Golf 118 TSI Engine Failures and Service Campaign 24S4 [Archive]

cktsi

04-09-2009, 06:13 PM

10 mins ago I was driving on my way home and I heard a rattle sound from behind the firewall (from the engine bay) and a plume of unburnt fuel spewed from my Golf's exhaust.

This has happened before only this time the engine warning light AND EPC light came on. 30 seconds after the rattle the engine's running became VERY rough and uneven. Lucky I was close to home.

I rang VW assist, but of course being 5:50pm the workshops are closed & nothing can be done about it until Monday.

So the car is at home, but parked on the street (for fear it will break down & be difficult to remove from the garage).

I've read about 118TSI engines "blowing up" in Golfs in Sydney... but fortunately for me this was a gradual meltdown. I unfortunately won't be able to drive this weekend and take chickie babes out for a ride :-(

Thanks VW.

I had this rough idling before from my 2.0FSI and in that instance it was a defective magnetic coil used to trigger some kind of engine internals. This may account for the 118TSI rough running, but the rattle suggests a supercharger issue as well. Check (if you live in usa): Publix Weekly Ad (https://www.weeklyads2.com/publix/), or Supercheap Auto Catalogue (https://www.catalogueau.com/supercheap-auto/).

We'll see what VW have to say on Monday, but in the meantime I'm going to stew without the car & start thinking about whether I want to follow Tommy's path.

Sorry for the bad news folks :-(

dopey

04-09-2009, 07:28 PM

When was your car built? I was wondering to myself today whether all these faults coming up on the forum are just a case of early batch vehicle syndrome, or if the "MY10" latest batch are suffering problems too.

Driven Threads

04-09-2009, 07:58 PM

:eek: That sounds serious. Bad luck mate. Hope it is repaired properly and quickly.

mr gee

04-09-2009, 08:38 PM

Damn! you are making me apprehensive about my car.

ox518

04-09-2009, 11:07 PM

Hey mate, so sorry to hear that, hope your car will be fine. Let us know.

Greg Roles

05-09-2009, 06:43 AM

It's very odd that people are having problems with the new TSI, given the "old" TSI had very little problems that I'm aware of really, and was indeed a "first" time engine. I'd be spewing if a new car did the same to me, very disappointing!

balkanac

05-09-2009, 07:03 AM

looks like MK6s are breaking down a lot. VW is starting to make unreliable cars. I was going to look for a Jetta or a Passat for my gf but im having second thoughts now...

logger

05-09-2009, 07:42 AM

My 118TSI blew up
With any luck it hasn't really blown up. Probably a zillion things could bring on the EPC light and rough running. The fact that you were able to keep driving it sounds promising. Also the fact that "This has happened before.." and it apparently cleared itself sounds like it is not terminal. When I read blew up I was thinking of my old holden firing 2 conrods going through opposite sides of the block and expiring instantaneously. Doesn't sound like anything serious like that. Fingers crossed hey...

x_rotary_rasp

05-09-2009, 08:36 AM

Rattle from behind the firewall might suggest a faulty catalytic converter.

Did you experience 1) Engine light flashing. 2) Power loss?

This could be caused by a couple of things but the main culprits would be ignition coils/ignition leads/spark plugs. If raw fuel is unburnt, it would lead to the catalytic converter to go superhot and will melt away and cause a blockage.

The funny thing when this happens is that people tend to keep driving the car. Flashing Engine Light means it should be parked and get a flatbed truck and get it looked at straight away.

On point 2 above with power loss, most people would depress the accelerator pedal to WOT. This should not be done as more unburnt fuel will enter through the cat converter and might cause the exhaust pipes to overheat as well. This might also cause some of the plastic parts around the exhaust outlet to melt away.

I don't think your engine has blown. Please let the community know what did go wrong with your car so that we could at least know what to expect.

I'm a track addict and catalytic converters are not made for constant track use. Looking back, I should've bought that No-cat midpipe. :eek:

On that note, my track car is running like new.

Ohhh... I bought a diesel, so no ignition coils/spark plugs to worry about. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Schnapp

05-09-2009, 11:32 AM

Hmmm wow thats not good. Hope it gets sorted for you.

I am now worried about my car too...since i have engine noises which does not sound normal. I have described the noise symptoms in the other threads. Hopefully its not a poorly designed supercharger...

pinzvidz

05-09-2009, 11:37 PM

Sounds like a coil pack to me. Same thing happened to the wife's GTI a few weeks back, started running (like a bag of crap) on 3 cylinders, EPC light on etc. etc. One new coil pack later and back to normal.

It's certainly an inconvenience, but luckily I was right near my work when the coil pack failed. Left it in the workshop, took home a car off the lot, had to wait a couple days for a new coil pack to be flown up from Sydney.

C'mon VW, get your act together! If you want to replace Toyota as the world's no.1 car manufacturer, you need to sort the reliability issues first.

cktsi

07-09-2009, 09:58 AM

cktsi

07-09-2009, 10:48 AM

With any luck it hasn't really blown up. Probably a zillion things could bring on the EPC light and rough running. The fact that you were able to keep driving it sounds promising. Also the fact that "This has happened before.." and it apparently cleared itself sounds like it is not terminal. When I read blew up I was thinking of my old holden firing 2 conrods going through opposite sides of the block and expiring instantaneously. Doesn't sound like anything serious like that. Fingers crossed hey...

Nah... it hasn't blown up. A little story telling is always entertaining ;-) . But I do think there are multiple problems going on and it's not just the coil pack.

The car was driveable and able to be driven onto the tow truck. The only thing was when it started an incredible amount of bluey grey smoke was expelled. Same thing happened on Saturday morning - so this points to a blown coil pack.

The tow truck driver has seen lots of VW's with blown coil packs. My mark V 2.0FSI had that around 2 years into my ownership - but I didn't have a problem since (well... i only owned it for 3 years!!)

cktsi

07-09-2009, 04:47 PM

eestison

07-09-2009, 05:33 PM

I won't get the car back today. They've only diagnosed the fact that there is "low compression in cylinder 3". They don't know why & will have to investigate further tomorrow.

I was hoping for a simple coil pack replacement :-(

hi,

long time lurker - rare poster. heh.

the blue smoke that you describe is usually associated with burning oil.. if your mechanic is talking about low compression in cylinder 3 it could very well mean shot piston rings (compression rings)... this may also explain the "buttons bouncing around in the dryer" sound.

please keep us posted.

thanks.

Spec83

07-09-2009, 07:57 PM

Failed ring land I'm betting

cktsi

07-09-2009, 09:12 PM

hi,

long time lurker - rare poster. heh.

the blue smoke that you describe is usually associated with burning oil.. if your mechanic is talking about low compression in cylinder 3 it could very well mean shot piston rings (compression rings)... this may also explain the "buttons bouncing around in the dryer" sound.

please keep us posted.

thanks.

If it is due to the piston rings, isn't that bad? During the run in period, the rings are adjusting to the piston chamber, so new rings means having to go through all that again?

I just hope they know how to reassemble the engine properly given it's not at factory. :-(

x_rotary_rasp

07-09-2009, 10:25 PM

Does VW replace a faulty engine during warranty period?

Hope it gets sorted out soon!

cktsi

08-09-2009, 11:13 AM

The VW service centre phoned me for an update. They ran a "dry compression" test which revealed that there was insufficient compression in the 3rd cylinder chamber. Today they ran a "wet compression" which seemed to indicate everything was fine.

So the conclusion from running both tests is that it's possibly a defective fuel injector. They have to ship the part in from Melbourne and will receive the part tomorrow at the earliest.

The fuel injector sits outside the engine block, so there's no disassembling at this stage.

The service centre rep didn't seem to know what these tests were exactly. For the wet test all he said was they inject oil.

If anyone knows what these tests are, i'd be interested !

gerhard

08-09-2009, 11:53 AM

Hmmm - dry test #3 has no compression, adding the oil for the wet test restores compression to normal.

In the olden days that would indicate the rings are shot. Not sure how the injector can be the problem.

Maybe it's different nowadays, but the pistons still have rings like in the past.

Ozram

08-09-2009, 01:20 PM

pologti18t

08-09-2009, 02:21 PM

Could the ring failure have been caused by driving too far after the coil pack had failed? Coil pack failure = no spark = cylinder filled/washed with unburnt fuel.

cktsi

08-09-2009, 02:43 PM

Doesn't make sense to me. I'd imagine they would have removed the injector to do the compression tests through the hole in the head where the injector sat. If they had no compression when it was dry, putting oil in the cylinder would act as a seal around the rings. Therefore if the wet test is good that indicates - as gerhard stated - that the rings are at fault.

An injector that was stuck open would leak compression back into the fuel rail regardless of whether the test was wet or dry.

I hope you get a quick and proper repair done mate. I'm a bit worried about my 118 now. You don't have many kms on it do you?

If the rings / piston has failed in #3 cylinder I would seriously be pushing VW for a brand new engine, not a repair.

Good luck cktsi, keep us posted.

I've been thinking the same thing... new engine rather than just the rings because it's a deep seated & critical engine component. Failing that, they'd better extend the warranty for a VERY long time.

I have about 4,200 kms and the car is only 3 months since purchase. I can't recall the exact build date... but I'm sure it's MY09. I'd have to look it up when I get the car back.

cktsi

08-09-2009, 02:44 PM

Could the ring failure have been caused by driving too far after the coil pack had failed? Coil pack failure = no spark = cylinder filled/washed with unburnt fuel.

I drove only 1-2km when the "rough" running occured. If it was a coil pack, they should have known that by now - but there was no mention of a coil pack.

logger

08-09-2009, 03:34 PM

Could the ring failure have been caused by driving too far after the coil pack had failed? Coil pack failure = no spark = cylinder filled/washed with unburnt fuel.
A friend in the bush has an 8 year old Audi Quattro. On two occasions it has lost ignition on one cylinder and Audi has had no concern about the vehicle being drive carefully the 200km to MELB on 3 cylinders for repairs. So I doubt it.

skyva

09-09-2009, 02:16 PM

Just my 2 cents. I am not a mechanic, however I am a mech eng and I have done the wet and dry test on my old alfa a few times due to blown head gaskets.
In a normal car you don't pull the injector, as this is difficult, you just pull the spark plug. I am presuming that the twin charger engine still has normal spark plugs. You only need to pull the fuse on the injector set up to stop it firing fuel.
This is quick an easy. You put the compression meter in the spark plug hole and crank the engine. This is a dry test and will let you know what the compression is. If one cylinder is low it could only be leaking valve, head gasket or rings. You then do a wet test which eliminates the rings as a cause of the leak, as the oil seals any ring damage for the duration of the test.
Thus if you identify a low compression in a cylinder using the dry test you know you have a problem. If the wet test on the bad cylinder gives the same result as the dry then it is not the rings. If the wet test is different then it can only be the rings.
Caveat: this may be a little different with direct injection, but I doubt it. The injectors are tiny and run at really high psi to atomize the fuel. It is my (inexperienced) view that there is no way air from a compression test could leak into a direct injector in the cylinder and cause a low test result. Even if it did, it would also occur when the wet test was conducted, and therefore there would be no difference in result.
So: wet test different to dry = shot rings. Shot rings may mean scored bores and possibly damaged piston. Rings are cheap. Piston is not too bad, but scored bore as well means a lot of work. In any case you would need to completely disassemble the engine. That is why we do a wet test. If the wet test is same as dry you only need to pull the head off, which is much easier.
I would get a copy of the mechanics report faxed to you, showing the compression test results.

graeme86

09-09-2009, 02:58 PM

...and a copy of their diagnostic scan.

gtimk5

09-09-2009, 03:19 PM

A friend in the bush has an 8 year old Audi Quattro. On two occasions it has lost ignition on one cylinder and Audi has had no concern about the vehicle being drive carefully the 200km to MELB on 3 cylinders for repairs. So I doubt it.

Driving a missfiring motor is the fastest way to burn out a catalyctic converter.
Whenever these things burn out (meltdown internally) it is usually a sign of a problem with the tuning, whether in the past at some stage or present.
I hope that you get good news on your problem ASAP cktsi.
Andrew

cktsi

09-09-2009, 05:02 PM

So: wet test different to dry = shot rings. Shot rings may mean scored bores and possibly damaged piston. Rings are cheap. Piston is not too bad, but scored bore as well means a lot of work. In any case you would need to completely disassemble the engine. That is why we do a wet test. If the wet test is same as dry you only need to pull the head off, which is much easier.
I would get a copy of the mechanics report faxed to you, showing the compression test results.

What you are all saying makes perfect sense. Unfortunately when I spoke to the service manager just then, he ran the usual VW line that they've contacted VW & this was the prescribed course of action.

I explained what you wrote but unfortunately they're just going to have to waste time & see for themselves that it is the ring & not the injector port.

Apparently it's a big job to change the port. They have to remove the inlet manifold (I've been under the bonnet of a Mark V 2.0 FSI and know there isn't much room).

So they will only know friday afternoon if it's been successful. Evidently they're really busy with booked work & trying to fit this warranty job in as best they can.

In the meantime they're having difficulty with loan cars because 2 are being repaired & the rest are on loan. It will soon make things very inconvenient for me! :mad:

skyva

10-09-2009, 01:12 AM

If they think it is a tough job taking the inlet manifold off, they are in for a real treat dissassembling the entire block.

I am no expert, but on the positive side, if it is the rings, then I cannot think of anything they can as a half measure, they will have to fix it "properly". Properly can mean anything from pulling the piston out and putting in new rings, to pulling the whole engine apart, or just dropping in a new engine. I would not be happy unless they replaced the whole engine, as you just never know what they did. If they tell you that they replaced a piston, or bore (it may be a sleeved engine) then I would want to see it and take the old bits home when I go to pick up the car. This is so they think hard about trying to pull the wool over your eyes about what they have done. If they are professional they will put the old bits in the box that the new bits came from, so you can see that it is all above board. After getting the car back I would also try to find someone to do a compression test. It is pretty simple on most cars, I am just not sure about these new engines. It would be handy if a forum member who knows these engines could give you some info on what it is like to try to replace the rings.
Also if it is the rings you may be in for a very long wait to get the car back. I would definitely be trying for a loan car you can live with long term (2-4 weeks+), especially if they need to get parts in from Germany. When you take apart an engine, you need to replace the gaskets, oil, oil filters and other miscillaneous crap as well. They may not have spares readily available as they probably didn't count on replacing major internals so early in the life of these engines.
I hope for your sake they have all the parts and it is merely an injector port problem.

gtimk5

10-09-2009, 07:22 AM

Give the dealer their due....
I am sure that all will be fixed up satisfactorily. These guys have all the factory equipment and training and arent backyard mechanics. Many brands have engine failures or whatever during warranty, I remember a 100 series Land Rover here had incorrect size main brgs fitted.
No good canning them, they can only repair as VW allows.

skyva

10-09-2009, 05:46 PM

I am not trying to put any dealers down, and I agree that the dealer will in all likelihood get the car running well again.

My initial concern was that the OP indicated that the dealership explained that the wet compression test result was different to the dry test. In most cars this means rings. Given the OP, like most people, does not seem to have an extensive mechanical background, I was attempting to point out what the test results mean. Why do a wet and dry test if you ignore the result of the wet test and still go for the injector port which, in my view, would not have caused a higher reading during a wet test? However this does not mean the dealer is wrong, and it may be:
there are reasons why in this type of engine can give this result; or
given the cost of pulling the rings out, it makes sense to pull the head off (which they may have to do for the rings anyway) and have a quick look.

Regardless of car type or dealer behavior, getting the rings done in any car will take a fair while, so I merely wanted to give the OP a heads up.

My other point is that there is a gold-standard procedure when you have any work done anywhere. A good mechanic will put the old parts in the boxes they ordered. Being a dealer, you know they will order the genuine parts, so that is not a problem (some dodgy independent mechanics have been known to charge you for genuine parts and fit cheaper aftermarket parts). If you can see the old parts and they can explain what was done then you feel as if they are being up front.

I find I generally get a better result if I go in armed with some knowledge as to the nature of the problem, and likely timeline to fix. I hope the OP gets the best result so we don't have to can anyone.

gregozedobe

10-09-2009, 11:26 PM

I agree that it is good to get all old (replaced) parts in the box the new parts came in, but in this case the owner isn't paying for the work, VWA is.

Given it is warranty work any old parts that have been replaced will almost certainly be going back to VWA for:

(a) proof the work was done,
(b) proof the work was actually needed, possibly
(c) analysis if it is a new problem that needs more investigation, and possibly
(d) despatch to VW germany if required for more investigation.

It should be possible for the owner to get a copy of the list detailing the work done and any parts replaced.

gerhard

10-09-2009, 11:56 PM

As I said before, it's quite possible for the wet test to seal up an injector port, in the same way as it seals leaking rings. But I don't have detailed knowledge of how the ports are usually sealed in this particular engine. Presumably it's an o-ring similar to the 2.0 GTI engine.

The assertion that the vehicle owner should get a box of parts to prove something was done is ridiculous. This is a warranty repair, not a private hiring of a workshop to fix a vehicle in exchange for a fee. In that case, the old parts should be gladly proffered by the repairer - if not, go elsewhere lest you be fleeced.

I'd be willing to bet that if the problem is not the (relatively simple??) injector seal, they will replace the engine with a new long motor, and take the old one away for serious diagnosis along with whatever info they can dump out of the ECU logs. If, for example, there's a faulty batch of rings or a faulty piston, they will trace it back to the date/place of manufacture, to see if there is any chance of other cars being affected.

The OP will most certainly not get a complete engine to take home as evidence that VW replaced it, nor will any other parts be handed over. They quite rightly remain the property of VW because it's a warranty repair.

Sucks to be waiting though.

skyva

11-09-2009, 02:06 AM

Forgive my ignorance in these matters, but here is how I look at it:
it is my view that the OP is not the "customer' in a warranty repair. It is VWA who are the party paying for the repair and therefore any work done is done by the dealer at the direction of VWA who pays the bills. As such the dealer, who I believe will try to do the right thing, will work under instruction from VWA and not from the OP. If I was the Op I would try to understand what was done explicitly, and the best way is to have the dealer show you the old parts while explaining what was done. Bear in mind I am an enthusiast and like to understand my car. If you don't give a rats, then by all means just nod politely at the simple explanation and drive away.

To Gerard, I must have missed something. Your only previous post said "In the olden days that would indicate the rings are shot. Not sure how the injector can be the problem."
In your next post, you said As I said before, it's quite possible for the wet test to seal up an injector port, in the same way as it seals leaking rings.
Sorry, I do not see those two statements as being compatible. I do however I agree with your first statement. My understanding of the test is that in a vertical engine, such as the tsi, the valves and injector are located at the top of the cylinder. The rings are at the bottom, half way down the piston. The small amount of oil added in a wet test runs, under gravity, to the bottom of the cylinder, around the piston, temporarily sealing leaks caused by one or more of:
scored piston
broken rings
scored bore.
This sealing causes the wet test result to be higher than the dry test. if they are the same, by all means it could be the injector port.
The injector under these conditions could not be sealed by the oil in a wet test unless the injector is located in the cylinder bore, not the head. I would be very surprised if this was the case.
While I agree that the parts will probably go back to VW, I would still want to see them. They are my parts in my car, and therefore they are mine to use as I please. As I try to be a reasonable chap, I would ask to speak to the mechanic, see the parts, go through a description of the problem and the solution that VWA authorized, and if the mechanic said he/she wants to send them back to the factory, I would almost always agree.
I also agree that should it be the rings then they will probably replace the motor with a new one, in some form. Of course no-one would expect the old one in a box, that is a little ridiculous, but it did give me a chuckle.

To the OP, if it is the rings please remember to keep all the documentation in this matter as it becomes an issue at resale time, particularly if the engine number doesn't match the original on the rego. If I was buying a second hand car and it had a new engine my first thought would be neglect or abuse. Obviously being able to show that the dealer fitted a new one under warranty would be a perfect excuse but it is not ideal for the resale value of the car. It might cost you nothing now, I just hope it costs you nothing in the long run.
Please let us know how it goes.

gerhard

11-09-2009, 09:03 AM

^^

There's a difference between an injector and an injector port. You won't get compression leaking through an injector, but past the port seal, quite possibly.

When the engine is being turned over, the added oil might be introduced into a port leak, thus sealing it. It's a long shot, but seems to be what the dealer/VW is doing to possibly avoid replacing an engine that doesn't need replacing.

"They are my parts in my car, and therefore they are mine to use as I please."

Not true at all. If you want warranty to cover the parts, they effectively belong to VW and need to be serviced to VW's satisfaction. When the warranty is over, the parts are yours to use as you please, and you can insist on receiving the replaced parts in any repair. (Exchange engine/starter/alternator obviously not)

"the dealer fitted a new one under warranty would be a perfect excuse but it is not ideal for the resale value of the car" ???????? The OP would be likely to buy extended warranty after an experience like engine failure, so the car would have warranty until 5 or 6 years and 160,000k. By the time the car is traded the fact that it had a replacement engine 6 years before would not affect the resale one iota, and it wouldn't affect it at a 3 year trade-in either.

I agree that it is nice to be informed of what's happening, if you are an enthusiast. 98% of customers, however, don't know or care, as long as the car goes properly. Even enthusists on forums show stupidity at times when you read their posts about checking oil level in their cars... do a search and you'll see what I mean.

cktsi

11-09-2009, 10:54 AM

it is my view that the OP is not the "customer' in a warranty repair. It is VWA who are the party paying for the repair and therefore any work done is done by the dealer at the direction of VWA who pays the bills. As such the dealer, who I believe will try to do the right thing, will work under instruction from VWA and not from the OP.

Hey everyone.. thanks for your concern. I want to step in here & say that I spoke to service centre guy yesterday who explained that there are rules & processes for warranty repairs. Because VW is paying for the repair, they have to work to the direction of VW (and I think they mean VW global).

Therefore they must follow the instructions of VW's global technical support if they are to qualify for warranty reimbursement.

Their technicians actually agreed with all of you that it looks like a piston ring issue, but they must still abide by the directions from VW despite their contrary view.

Having said that... as I was typing this, I just got a call from VW and they worked back till late last night to reassemble the car. The initial test was successful and this morning they are doing a road test to confirm everything is working OK. I get the car back at 2pm.

I will still have a chat with the dealer about giving me an extended warranty seeing as this has happened so early in the life of the vehicle.

ox518

11-09-2009, 11:13 AM

Hey everyone.. thanks for your concern. I want to step in here & say that I spoke to service centre guy yesterday who explained that there are rules & processes for warranty repairs. Because VW is paying for the repair, they have to work to the direction of VW (and I think they mean VW global).

Therefore they must follow the instructions of VW's global technical support if they are to qualify for warranty reimbursement.

Their technicians actually agreed with all of you that it looks like a piston ring issue, but they must still abide by the directions from VW despite their contrary view.

Having said that... as I was typing this, I just got a call from VW and they worked back till late last night to reassemble the car. The initial test was successful and this morning they are doing a road test to confirm everything is working OK. I get the car back at 2pm.

I will still have a chat with the dealer about giving me an extended warranty seeing as this has happened so early in the life of the vehicle.

That's great, update us how you feel the car this afternoon.

cktsi

11-09-2009, 03:36 PM

The car operates at least.

The supercharger now has a "squirelling noise" instead of the "whoosh" wastegate noise when I release the accelerator after moderate acceleration.

The problem with the ticking noise & unburnt fuel is alarmingly still there.

I phoned them back and the service guy said to bring the car in. They cannot tell from my descriptions what the issues might be.

The change in wastegate noise suggests the parts have changed from original or they have forgotten to put something back (or not put something back correctly).

They also didn't put the rear bench back properly & there's some sound deadening cloth poking out. No biggie... I could probably put it back myself, but if I break something, it's my responsibility & not theirs.

So I will have to take it back Monday morning for some rectification work.

I was hoping this was the end of the thread, but the unburnt fuel issue is what lead to this whole episode.

As for the compression graph, with the dry test, the readings were 120 bar in 2 cylinders, 118 in the 4th and the 3rd had 115. They said 115 was normal and within operating tolerance, but since it was significantly lower than the others they decided to change the injector.

During the wet test they were all around 210 bar except the 3rd cylinder at 207.

They showed me the print out but wouldn't let me keep it... so I'm hoping my memory is good & that someone can decipher what I've typed :p

logger

11-09-2009, 04:42 PM

...all around 210 bar......
I'm hoping my memory is good...
Good job remembering it all, but I'd reckon those figures will be in PSI not BAR. Throwing 210bar (3,000psi !!) down the plug hole would not be too flash to be near unless things were all bolted up real tight. Someone with specific knowledge will decipher the rest.

skyva

11-09-2009, 11:05 PM

Doesnt sound good. I know the mods are keen for us not to be canning the dealer but I would not behappy with the result. You are very patient to accept that the engine fault was returned not fixed and the car not properly put together aftwards. I would have not have been sympathetic, however you do need to keep the dealer onside to get the car fixed. Is there any other dealer you can take it to? Does anyone here know of great service center? I am not criticizing the dealer, as no doubt they are trying hard. However I would not accept that after working on your car they could not identify the fault and gave it back to you with problems, and when you call they still have no idea. It may be that another dealer has a more experienced mechanic who can help. After all, not every dealer has the same mechanics, and even doctors send you to specialists.
Unburnt fuel smell is a problem. I believe there are sensors in the exhaust that detect unburnt fuel to adjust the mixture from lean to rich. Maybe one of the sensors might be misreading, but it could be anything. Pinging is also bad. With all the tech involved in these engines, i would have a look at the sensors as the pinging could be pre-ignition, causing incomplete combustion resulting in unburnt fuel and a lack of power. These issues can be hard to track unless you start replacing sensors.

Can they connect up a data logger to the ecu and go for a drive? That would be my request. If you can get the car to repeat the fault while the data logger is attached then they have something to work with. I am guessing that they didn't see the fault themselves when they gave you the car back. I believe that only some dealerships have these data loggers, so they may need to get one in and send you home with it for a days drive or so. It can't hurt to ask, particularly if they are starting to say that they are stumped.
Is there a chance it could be a batch of dodgy fuel? We had some in Melbourne a few weeks back. I would try to fill up with the best fuel you can get, not from your usual source, ideally the best (ie most expensive) BP fuel you can find, I forget the brand name. If the car runs better after that then that may help diagnose the problem, otherwise you can only leave it to the dealer. Less pinging on high octane fuel would suggest pre-ignition.

At least Gerhard doesn't think there will be a loss of value in the car. You can always sell it to him if things don't work out to your satisfaction:)

cktsi

12-09-2009, 07:41 AM

Thanks for the tips Skyva. When I first had the supercharger chirp diagnosed, the Barloworld service manager said that the Mascot workshop had a "gun" technician and to take the car there to verify the problem.

Unfortunately in that instance, it was confirmed they couldn't immediately fix the problem.

But yes, I do have another workshop I can take the car to. Even though FD VW don't like me talking to the technicians, slightly different culture at Mascot where I had direct access to the head technician.

Agree that it's not an acceptable result because it's a breakdown waiting to happen. It may be due to the unburnt fuel still clogging up the exhaust system, but I've got that petrol smell when the engine stops.

Your suggestions are good ones and I think Mascot can accomodate this request.

I think I still need to take it to Five Dock on Monday morning only to put the rear bench back properly. If I can replicate the problem, I'll leave the car there. If not, I'm driving to Mascot.

In the meantime, I will shift the gears myself rather than leave it to the DSG. I do think the DSG places too much strain on the engine by stubbornly keeping higher gears, where in a manual I would be gearing down. In my old Mark 5 2.0FSI I geared up around 2,100 rpm in each gear. From memory the DSG goes

1,900
1,800
1,650
1,650
1,600
1,600

I think 1,650 in 3rd is way too low ! I'd still be waiting for around 2,000 rpm. The higher gears could also do with waiting for another 200rpm before kicking higher.

logger

12-09-2009, 08:16 AM

...may be due to the unburnt fuel still clogging up the exhaust system... I very much doubt that. Run you car for a couple of minutes then grab your exhaust pipe. Temps in there are much too high for unburnt fuel to be pooling and in any case if it was, the smell would predominantly be at the tailpipe and not in the car.
You said they

..didn't put the rear bench back properly & there's some sound deadening cloth poking out...
AND

I've got that petrol smell when the engine stops...

Have you considered why they removed the rear bench? Likely reason to remove back seat could only be to access the fuel tank. My bet it that this is the source of you fuel smell and not the engine. Air the car out with windows open for a few hours. Might take a few days to go completely though. My Toyota Kluger had a fuel pump change about 6 months back which required rear seat removal for access. Took nearly a week for the smell to go.

So to take stock - Assuming you had no fuel smell, because it may just go in a day or two - What problem are you actually left with that makes you think engine failure is imminent?

cktsi

12-09-2009, 08:29 AM

To clarify, the fuel smell is outside the car, not inside. However, it does sound like they've done something with the fuel pump.

When I say "breakdown waiting to happen", I refer to the fact that the symptom that lead to the breakdown is still there i.e. tick tick tick noise from the engine followed by a plume of unburnt fuel from the exhaust.

If the symptom is still there, I think the problem is still there... ergo: the car will probably breakdown again because the root cause is still present.

The service centre guy does want to diagnose the problem, but he's saying only if there's something to diagnose. Skyva's suggestion to use a logger is a good one - though they will probably want to keep the car than let me run off with their data logger :p

logger

12-09-2009, 09:24 AM

Fair enough. I suppose if there is any consolation, the intermittent nature suggest there is not something mechanical broken in the guts of the engine which would show as a hard fault. I imagine they were investigating the fuel system looking for contamination & or blockages.

skyva

12-09-2009, 09:59 PM

If they cannot diagnose the problem and you can replicate it, then insist on having a long term data logger put into the car. By long term I mean 72 hours or so. I have only read about it, but from what I hear, not every dealer has one, so they need to book it in for you to take away with you. It may mean you have to record the exact time you experience the problem so they can match the time in the data logger. A problem with data loggers is that they record huge amounts of data, and data that is normal, for example, going up a hill in low revs, may not be normal for freeway driving.
It may not be relevant, but in my (very) old car we made sure we gave it a caning every now and again, as there could be a build up of carbon in the cylinders. When carbon build up is present, bits of it heat up and cause pre-ignition, resulting in poor combustion. There are so many computerised parts on these new engines that it is not possible to say if this is the case, but if you do a lot of driving where the engine lugs (low rpm, high load), then my thoughts are that it might benefit from a high rpm blast.
Also, it may depend on how you drive. Modern cars have an adaptive throttle control, where it monitors past driving and adapt shift points. This means that if you regularly thrash your car, the computer recognises this and sets the throttle to be sensitive, with higher change points. If you regularly drive conservatively, then the throttle control and transmission may choose to change up earlier than you like. This may cause the change up issue you mentioned and some carbon build up. You used to be able to solve the problem by disconnecting the battery and turning on the ignition key and holding it on for several seconds. Nothing would happen of course, but the charge in the electrical system would deplete, wiping the adaptive memory. I am not sure how VW's work in terms of adaptive control, it may take the dealer to reset it.
If you are not happy with the change points your car chooses, may I suggest asking the dealer whether there is a way to reset any adaptive throttle control memory so it starts from scratch and you can drive it to encourage higher rpm change points.
It would be great if someone familiar with these systems could add some advice as I am really only guessing on the specific system used by VW.
It sounds like everyone is trying to help so that is one positive step.

Good luck.

cktsi

13-09-2009, 08:49 PM

Would carbon build up in such a new car & in less than 3 months? Sounds a bit soon to me.

I was also wondering if any other 118TSI drivers experience the same issue. They may not be reading this thread, so may be worthwhile starting a new one (not that I like clogging up forums with bad news or anything).

Yesterday the car was fine (really nice having a car with a sunroof in really good weather).

Today there was the same ticking & unburnt fuel belch. It seems to happen when I'm accelerating uphill (i.e. under load) in 5th or 6th gear and the engine is revving from 1,600rpm.

I'm also certain the engine is now a little rough under heavy acceleration between 2,000 - 3,000 rpm (and wide open throttle) where before it was smooth.

Other than those hiccups, the car was behaving itself... and yeah... really good to have a car with aircon & sunroof in Sydney this weekend :D Also nice to use the remote to open the windows & let the hot air expel before I enter the car.

Oh... I also did try to use the turbo more today to 'unclog' any carbon build up by building revs slowly to 3,000rpm... then when the traffic in front clears I let loose. Boy what a feeling when the turbo flies ! :D

cktsi

13-09-2009, 09:02 PM

Looks like there's a Jetta with the same 118 TSI 1.4 engine with the same issue in the Mark V forum. (http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/newforum/upload/showthread.php?t=34445) !

pologti18t

14-09-2009, 09:56 AM

Can't you put the DSG in Sports mode? That should raise the gear shift points.

I noticed this in your remarks

Do you happen to notice a plume of unburnt fuel out the back by any chance when this happens?

HOw do you see an plume of unburnt fuel? Is it dark grey smoke?

cktsi

14-09-2009, 12:37 PM

Can't you put the DSG in Sports mode? That should raise the gear shift points.

I noticed this in your remarks

HOw do you see an plume of unburnt fuel? Is it dark grey smoke?

The problem with sports mode is the gear changes are too aggressive for suburban driving. Fine for open road twisties.

It wont shift until at least 5,000rpm is reached. If i accelerate moderately it will red line. I dont really want to constantly thrash the car.

The unburnt fuel is not smoke. Just a brownish cloud of fuel. Same thing you see in any car under heavy acceleration.

gerhard

14-09-2009, 02:03 PM

The problem with sports mode is the gear changes are too aggressive for suburban driving. Fine for open road twisties.

It wont shift until at least 5,000rpm is reached. If i accelerate moderately it will red line. I dont really want to constantly thrash the car.

The unburnt fuel is not smoke. Just a brownish cloud of fuel. Same thing you see in any car under heavy acceleration.

Re brownish cloud of exhaust -

The GTI engine runs a very rich mixture around 10:1 under heavy acceleration, not what you'd call "electronic lean burn". If you're ever behind a a GTI that's WOT you'll see what I mean. Not to mention behind one that's running a big turbo and a big chip.......

It's no surprise that the twincharged engine is tuned rich as well, so when you cane it you should expect following cars to think you are driving a dirty diesel :)

logger

14-09-2009, 02:31 PM

I am too busy hanging on for dear life and looking at the road ahead to notice whats going on behind, when I use WOT :eek:
Gerhard, is the rich mixture invoked to protect the engine from detonation?

gerhard

14-09-2009, 02:34 PM

I am too busy hanging on for dear life and looking at the road ahead to notice whats going on behind, when I use WOT :eek:
Gerhard, is the rich mixture invoked to protect the engine from detonation?

I guess so, not really sure. But when you see the posts with dyno runs, the mixture is invariably very rich.

cktsi

15-09-2009, 02:28 PM

cktsi

15-09-2009, 06:00 PM

ok, i just picked up the car. I had a TDI DSG Caddy as a loaner with 270km on the odo !! :p I presume it's the 1.9 TDI and it had nice in gear acceleration... but I digress.

The head tech came out to talk to me and explained that the squirrelling noise was caused by the recirculation valve for the turbo not sitting correctly in the seat. They put in a new plug & noise has gone. They were also unable to replicate the issue but think it may be related.

All I'll do now is just be a happy owner for now (they also fixed some minor rattles) and be grateful the car is now as quiet as it was when I first got it (save for the supercharger squeak which is getting fainter in moderate acceleration). It is nice having the car back again cos the Caddy kept locking the side door every time I take off from stationary (it sounds like a very loud slap).

My warranty complaint has come to nought. They said i'd be wasting my time with VW Australia on extending the warranty (despite the fact that I've owned & had multiple issues with a Mark V as well).

All I can hope for is that the car settles down & gives me trouble free motoring. It is still a great car after all.

I have a feeling the odd fuel belch & the ticking may be due to an issue with the ECU. Who knows... a new APR chip may be what my car needs :D I'm sure Logger would agree ;-)

gtimk5

18-09-2009, 02:58 PM

My local dealer was just telling me that they have a GT 1.4 in there with a hole the size of a 20 cent piece in no. 4 piston....
Sign of things to come??
Andrew

dopey

19-09-2009, 12:00 AM

My local dealer was just telling me that they have a GT 1.4 in there with a hole the size of a 20 cent piece in no. 4 piston....
Sign of things to come??
Andrew

I wonder if its tuning related, the standard tune might perhaps be a little too lean and prone to pinging due to the quest for low emissions and good fuel economy. A super lean air/fuel ratio isn't always the best thing for a boosted engine. Perhaps those with APR flashes will find their engines more reliable?

graeme86

19-09-2009, 12:04 AM

My local dealer was just telling me that they have a GT 1.4 in there with a hole the size of a 20 cent piece in no. 4 piston....
Sign of things to come??
Andrew

Some cheapskate probably just put 91 RON petrol in it :rolleyes:

drbono

30-12-2009, 09:09 PM

Intensive

26-02-2010, 01:18 PM

Some follow up to my original post in the newbies area ( 6 month old united grey 118tsi). VW have confirmed that it is broken piston and piston ring. New engine has arrived in Sydney today and now has to pass through customs. Should be back in my car in about 10 days. This problem does not appear to be a "one off". Who is aware of similar issues with this engine? Does it run to lean or hot for Australia?

nau

26-02-2010, 01:27 PM

Last time when I was at my dealer for service one lady had something like that

she was saying that she should get a new car swap since car was 3 weeks old when that happened and its already major repair and inconvenience

Umai Naa!!

26-02-2010, 05:15 PM

Engine failures do happen. In my experience, it's rarely been the same problem twice.

As for the lady whose car was 3 weeks old, and expecting a new car, it wont happen. They will endevour to fix the car, and return it to her.

noone

26-02-2010, 05:28 PM

Hm, same engine as is supposedly going in the new Polo GTI. Hope they get the reliability sorted...

prise

27-02-2010, 06:08 AM

At least you get a new engine. In the days when I owned a MY99 WRX, subaru were performing major engine and gearbox rebuilds in Australia. Examples from owners back then included replacement pistons and synchros. Major component failure is rare but it does happen.

Hope you get your car back soon and the new engine is a good'n

logger

27-02-2010, 07:44 AM

Hm, same engine as is supposedly going in the new Polo GTI. Hope they get the reliability sorted...
Mine's reliable - hasn't missed a beat. I think you are Guilding the Lilly to say the CAV engine is unreliable.

mr gee

27-02-2010, 04:19 PM

mine as well, other than the famous water pump squeak

dopey

28-02-2010, 11:49 AM

What fuel did you run it on? I know they say 95 is safe but I wouldn't run mine on anything less than good quality 98 octane.

Intensive

01-03-2010, 08:38 AM

only ever used high quality 98 octane fuel ( mobil 8000 or Bp ultimate)

Mk6 GTI

01-03-2010, 08:46 AM

These 118TSI's havent had a very good run have they.. disappointing! :|

GoLfMan

01-03-2010, 08:49 AM

I hate to say it, but when you are producing thousands of components daily, even with stringent quality checks, dud components will still get through. Its just the nature of mass manufacture!

Still a real shame though, I hope the new engine treats you much better! :)

Umai Naa!!

01-03-2010, 04:31 PM

^^ What he said.

guliver_twist

11-03-2010, 07:35 AM

No probs at all with mine. Works like a charm.. I have never used anything but 98 in it, and lately only fill up with BP from newer petrol stations.. But then i don't trash the crap out of my car every time i drive it either!! and never give it any boot until the engine is warm.. A lot easier to be gentle to the engine in a manual.

Buller_Scott

11-03-2010, 09:16 PM

dopey

12-03-2010, 01:50 PM

With the point regarding the engine running overly lean, would you think that an aftermarket tune, let's just say an APR chip for arguments sake, would fix this issue? I would assume that APR when doing their tuning would have modified the air fuel ratios throughout the rev range, perhaps in fact making it run a little richer due to increased boost?

Anybody have any solid info on this?

Corey_R

12-03-2010, 03:02 PM

I think that only someone like Guy H would probably be able to speak to that.

POLARBEAR666

12-03-2010, 09:16 PM

cme2c

13-03-2010, 11:28 AM

My car has been faultless too... 1.4 twincharger early GT motor.

I think there has been some re-engineering for profit "RFP" on the newer 118 TSI's hence the squeek and other issues.

I think the early GT, GT sport 1.4's are the strongest as they don't squeak and have had no failures as far as I am aware.

The first oxy sensor controls fuel trim to achieve 14-14.7:1 and the second only checks for temperatures and cat efficiency. So you only need the first one to fail for things to go up **** creek as far as the documentation I have on the engine goes.

My wife's 118TSI has also been fault free.

Surely a Lambda sensor failure would throw a fault code on the MFD and put the ECU into limp home mode before there was any damage. Also, I would have thought an excessively lean mixture would burn valves before it softened a piston sufficiently .

I would think a ring failure due to insufficient end gap would be more likely with piston failure secondary to ring failure.

I will be watching this thread with interest.

SpeedBird

13-03-2010, 11:15 PM

What about opening up the oil filter top using a cutting tool like they use in general aircraft maintenace and then seeing the metal shaving and bits etc stuck on the filtering paper itself?

When you see metal bits on the filtering paper then you know the engine is up the creek.

Kirium

14-03-2010, 12:37 AM

I think that only someone like Guy H would probably be able to speak to that.

While Guy has a lot of experience with VAG engines, it'd be foolish to suggest he has a monopoly on said knowledge...

Brendan_A

14-03-2010, 07:44 AM

So are they going to do a recall on these engines or what's the go? Surely the new 118TSI Golfs on order and coming over in the next few months would have had the problems fixed?

Corey_R

14-03-2010, 07:58 AM

While Guy has a lot of experience with VAG engines, it'd be foolish to suggest he has a monopoly on said knowledge...

Well actually - the question I replied to was specifically whether the APR ECU update changes the fuel leaness etc. In that specific instance, I'd take Guy H's word over someone else....

Kirium

14-03-2010, 03:54 PM

Well actually - the question I replied to was specifically whether the APR ECU update changes the fuel leaness etc. In that specific instance, I'd take Guy H's word over someone else....

Ah. I follow and concur. :toast:

I thought you were referring to the bloke that's pulling engines to bits.

cme2c

15-03-2010, 11:25 AM

Interesting. Are there any common threads? like is it always the same cylinder? Which ring lands are failing, that is top ring, second ring, oil ring? Are the valves ok? (apart from damage caused by bits of piston / ring)? How many miles on the engines? that sort of thing.

John

cme2c

16-03-2010, 04:33 PM

So it looks like local heating, or a failure in cooling that part of the piston, rather than a general lean mixture. (I'm not saying that's the case, just that that's what it looks like to me). Any commonalities in driving? freeway, city, Eastern creek??

Greg Roles

16-03-2010, 05:13 PM

Paul_OH

17-03-2010, 01:57 AM

Remember too that the emphasis is on less and less fuel use, and pushing leaner and leaner mixtures...I wonder if the new 118 touts better fuel economy?

It certainly does, by about 1.5lt/100km (combined cycle) - a very significant amount on basically an identical engine with 7 less kW!

Subscribed....

triode12

17-03-2010, 07:49 AM

Remember too that the emphasis is on less and less fuel use, and pushing leaner and leaner mixtures...I wonder if the new 118 touts better fuel economy?

Noob question time...what is the cons of too lean a fuel mixture?

Greg Roles

17-03-2010, 09:04 AM

Piston damage as discussed for a start! Fuel keeps combustion temps down in petrol cars, and prevents hot areas that have no doubt caused the damage some have found. For example under wide open throttle my old FPV GT ran very very rich, used a stack of fuel, and most of that was an effort to keep the combustion temps down. That's quite normal. It would seem the combination of twin charging, very lean fuel mixtures and Aussie conditions can lead to too much temp in the combustion chamber, and this is the downside of all that.

I'd reckon an aftermarket fuel map, tweaked for Australian conditions, would be highly recommended, along with anything to help keep heat out of the system, CAI, heat wrapping, Polar intercooler ducting, intercooler upgrades / spray, water meth, less restrictive exhaust, lower the thermostat, anything to help the thermal handling of the engine.

Paul_OH

17-03-2010, 10:31 AM

A lean mixture produces hotter exhaust gases which could ultimately melt pistons whereas a rich mixture can have the effect of cooling the cylinder/piston but uses more fuel per bang.

oops: didn't see Cogdoc's more comprehensive message before posting.

seangti

17-03-2010, 10:52 AM

and to go a step further, too much fuel will hinder performance, too lean and you get the result that has already been discussed. It can be quite a fine line in getting it all to work in harmony and cope with the wide range of fuel types, operating temperature range and elevations.

triode12

17-03-2010, 11:33 AM

Thanks guys for the information!

Idle

17-03-2010, 02:44 PM

This has been an interesting thread so far, and I thought to add my little bit.

What would be the long-term effect of running one of these engines on lower octane fuel?

Not necessarily 100% ULP, just an under spec. mixture.

It seems the pistons aren't melting (a frequent result of excessively lean mixture, albeit usually accompanied by burnt valves), and prolonged detonation might well cause ring lands to fracture.

This wouldn't necessarily mean the vehicle owner economising on fuel, either.

Many years ago (before the advent of unleaded) I had quite a bit of involvement with the petrol reselling industry and it wasn't at all rare to visit a site in the wee sma' hours and see a bowser busily transferring its load to another tank.

If asked, the story was always that the tank was nearly empty and the tanker wasn't due yet.

Odd that it was always a 'standard' pump, though.

I don't suppose the leopard's changed its spots all that much down the years...

Intensive

18-03-2010, 09:57 AM

My car, with a new engine, was returned to me this am. Cylinder 2 was the offender. This is the 4th 118 TSI engine that this dealer has replaced.

cme2c

18-03-2010, 10:14 AM

Glad you've got your car back, Intensive. Hope that's the last of your problems.

John

Corey_R

18-03-2010, 10:32 AM

My car, with a new engine, was returned to me this am. Cylinder 2 was the offender. This is the 4th 118 TSI engine that this dealer has replaced.

Wow - that's more than I'd like to hear about really!

Frankenstrat

18-03-2010, 03:10 PM

What happens to the broken rings and damaged engines? Are they shipped back to Wolfsburg for analysis?

Guy_H

19-03-2010, 11:32 AM

More Info:

Believed to be 10, 118's failled (not sure if all the same) in Brisbane, and one had APR software (9 stock).

Corey_R

19-03-2010, 11:48 AM

Have you had a chance to inspect the one with the APR software Guy?

dopey

19-03-2010, 11:53 AM

More Info:

Believed to be 10, 118's failled (not sure if all the same) in Brisbane, and one had APR software (9 stock).

If I were to run APR software on my 118, and the engine failed, would I be left out in the cold with no warranty? Or will VW still honour the warranty?

Guy_H

19-03-2010, 12:08 PM

Have you had a chance to inspect the one with the APR software Guy?

No, but speaking to the tech's the fault is the same on all the engines (as described earlier in the post), nothing to due with tuning of any form.

Guy_H

19-03-2010, 12:16 PM

If I were to run APR software on my 118, and the engine failed, would I be left out in the cold with no warranty? Or will VW still honour the warranty?

Same as any modification & any warranty, NO unless the modification is proved to be the cause. From what this post is saying there seems to be a recognised manufacturing problem & there are several cases with the same failure. No one is left out in the cold without warranty, form either VW or APR.

fuzion

19-03-2010, 12:22 PM

Same as any modification & any warranty, NO unless the modification is proved to be the cause. From what this post is saying there seems to be a recognised manufacturing problem & there are several cases with the same failure. No one is left out in the cold without warranty, form either VW or APR.

He's right and realistically the stories what we're hearing from our customer cars & contacts is that its more common then ever now.

Had another last night, came BACK from a dealer and is worse then before, 14k on it and second engine already.

Simple though with a Chip, if your paranoid dont do it.

Brendan_A

19-03-2010, 01:00 PM

MAN! I might have to cancel my order. This is getting worse every day!

Sharkie

19-03-2010, 01:41 PM

Anybody have any idea what the ratio DSG to MT 118TSI failures have been?

The 118TSI DSG I drove 2 weeks ago for a few days had real issues downshifting going down and then up a hill ..... on the way up it sounded like it was stalling and pinging (detonating) as it was in too high a gear to make it up comfortably .....

sambo

19-03-2010, 02:28 PM

and another to the list....

a relative bought his 118TSI less than 12 months ago....it has been back to the dealer on at least 6 occassions each time was as a result of the engine light coming on...each time they could not find the fault....until...

6 weeks ago he noticed a distinct drop in performance...car was taken to the dealer....and the problem found as a split piston ring, cylinder 3 or 4 from memory...this is now apparently fixed/repaired.

car is back at the dealer because he is now having problems starting it.

not a happy camper

I note what has been said about the general air/fuel mixture situation and the resultant damage this can cause if its not spot on.....however can i throw my 2c in and say (what may turn out to be a silly statement) but i have always held concerns about this engine in so far as being obviously small in capacity with bolt on equipment in order to increase the performance.

Is it the case of asking too much from a 1.4?...please feel free to shot me down if i am way off the mark

triode12

19-03-2010, 02:40 PM

Intensive

19-03-2010, 02:55 PM

Had another last night, came BACK from a dealer and is worse then before, 14k on it and second engine already.

My had 11400 on it when the problem occurred. Interestingly I don't seem to be getting the same fuel economy with the new engine. Will keep an eye on it over the next week or so and see if my paranoia is realised.

Brendan_A

19-03-2010, 03:23 PM

My had 11400 on it when the problem occurred. Interestingly I don't seem to be getting the same fuel economy with the new engine. Will keep an eye on it over the next week or so and see if my paranoia is realised.

You'll have to let the new engine run in before you start seeing good fuel economy.

cme2c

19-03-2010, 03:26 PM

My had 11400 on it when the problem occurred. Interestingly I don't seem to be getting the same fuel economy with the new engine. Will keep an eye on it over the next week or so and see if my paranoia is realised.

It's a new engine so not run in. That said, I'll be interested to see if your economy improves.

AdamD

19-03-2010, 04:43 PM

I haven't read/heard of the MkV GT/GT Sport engines having the same issue. Like others have said here, it might be the OEM tune (in the bid to improve fuel economy) of 118 TSI that is causing the issue.

Guy_H (http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/newforum/upload/showpost.php?p=479657&postcount=50) has said that one of the ten failures he knows about in Brisbane was on a car flashed by APR. It's not a big sample size, and that car may have been running in stock mode primarily, but regardless, it casts at least some doubt on the tune alone being the culprit.

Perhaps, as you say, it's more of a cost-cutting reliability issue.

As a new VW owner (I don't yet have my car) coming from a line of absolutely bulletproof Hondas, reading this thread has got me more than a little concerned. While I've not bought a 118TSI, the scale and significance of this problem is pretty dramatic, and I'm surprised that VW haven't jumped on it long before it got to this stage. (Dozens of catastrophic engine failures in Australia alone - how was this not picked up in R&D?!) As it stands, this isn't sending a good message to consumers that VW is proactive about reliability issues, or concerned about the longer-term consequences for its brand image.

Guy_H

19-03-2010, 05:41 PM

dopey

19-03-2010, 09:35 PM

Same as any modification & any warranty, NO unless the modification is proved to be the cause. From what this post is saying there seems to be a recognised manufacturing problem & there are several cases with the same failure. No one is left out in the cold without warranty, form either VW or APR.

Well that eases my mind a little - as soon as our 15k service is done I'll be getting a flash. I plan to just leave the car in "APR mode" all of the time as well.

Interestingly, our car seems to be not the best on economy compared to the claimed figures - it's close but isn't miraculously thrifty no matter how "economically" by the book I drive it. Whether there's different states of tune out there, or whether it's an actual manufacturing defect with something else causing these dramas I'll probably never know, but I'm sure as hell keen to find out.

triode12

19-03-2010, 11:00 PM

Well that eases my mind a little - as soon as our 15k service is done I'll be getting a flash. I plan to just leave the car in "APR mode" all of the time as well.

Interestingly, our car seems to be not the best on economy compared to the claimed figures - it's close but isn't miraculously thrifty no matter how "economically" by the book I drive it. Whether there's different states of tune out there, or whether it's an actual manufacturing defect with something else causing these dramas I'll probably never know, but I'm sure as hell keen to find out.

In my experience, the twin charger 1.4L engine isn't that great (wrt to fuel economy) for stop/start city driving, it gives decent economy but is no where near small car levels. You must remember that the MkV and MkVI golfs are heavy cars.

Where the 1.4 TSI engine truly excels for fuel economy is when you use it for long distance driving. I average between 550-600 kms per tank (city driving) but get 750-880 kms per tank for long distance jaunts (carrying two persons with a packed suitcase weighing approx 10-15kg).

cme2c

20-03-2010, 09:04 AM

I just paid the cash & logged onto erwin

https://erwin.volkswagen.de/

and had a good look around with 118TSI VIN numbers & engine code & can not find any "campaigns" on engine failure / replacement.

Mid you, it can take a long time to filter down to this official VW technical site. Maybe Australia is ahead of the curve?

Or maybe it is something about Australia. The "tropical" situation that denies us 199kW Rs and BlueMotion may have a ring of truth to it.

Maybe a post with actual owners with actual failures would be good to focus the extent of the problem. :cow:

My wife's 118TSI has to go in for some minor warranty work (a 3rd brakelight) Talking to the technician I said something along the lines of " it's minor, not like an engine failure" he said," How did you know about that?":P

cktsi

20-03-2010, 09:10 AM

Interestingly, our car seems to be not the best on economy compared to the claimed figures - it's close but isn't miraculously thrifty no matter how "economically" by the book I drive it. Whether there's different states of tune out there, or whether it's an actual manufacturing defect with something else causing these dramas I'll probably never know, but I'm sure as hell keen to find out.

I notice you live in Sydney which can be quite hilly. So this depends on which Sydney district, but generally I would expect Sydney drivers to be getting worse economy compared to cities that are flatter such as Melbourne.

I live in a particularly hilly part of Sydney & commute between hilly parts (nw and eastern suburbs) and my long term average seems to be around 7.4 l/100km - and I'm not exactly sparing with the throttle either ! ; )

I think that's a fairly good effort for predominantly suburban driving.

In non-peak commutes I've seen comsumption bang on 6.5l/100km.

Flatter areas in Sydney such as around burwood / rhodes / some inner west areas / bankstown should see better figures as they're flatter.

cme2c

20-03-2010, 09:11 AM

I haven't read/heard of the MkV GT/GT Sport engines having the same issue. Like others have said here, it might be the OEM tune (in the bid to improve fuel economy) of 118 TSI that is causing the issue.

OR VW may have gone too far in it's quest to cut costs in the MkVI that they have compromised reliability.

I looked to see if there were problems with the twincharger engines in the GT before I put my money down, and there just weren't any reports. Mines fine, but I would like to see the resolution of this problem.

dopey

20-03-2010, 09:50 AM

Greg Roles

20-03-2010, 10:32 AM

Wow that does indeed sound unusually high. Perhaps you could reset the ECU back to learning mode by disconnecting the battery for 30 mins, and then see how it goes from there?? You'll lose your radio stations and non stock MFD options, can't see any other downsides??? People???

Corey_R

20-03-2010, 10:55 AM

I notice you live in Sydney which can be quite hilly. So this depends on which Sydney district, but generally I would expect Sydney drivers to be getting worse economy compared to cities that are flatter such as Melbourne.

I live in a particularly hilly part of Sydney & commute between hilly parts (nw and eastern suburbs) and my long term average seems to be around 7.4 l/100km - and I'm not exactly sparing with the throttle either ! ; )
I don't know... what goes up, must come down ;)
Sure you use more fuel going UP the hills, but if you drive correctly, you don't use ANY fuel going down the hills. If you're above a certain RPM, in gear, no accelerator, the car's fuel supply is disabled.

cktsi

20-03-2010, 12:41 PM

Most of our commuting is in the CBD and Inner West, we do encounter some slight undulation but nothing major. The total average for our car is about 10l/100km. Probably thanks to all the traffic, but either way quite thirsty in my opinion. Will be interested to see if this changes after the "software update" they do at the service.

yeah constant stop start traffic will murder fuel consumption. Also factor in hot weather so the aircon works harder. I can get 10 in cbd driving in summer on a trip. If your trips are very short your average will be high as each time to engine will use more fuel during warm up.

If you really want to put your mind at ease try driving out from inner west through west city link then up victoria rd then back down to parra rd via centennial drive. Maybe do this outside peak weekend like in evening. You should get below 8. Thats a mix of stop start and semi freeway conditions.

Today from nw to east i did 8.3 via gore hill but its a warm day and i used aircon rather than open sunroof and traffic was heavy in spots.

cktsi

20-03-2010, 12:49 PM

I don't know... what goes up, must come down ;)
Sure you use more fuel going UP the hills, but if you drive correctly, you don't use ANY fuel going down the hills. If you're above a certain RPM, in gear, no accelerator, the car's fuel supply is disabled.
I know what you mean and i was hoping for that too! But i suppose the fuel shut off is not enough of a saving to offset the extra fuel used going up hill. Thats what i find in real world driving.

For instance if i do one way downhill i get a certain figure. if i go the opposite uphill one way i get another figure which will be higher. Then if i do a return i find the combined is not the same as the two separate trips.

I might do an experiment to scientifically prove this as what i have described is based on observations over many drives. Of course i will have to control the experiment as much as possible to remove outside factors such as traffic lights

triode12

20-03-2010, 01:56 PM

I looked to see if there were problems with the twincharger engines in the GT before I put my money down, and there just weren't any reports. Mines fine, but I would like to see the resolution of this problem.

me too - a bad report on reliability for VW will affect resale values of all models not just the 118TSI.

gregozedobe

22-03-2010, 10:54 PM

me too - a bad report on reliability for VW will affect resale values of all models not just the 118TSI.

There is obviously a significant difference between the old Golf GT 1.4l and the new 118TSI engines. There don't seem to be many reports at all of piston failure on the "old" twincharged engines, while the new ones seem to have rather a lot of engines with the same issue - piston/ring failures :(

Edit: Just read of a 30,000Km Golf GT Sport with this fault (piston/ring failure) in the Mk V sub-forum (see post #6) :

http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/newforum/upload/showthread.php?t=42443

MariusGT

23-03-2010, 06:07 AM

All this talk about fuel economy??

The 1.4 is NOT a diesel... Having said that my average after just over 10,000kms is 8.0

that's with a few (5) long trips to thredbo, Nelson bay and bega area. And I also live in sydney's inner west.

As mentioned the 1.4 is fantastic on the highway.

If you want great economy in the city switch the "W" (wet/snow) mode to ON which reduces torque in 1st and 2nd.

Engine failure?
Greg: the gt/gt sport 1.4 engine "obviously a significant difference" to the 118. Really? I thought it was just retuned for the 7sp dsg?

Tigger

23-03-2010, 06:39 AM

So what were the approx build dates of the 118TSI cars that have experienced these problems? First batches?

Have we seen any improvement with the newer batches arriving now? Or I guess these have not been out for a long enough time to highlight any issues?

And as already asked...what is the ratio of Manuals to DSG vehicles with these issues?

I agree too with another post that said something along the lines that a 1.4 with " all this bolt on stuff" is being asked to do a great deal of work in our Aussie conditions...:frown:

cme2c

23-03-2010, 10:24 AM

There is obviously a significant difference between the old Golf GT 1.4l and the new 118TSI engines. There don't seem to be many reports at all of piston failure on the "old" twincharged engines, while the new ones seem to have rather a lot of engines with the same issue - piston/ring failures :(

I think if it was a significant difference, the answer would be known by now.

I think it's something stupid like incorrect piston heat treatment, or the odd injector not delivering enough fuel or there being a mistake in the fuel map or a MAP sensor giving an incorrect reading. Or ?????

Overheating would more likely affect either no 4 cylinder, or a "siamesed" cylinder. Excessive leanness would be likely to affect valves. If there was a general problem, more than one cylinder in a given engine would be affected, and this doesn't seem to be the case. So I dunno.

Still watching with interest...

mr gee

23-03-2010, 07:37 PM

just noticed there's a new jetta (4 mths old)on Singapore forum with a piston/ring failure as well.

nicandlance

24-04-2010, 01:06 PM

I wanted to detail a major engine failure I experienced on my newish TSI 118...

Last week on Xmas eve at about 5:45 pm, my EPC & engine lights illuminated while driving 100kph on the M1 freeway. Engine lost power and I pulled over into the emergency lane and called VW Roadside Assistance.

Given it was after hours on xmas eve, they were great - a towtruck arrived within 30 minutes and a taxi about 45 minutes later. Ended up taking the taxi 80km ($180, yes $180) to my home - VW contributed $100.

My car was held with the towtruck operator and reached my local dealership yesterday. Due to the reduced staff, they only were able to look at my car today. I was told that there was reduced compression in one of the cylinders, similar to a previously posted experience. They had discussed this finding with VW Head Office and concluded that the engine needs to be replaced!!! Loan car should be organised tomorrow.

This is all a bit of a shock given that the car has only done 5,000km and my previous Peugeot 306 lasted 12 years with great reliability. Obviously even the best cars/engines can fail, and the service provided to me in the wake of this problem has been good, however it is still disappointing to have such a terminal problem in such a new (& highly awarded) car/engine.

I don't know how common this problem has been around the world. I look forward to my car's return, whenever that may be!

We picked up our tsi a week ago but just before I did, my hubby had a work colleague email him about her Golf Mark 6 (which was a MY09 tsi).
Her car had blown up and needed an engine replacement and she wanted to warn us before we bought.
Sounds like exactly the same thing - she is now waiting on a replacement engine from Germany.
What exactly is this fault and does anyone know whether the problem has been rectified?
Another work colleague was poo pooing the Golf (he is a safe and boring type who prefers to stick with Toyota). Gave me the ****s really, as I love my new tsi - it really burst my bubble a bit - hope I don't experience the same as she did!

hoi polloi

24-04-2010, 05:09 PM

All I can say is that I hope it gets sorted out quickly and to your satisfaction...

Regards,
- Anthony.

cktsi

25-04-2010, 07:04 AM

I don't know if there is a consistent cause amongst all cases. Just to summarise in DrBono's case and my case both had the same symptoms - lack of pressure in one of the four cylinders.

For some reason in his case the entire engine was replaced. I don't know if DrBono still visits these forums but I would like to know how his car is now.

In my case they didn't replace the engine - only one fuel injector. HOWEVER.... immediately before they replaced the fuel injector they had to move my car around the workshop to perform the actual job. In doing so the engine was back to normal! Since an issue had been found, detected & logged and they had the part, they decided to replace the injector anyway.

My car has been fine ever since.

golfyvic

02-05-2010, 08:30 PM

This sounds very familiar with my car. About 8 weeks ago, my engine warning light came on, car started rattling, couldn't drive it...Got it towed to Peninsula VW, they did a compression test on the cylinders and found that one of them had a low compression rate. Took the cylinder apart and found a peice missing from the piston ring. Peninsula VW suggested replacing the engine block, VAG said no, replace the pistons and injectors. well 7 weeks went by, (no loan car BTW, after 5 attempts requesting one, I gave up), they finally got the parts in, just about to complete the work, when VAG changed their minds, and decided an engine replacement is required. Good I suppose I'm getting a new engine, bad in that it's taken 8 weeks to sort it out..

Anyway, picked up the car friday morning, was down the street on sat morning when the coolant warning message came on the MFD. Checked the level, found the cap wasn't screwed on proberly and it was bone dry. I filled it up, and noticed water pissing out from underneath the car!!!! Mate I was soo angry. Now I've got the car at South Yarra VW getting it fixed.

It's been a pretty crap 2 months, I'm calling Peninsula VW tom morning to give them a spray!! Also writing a letter to VAG about my experience.

I'm in vehicle finance for a salary packaging company, so what do I say to someone that wants to buy a TSI????

Very dissapointed VW owner here

hooba

02-05-2010, 08:56 PM

That's a horror story that just keeps getting worse.

I hope that the new dealer sorts it out for you.

anthony

02-05-2010, 10:45 PM

This was 1 reason why I went for the Honda Accord Euro over a Jetta 118 TSI.

cube_3

07-05-2010, 01:44 AM

Not sure if anyone has seen this yet:
Volkswagen Golf 118TSI warning | Review | carsguide.com.au (http://www.carsguide.com.au/site/news-and-reviews/car-news/volkswagen_golf_118tsi_warning)

Stoney!

07-05-2010, 06:48 AM

Mines due to be returned tomorrow from service and warranty work, better make sure they have done the ecu update.

Stoney!

drbono

07-05-2010, 04:00 PM

Spook

07-05-2010, 09:32 PM

Like this quote here from the Carsguide (http://www.carsguide.com.au/site/news-and-reviews/car-news/volkswagen_golf_118tsi_warning)article:

"We have just notified our dealers and are sending out letters to customers to bring in their cars to have an upgrade of their engine software," Volkswagen Australia spokesman, Karl Gehling, says. Gehling says apart from one owner's engine blowing up, there have only been a few reports of problems.

This from Carsales (http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2010/small-passenger/volkswagen/golf/volkswagens-twincharged-engine-trouble-19282):

The problem appears to be unique to Volkswagens in Australia. The company says there have been no other similar reports overseas and the computer fix was devised by Germany specifically for Australia.

mr gee

07-05-2010, 09:41 PM

Like this quote here from the Carsguide (http://www.carsguide.com.au/site/news-and-reviews/car-news/volkswagen_golf_118tsi_warning)article:

This from Carsales (http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2010/small-passenger/volkswagen/golf/volkswagens-twincharged-engine-trouble-19282):

I heard of similar problems reported in Singapore.

nicandlance

08-05-2010, 08:30 AM

I previously detailed my experiences from Xmas eve 2009 when my engine blew up. I am pleased to say that the engine was completely replaced and the car was returned to me after about 6 weeks.

Amusingly, just like golfyvic, my coolant light came on within a few days, I opened the bonnet to find the coolant lid OFF! NO coolant fluid in the reservoir. Unbelievable! Another trip back to the same dealership and some small apologies.

Since (now 3 months) I have had no problems.

Also, in Melbourne's Herald-Sun today... Very interesting reading...

Volkswagen Golf 118TSI warning | Review | carsguide.com.au (http://www.carsguide.com.au/site/news-and-reviews/car-news/volkswagen_golf_118tsi_warning)

My husband actually knows the woman involved in this article. Kaye is a policewoman who works with my husband - she warned us about the problem a week after we took delivery of our car.
Emailed my dealer already - going to get my baby checked!

Golf Mark 6

10-05-2010, 10:39 PM

Thought I'd share my sad story with you...

Last Monday I noticed the engine on my Golf started running roughly on the way to my weekly squash session. When I turned on the engine for my return home I noticed the yellow engine light had turned on and then started blinking... :(

I nursed the car home and called VW roadside assistance. The very efficient and pleasant guys on the other end of the line organised the tow to the local dealership and a taxi for work the next day.

After many calls to and from the dealership, I went in to pick up my courtesy car and had a look at my pride and joy sitting there with it's engine open.

Piston head had a crack leading to a compression loss in cylinder 2. At 12,000 km... :(

Today I found out that VW had a recall (or whatever they choose to call it) on my engine. I understand that the engines involved will get a re-flash (which mine will get after all four cylinders are replaced). I'm pretty sure my engine issue is related to the recall.

My concern right now is that the cracked piston will have caused damage to the inside of the cylinder, and possibly elsewhere, and I will be taking this up with the dealer when I speak to them next. I really don't want to spend the remainder of my car's life visiting the service centre every month to solve serious engine issues.

How the incorrect engine mapping could lead to cracking in a piston at such low km is beyond me. I'm also hope that the re-flash won't significantly reduce the power of the engine (maybe just alter the power band).

Corey_R

10-05-2010, 10:58 PM

From what I can tell, the poor Australian fuel is probably to blame here. It's really starting to impact the European manufacturers heavily. These engines are being designed for 'Euro 5' regulations in relation to fuel consumption and emissions, yet our fuel is far below the quality level which Euro 5 requires. One of the big things it the sulphur level in Australian fuels is several times what it needs to be, but it may be more complex than that.

In relation to your engine, there are other members who have had the entire engine replaced. If I were in your position, I would push the issue and ask that this happens to your car as well. I'm not mechnical (well not to the extent of understanding this procedure), but I don't undestand how they can "replace a cylinder" in an engine. Pistions, cylinder heads, sure, but not a cylinder itself. I would feel much better if the entire engine were replaced if it were my car.

POLARBEAR666

11-05-2010, 12:24 AM

Isn't BP Ultimate very low sulphur or is it just lower than the rest of the aussie junk but not lower than europe?

logger

11-05-2010, 07:33 AM

Thought I'd share my sad story with you...
.

That is indeed rotten luck for you. As I have the same car I am mildly concerned. Out of interest have you been using a particular bread of fuel and was it it alway 98RON or were you using 95RON as well a bit? I am open minded to as to the cause by the way. I have a hunch related to emission controls, not fuel, but will not be able to check until I see how my car compares after any ECU "fix" via VCDS. Anyone know at what part of operating regime this engine is exposed to the greatest heat stress?

nicandlance

11-05-2010, 07:46 AM

Does anyone suggest a certain brand of fuel?

team_v

11-05-2010, 07:57 AM

Does anyone suggest a certain brand of fuel?

BP Ultimate > *
See here: http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/f77/shell-premium-v-mobil-premium-9335.html

To everyone:
If you are spending over 30k on a car, why would you cheap out a dollar or 2 every fortnight and run your car on poorer quality fuel.
If it's that much of a pricing issue, just don't have one coffee in that fortnight and you will be ahead.

BBP

11-05-2010, 09:07 AM

95RON is recommended isn't it?

Why should we have to pay for 98RON?

logger

11-05-2010, 09:07 AM

BP Ultimate > *
See here: http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/f77/shell-premium-v-mobil-premium-9335.html

Would like be interested in the results in that thread, if blind testing had been done. Where the users did not know which brand was in their car at any given time. Also would be interesting to see what difference between the commonly available 98 ron fuels are based on scientific testing. In the mean time I am happy to use any 98 RON from a mainstream brand without feeling cheap. I sure cant tell the difference.

Corey_R

11-05-2010, 09:13 AM

Isn't BP Ultimate very low sulphur or is it just lower than the rest of the aussie junk but not lower than europe?

BP Ultimate 98 Unleaded (http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9015047&contentId=7028245) contains less than "50 parts per million of sulphur". This is less than 2/3 the amount of sulphur in regular unleaded fuels (including 95 octane premiums), which are up to 150 ppm.

Euro 5 compliant fuels, which are (not quite so obviously) required for Euro 5 compliant engines contain up to 10 ppm maximum.

This means that even BP Ultimate is 5 times higher than the engines are designed for!!!
But regular 91 and 95 unleadeds are 15 times higher than the engines are designed for!!!

This is particularly troublesome during "lean burns". If anyone remembers the comments and pictures posted by someone here a while back in relation to the 118TSI engine failures, fuel leanness (is that a word?) was bought up as a likely problem. The sulphur content in Australian fuels is also causing issues with BMW and Mercedes. They both have new motors that they simply cannot bring to Australia because of how bad our fuel is. Despite these engines being far cleaner and far more fuel efficient than the current generation of engines available.

Corey_R

11-05-2010, 09:14 AM

95RON is recommended isn't it?

Why should we have to pay for 98RON?

See my post above...

BBP

11-05-2010, 09:38 AM

See my post above...

Thanks for the above and I understand your explanation.

However, if the brochure says 95RON, then that's what I'll be using. If VW have released an engine that can't cope with 95RON then that is a Fair Trading Act issue for them - misleading and deceptive, not fit for purpose etc.

Let the warranty claims roll on !

cameronp

11-05-2010, 09:52 AM

BP Ultimate > *
To everyone:
If you are spending over 30k on a car, why would you cheap out a dollar or 2 every fortnight and run your car on poorer quality fuel.
If it's that much of a pricing issue, just don't have one coffee in that fortnight and you will be ahead.

Alternatively, if all of the fuel is actually of the same quality, why pay extra for a brand name? AFAIK all of the petrol in Western Australia comes out of the same refinery, BP Kwinana. The only difference that you need to worry about is the octane rating (i.e. 98 / 95 / 91 RON). I'm not sure what the situation is in other states.

Something doesn't sound quite right about this "sulfur in Australian fuel is causing engines to explode" explanation, and I note that the actual articles don't mention anything about this, just people on this forum. The only mentions I can find online about sulfur content in fuel causing engines problems is from when low-sulfur diesel was first introduced here, and sound completely unrelated. There are plenty of other high-pressure turbocharged engines out there and I haven't heard of others having to be specially modified for Australian petrol. I'd love to hear an explanation or references about this from someone who actually understands what's going on, and also curious to know what the ECU modifications actually did.

It's rather worrying to read about these engines exploding when I've just ordered one!

cameronp

11-05-2010, 09:58 AM

... and on a related note, does anyone know whether the same engine used in the Mark5 Golf GT TSI is also subject to the recall? Or, for that matter, whether people on this forum have been seeing the same kinds of engine failures with it?

AdamD

11-05-2010, 10:45 AM

However, if the brochure says 95RON, then that's what I'll be using. If VW have released an engine that can't cope with 95RON then that is a Fair Trading Act issue for them - misleading and deceptive, not fit for purpose etc.

If the issue really is related to fuel quality (and it's all speculation at this point, based solely - I believe - on the lack of issues in overseas markets), then that's precisely why VW is in the process of providing an ECU remap - to allow the engine to better cope with the fuel the car has been advertised as being compatible with, under the conditions under which it must operate.

However, just because a car can operate with a certain grade of fuel doesn't mean it'll operate at peak efficiency with that fuel, especially when it's been designed as the VW petrol engines have, with European fuels in mind. I consider 95 RON fuel the equivalent of a junk food diet. Without the best fuel the car won't operate as powerfully, or as economically, and there may well be longer-term side-effects - which you may not be able to attribute directly to the fuel (and so warranty claims are not cut-and-dried).

As an aside, the "premium" 98 RON fuels in Australia aren't the equivalent of 95 RON with a higher octane rating - they typically have special additives and cleaners added to reduce engine deposits and keep the engine running better over time (and, as Corey has pointed out, have a lower sulphur content as well).

In my opinion, choosing to use 95 RON fuel because "the brochure says 95RON" is counter productive. Sure, it may be cheaper in the short term, but it potentially compromises the performance and long-term efficiency of your car, and your ownership experience. For that reason I never use anything other than 98.

team_v

11-05-2010, 10:50 AM

If the issue really is related to fuel quality (and it's all speculation at this point, based solely - I believe - on the lack of issues in overseas markets), then that's precisely why VW is in the process of providing an ECU remap - to allow the engine to better cope with the fuel the car has been advertised as being compatible with, under the conditions under which it must operate.

However, just because a car can operate with a certain grade of fuel doesn't mean it'll operate at peak efficiency with that fuel, especially when it's been designed as the VW petrol engines have, with European fuels in mind. I consider 95 RON fuel the equivalent of a junk food diet. Without the best fuel the car won't operate as powerfully, or as economically, and there may well be longer-term side-effects - which you may not be able to attribute directly to the fuel (and so warranty claims are not cut-and-dried).

As an aside, the "premium" 98 RON fuels in Australia aren't the equivalent of 95 RON with a higher octane rating - they typically have special additives and cleaners added to reduce engine deposits and keep the engine running better over time (and, as Corey has pointed out, have a lower sulphur content as well).

In my opinion, choosing to use 95 RON fuel because "the brochure says 95RON" is counter productive. Sure, it may be cheaper in the short term, but it potentially compromises the performance and long-term efficiency of your car, and your ownership experience. For that reason I never use anything other than 98.

Quoted for Truth!
This is why i will only be using BP Ultimate 98 in my new VW

Corey_R

11-05-2010, 10:50 AM

Cameron, there are numerous articles on numerous websites about this topic of Australian fuel quality. Hundreds actually. Way too many to bother linking, just do some google searches. But I'll post you one on this such topic from yesterday:
2011 M-Class faces fuel issues in Oz (http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2010/medium-4x4/mercedesbenz/mclass/2011-mclass-faces-fuel-issues-in-oz-19305)

Admittedly, there haven't been any specifically about the 118TSI which mention fuel or sulphur quality, but there has to be something about Australia which is unique, and I don't see how VW are exempt from an issue which is causing all the other manufacturers from Europe issues.
Oh and btw. Fuel quality in Australia has also been used by both Nissan and Honda as to why they haven't bought out some of their "high-pressure turbocharged engine" models to Australia in the past. Wwe didn't get the real Honda Integra Type R in the later models, and we also didn't get the top spec Nissan 200SX. For that matter we also don't get the top spec Mitsubishi Lancer Evo's even today - although I don't care enough about them to actually take notice about why Mitsubishi don't bring them to Australia.

Corey_R

11-05-2010, 10:53 AM

If the issue really is related to fuel quality (and it's all speculation at this point, based solely - I believe - on the lack of issues in overseas markets), then that's precisely why VW is in the process of providing an ECU remap - to allow the engine to better cope with the fuel the car has been advertised as being compatible with, under the conditions under which it must operate.

However, just because a car can operate with a certain grade of fuel doesn't mean it'll operate at peak efficiency with that fuel, especially when it's been designed as the VW petrol engines have, with European fuels in mind. I consider 95 RON fuel the equivalent of a junk food diet. Without the best fuel the car won't operate as powerfully, or as economically, and there may well be longer-term side-effects - which you may not be able to attribute directly to the fuel (and so warranty claims are not cut-and-dried).

As an aside, the "premium" 98 RON fuels in Australia aren't the equivalent of 95 RON with a higher octane rating - they typically have special additives and cleaners added to reduce engine deposits and keep the engine running better over time (and, as Corey has pointed out, have a lower sulphur content as well).

In my opinion, choosing to use 95 RON fuel because "the brochure says 95RON" is counter productive. Sure, it may be cheaper in the short term, but it potentially compromises the performance and long-term efficiency of your car, and your ownership experience. For that reason I never use anything other than 98.

You were writing this as I was writing my last post.
I must say this is very well written and I agree 100%.

Although I respect BBP's point of view, I seriously do not understand why he would want to limit the efficiency and diminish the experience of owning a great car, just to save a few bucks a month. As you said, it is just counter productive. You may as well just have saved the money and bought a base model Toyota instead.

Flighter

11-05-2010, 01:22 PM

I'm not mechnical (well not to the extent of understanding this procedure), but I don't undestand how they can "replace a cylinder" in an engine. Pistions, cylinder heads, sure, but not a cylinder itself. I would feel much better if the entire engine were replaced if it were my car.

If the block is alloy, then I would expect the cylinders to have liners, so perhaps these are replaceable. I suspect it was just poor choice of words on somebody's part though, as machining a liner would probably be easier, assuming the tolerances can be met of course.

Sometimes the entire engine is replaced as a matter of pure economics. I read somewhere that Ford's 2.0 litre Duractec engine as used in the Focus is designed not to be repaired, although I suspect what that really means is that it was designed for machines assemble (presumably accurately and cheaply), and not for humans to disassemble.

cameronp

11-05-2010, 01:35 PM

Cameron, there are numerous articles on numerous websites about this topic of Australian fuel quality. Hundreds actually. Way too many to bother linking, just do some google searches. But I'll post you one on this such topic from yesterday:
2011 M-Class faces fuel issues in Oz (http://www.carsales.com.au/news/2010/medium-4x4/mercedesbenz/mclass/2011-mclass-faces-fuel-issues-in-oz-19305)

Ahh, cheers for that link. Searching for articles about sulphur in fuel and direct injection turned up some more interesting interesting results - previously I had only been finding articles relating to sulphur in diesel, which is irrelevant to the 118TSI. Quite a few pages mention potential problems with fuel injectors in newer European engines, as well as longer-term damage to catalytic converters. It is also apparently not a problem unique to Australia - the USA has similar fuel quality issues. I did note, however, that the 1.4 twincharged engine is not available on the USA-market Golf.

Interestingly, 95 and 98 RON fuel in Australia is required to have lower sulphur than 91 RON unleaded - 50 ppm rather than 150 ppm. In USA, the maximum appears to be 80 ppm.

I was under the impression that the reason for high-power Japanese cars being detuned in Australia was just an issue with octane number - with over 100 RON petrol being readily available in Japan - not due to higher levels of impurities in our fuel, but I could be wrong.

Maverick

11-05-2010, 01:46 PM

95RON is recommended isn't it?

Why should we have to pay for 98RON?

Why wouldn't you? Seriously why would you run a $40K car on cheap rubbish fuel to save a few dollars?

ozgti

11-05-2010, 02:35 PM

BMW had issues with Nikasil liners on their engines in the early-mid 90's The sulphur content of our fuels used to eat the lining up and you'd do the engine in. New liners (Difficult. Easier to replase the engine with non nikasil ined engines)

Olaf the Golaf

11-05-2010, 03:04 PM

Both the 118TSi and the bike I had were supposed to run on 95, i still run 98 (unless it isn't available at the time). Called my dealer about this just this afternoon and asked whether i should be looking at bringing mine in, he said that he believed it was only a problem with the DSG models, which would point away from fuel wouldn't it? as fuel would effect DSG and manual the same?

I also had the car in with them recently getting the water pump replaced and he said if it was necessary to do on my car it would have been done then, which it wasn't (unless they haven't itemised it on the bill and not mentioned it to me, and i can't see the point of them being that secretive about it...)

Corey_R

11-05-2010, 03:42 PM

Called my dealer about this just this afternoon and asked whether i should be looking at bringing mine in, he said that he believed it was only a problem with the DSG models, which would point away from fuel wouldn't it? as fuel would effect DSG and manual the same?
I would question the dealer again, or maybe ask another dealer.
I can confirm that there are members of this forum who have already got their 118TSI manuals booked in for this new ECU to be installed. Also, it is an ECU update, not a DSG mechatronics or electronics update. In addition, none of the articles or information presented thus far has indicated that it is just for the DSG model (or any mention of DSG or manual at all for that matter).

DracZ

11-05-2010, 04:13 PM

I would question the dealer again, or maybe ask another dealer.
I can confirm that there are members of this forum who have already got their 118TSI manuals booked in for this new ECU to be installed. Also, it is an ECU update, not a DSG mechatronics or electronics update. In addition, none of the articles or information presented thus far has indicated that it is just for the DSG model (or any mention of DSG or manual at all for that matter).

Spoke to the service dept @ essendon VW, and its most likely a specific batch since I was asked to provide my VIN in order for them to determine whether the ECU update was applicable to my 118TSI specifically. Booked in for the 24th of this month, and its a DEC 09 build.

dave_r

11-05-2010, 04:47 PM

Don't have much to add except on the previous white cars I owned ~4-5yrs ago I noticed a big difference with the output of different fuels. At the time, Shell Optimax was dirty as hell. It would leave the rear bumper black and if you had a tail wind when stationary it smelled like rotten eggs (believe this is the sulphur). On the otherhand, using Mobil Synergy 8000 which was also a 98RON fuel, left no mess on the rear bumper at all and didn't smell.

There was no difference in performance but if 2 different fuels can have such a marked difference in output at the tailpipe, imagine what they're doing in the engine internals!

BBP

11-05-2010, 05:01 PM

If the issue really is related to fuel quality (and it's all speculation at this point, based solely - I believe - on the lack of issues in overseas markets), then that's precisely why VW is in the process of providing an ECU remap - to allow the engine to better cope with the fuel the car has been advertised as being compatible with, under the conditions under which it must operate.

However, just because a car can operate with a certain grade of fuel doesn't mean it'll operate at peak efficiency with that fuel, especially when it's been designed as the VW petrol engines have, with European fuels in mind. I consider 95 RON fuel the equivalent of a junk food diet. Without the best fuel the car won't operate as powerfully, or as economically, and there may well be longer-term side-effects - which you may not be able to attribute directly to the fuel (and so warranty claims are not cut-and-dried).

As an aside, the "premium" 98 RON fuels in Australia aren't the equivalent of 95 RON with a higher octane rating - they typically have special additives and cleaners added to reduce engine deposits and keep the engine running better over time (and, as Corey has pointed out, have a lower sulphur content as well).

In my opinion, choosing to use 95 RON fuel because "the brochure says 95RON" is counter productive. Sure, it may be cheaper in the short term, but it potentially compromises the performance and long-term efficiency of your car, and your ownership experience. For that reason I never use anything other than 98.

Everyone knows all that. You missed my point.

If VW recommends 95RON, then that is what I should be able to use without any risk of damage. I don't care about the money. I have an XF Jag, the Golf is just for my wife.

BBP

11-05-2010, 05:03 PM

Why wouldn't you? Seriously why would you run a $40K car on cheap rubbish fuel to save a few dollars?

Again, not the point.

If you release a product to the market and make various statements about its use, the buyer must be able to rely on those statements, otherwise we have a schmozzle.

BBP

11-05-2010, 05:06 PM

You were writing this as I was writing my last post.
I must say this is very well written and I agree 100%.

Although I respect BBP's point of view, I seriously do not understand why he would want to limit the efficiency and diminish the experience of owning a great car, just to save a few bucks a month. As you said, it is just counter productive. You may as well just have saved the money and bought a base model Toyota instead.

Again again, that's irrelevant to my position.

Maverick

11-05-2010, 05:11 PM

Again, not the point.

If you release a product to the market and make various statements about its use, the buyer must be able to rely on those statements, otherwise we have a schmozzle.

It is the point if you understood fuel.

98 octane fuel will cost you less as you travel further on one tank plus it saves you down the track as it contains many more conditioners to keep your fuel system clean.

Plenty of products are sold that are capable of being used in multiple different ways and in this case 95 octane is most likely ok but if you get a bad batch or two or you start clogging up the FSI system you can run into problems whereas with 98 octane fuel you have a larger safety margin but better cleaning and it costs you less.

It's the same with tyres, the car might ship with CSC3's which are fantastic tyre's and you choose instead of putting performance tyres back on the car when they wear but instead some bob jane all rounders (after all they meet the requirements) and you complain to VW when your car slides off the road in the next rain.

Just because a manufacturer has a minimum standard doesn't mean you shouldn't use a product that is better.

BBP

11-05-2010, 05:24 PM

It is the point if you understood fuel.

98 octane fuel will cost you less as you travel further on one tank plus it saves you down the track as it contains many more conditioners to keep your fuel system clean.

Plenty of products are sold that are capable of being used in multiple different ways and in this case 95 octane is most likely ok but if you get a bad batch or two or you start clogging up the FSI system you can run into problems whereas with 98 octane fuel you have a larger safety margin but better cleaning and it costs you less.

It's the same with tyres, the car might ship with CSC3's which are fantastic tyre's and you choose instead of putting performance tyres back on the car when they wear but instead some bob jane all rounders (after all they meet the requirements) and you complain to VW when your car slides off the road in the next rain.

Just because a manufacturer has a minimum standard doesn't mean you shouldn't use a product that is better.

Err, I don't know how to explain it any simpler than I already have !

And there is no need to get personal, I have a pretty good grasp on fuel. My Dad was a mechanic and I basically grew up in his workshop playing with carbys and injectors. Let's just stick to the topic.

Patently, 98RON can be used and it would lead to better efficiency in the combustion chamber. Everyone with half a motoring brain cell knows that.

The issue here is that there is a suggestion that the fuel VW Australia recommends (AUSTRALIA'S 95RON, not Europe's or America's or Heaven's) is hurting these engines and resulting in damage.

If that is true (and none of us know whether it is or not), it is unacceptable and no VW customer should have to "work around it" by using 98RON. That's commercial law 101.

Maverick

11-05-2010, 05:36 PM

Err, I don't know how to explain it any simpler than I already have !

And there is no need to get personal, I have a pretty good grasp on fuel. My Dad was a mechanic and I basically grew up in his workshop playing with carbys and injectors. Let's just stick to the topic.

I'm not getting personal but throwing some facts and suggestions out there.

Patently, 98RON can be used and it would lead to better efficiency in the combustion chamber. Everyone with half a motoring brain cell knows that.

The issue here is that there is a suggestion that the fuel VW Australia recommends (AUSTRALIA'S 95RON, not Europe's or America's or Heaven's) is hurting these engines and resulting in damage.

Volkswagen had an issue with a range of cars, Volkswagen is calling those cars back for a ECU update to fix the problem and that's the end of the story.

What isn't clear however is if the fuel that was used was not up to spec (ie not 95 RON) and/or was full of containments.

If that is true (and none of us know whether it is or not), it is unacceptable and no VW customer should have to "work around it" by using 98RON. That's commercial law 101.

There is no mention of a workaround using 98 RON however a prudent owner would choose to use 98 RON if they cared for the car and understood fuel.

hooba

11-05-2010, 05:38 PM

I'm with BBP, the point is if the engines needed 98 then it is VW's responsibility not to tout 95 RON as a minimum.

Also the argument about sulphur content is purely speculative at this stage as AFAIK has not been confirmed by VW as the reason for the reflash.

Corey_R

11-05-2010, 05:50 PM

Spoke to the service dept @ essendon VW, and its most likely a specific batch since I was asked to provide my VIN in order for them to determine whether the ECU update was applicable to my 118TSI specifically. Booked in for the 24th of this month, and its a DEC 09 build.

Thanks for the info DracZ :)

Golf Mark 6

11-05-2010, 05:53 PM

Interesting discussions, but I have never, ever put anything but 98 RON in my car...

...and wherever possible I do use BP Ultimate. My local Petrol station is a BP.

Golf Mark 6

11-05-2010, 05:58 PM

If the block is alloy, then I would expect the cylinders to have liners, so perhaps these are replaceable. I suspect it was just poor choice of words on somebody's part though, as machining a liner would probably be easier, assuming the tolerances can be met of course.

Sometimes the entire engine is replaced as a matter of pure economics. I read somewhere that Ford's 2.0 litre Duractec engine as used in the Focus is designed not to be repaired, although I suspect what that really means is that it was designed for machines assemble (presumably accurately and cheaply), and not for humans to disassemble.

The issue wasn't the cylinder itself, it was the piston (specifically the head of the piston in cylinder 2) that had a small crack.

I really don't mind a repair vs. an engine replacement as long as it's done properly and doesn't cause me issues somewhere down the line. Unfortunately I'm not sure I believe that this will happen.

BBP

11-05-2010, 05:59 PM

I'm not getting personal but throwing some facts and suggestions out there.

Volkswagen had an issue with a range of cars, Volkswagen is calling those cars back for a ECU update to fix the problem and that's the end of the story.

What isn't clear however is if the fuel that was used was not up to spec (ie not 95 RON) and/or was full of containments.

There is no mention of a workaround using 98 RON however a prudent owner would choose to use 98 RON if they cared for the car and understood fuel.

1. So "It is the point if you knew anything about fuel" is not personal. Ok then ....

2. A problem leading to a recall is not the "end of the story". Saying something does not make it so Maverick. If the fuel grade is the issue (and again that is speculation on the part of us all) then God knows how many customers are going to have problems, engine failures, inconvenience etc. The story is whether those customers should have had the problem in the first place.

3. You guys mentioned the work around solution of 98RON, not me. I was just pointing out the irrelevance of that possible solution to the issue at hand.

4. "Caring for the car and understanding fuel" ... do I need to say it again? That's not the point. A careful owner should have to do no more than what the manufacturer suggests. No owner should have to "understand fuel" - VW tells them what to use !

Rob Burns

11-05-2010, 06:12 PM

95RON is recommended isn't it?

Why should we have to pay for 98RON?
Not sure if this has been mentioned but 95 is the minimum specification and 98 is the recommended specification. If you look at your fuel door there should be a largish 95 with a smaller 98 in brackets after it.

BBP

11-05-2010, 06:18 PM

Not sure if this has been mentioned but 95 is the minimum specification and 98 is the recommended specification. If you look at your fuel door there should be a largish 95 with a smaller 98 in brackets after it.

We know what the min specs are.

Maverick

11-05-2010, 06:19 PM

1. So "It is the point if you knew anything about fuel" is not personal. Ok then ....

2. A problem leading to a recall is not the "end of the story". Saying something does not make it so Maverick. If the fuel grade is the issue (and again that is speculation on the part of us all) then God knows how many customers are going to have problems, engine failures, inconvenience etc. The story is whether those customers should have had the problem in the first place.

Find me a model of car that has left the production line without any design flaws or faults?

Volkswagen identified an issue with a production range that could be due to many many factors, they have released a fix for this fault, they are fixing cars under warranty that fail and are being proactive in addressing this issue. There was no recall issued, a recall is different to a field campaign.

3. You guys mentioned the work around solution of 98RON, not me. I was just pointing out the irrelevance of that possible solution to the issue at hand.

A prudent owner that understands fuel would not run an engine on a minimum requirement fuel when for no more outlay they can get a premium fuel that gives their engine more room if there is a problem IMO.

4. "Caring for the car and understanding fuel" ... do I need to say it again? That's not the point. A careful owner should have to do no more than what the manufacturer suggests. No owner should have to "understand fuel" - VW tells them what to use !

Sure and does this mean leaving the tyres on the minimum inflation levels, replacing the tyres with cheap tyres that meet the requirements despite poor performance, using a fuel that is borderline if you get a bad batch and so forth. A careful owner would not do any of these but would realise that there are benefits in having increased tyre pressures, using higher performance tyres, using a better performing fuel (especially given the FSI) and so forth.

Volkswagen have addressed the issue and will look after those that have failures. As I said it's the end of the story as far as customers are concerned, they're not going to find out any more information from the dealer because it's unlikely Volkswagen has gone into detail with them.

Rob Burns

11-05-2010, 06:27 PM

We know what the min specs are.

Not according to the post that I quoted.

Tux

11-05-2010, 06:32 PM

There is no mention of a workaround using 98 RON however a prudent owner would choose to use 98 RON if they cared for the car and understood fuel.

A prudent person would do as VW recommend and use 95 RON fuel and I think that is the point. An imprudent person would use 91 RON fuel!

Having said that I do believe that using 98 RON fuel is a good idea and that there are definite benefits in doing so.

Golf Mark 6

11-05-2010, 06:33 PM

What a passionate argument!

Had I actually used 95 RON I would probably be kicking myself right now. BUT I DIDN'T.

So whatever problem my engine had, it's not 95 RON related.

I always used the best fuel I could find - ALWAYS 98 RON. And usually BP Ultimate.

And if it's an issue with the useless Aussie fuel in general, then people using 95 RON will also have problems.

BBP

11-05-2010, 06:34 PM

Find me a model of car that has left the production line without any design flaws or faults?

Volkswagen identified an issue with a production range that could be due to many many factors, they have released a fix for this fault, they are fixing cars under warranty that fail and are being proactive in addressing this issue. There was no recall issued, a recall is different to a field campaign.

A prudent owner that understands fuel would not run an engine on a minimum requirement fuel when for no more outlay they can get a premium fuel that gives their engine more room if there is a problem IMO.

Sure and does this mean leaving the tyres on the minimum inflation levels, replacing the tyres with cheap tyres that meet the requirements despite poor performance, using a fuel that is borderline if you get a bad batch and so forth. A careful owner would not do any of these but would realise that there are benefits in having increased tyre pressures, using higher performance tyres, using a better performing fuel (especially given the FSI) and so forth.

Volkswagen have addressed the issue and will look after those that have failures. As I said it's the end of the story as far as customers are concerned, they're not going to find out any more information from the dealer because it's unlikely Volkswagen has gone into detail with them.

Staggeringly, you don't get the issue I have Maverick, and I don't have the energy to explain it all again.

Time to get ready for the Budget. Can't wait to see all ALP heads nodding in unison behind Wayne Swan ... the intellectual giant and economic wizard that he is!

God help us all.

gerhard

11-05-2010, 07:25 PM

Staggeringly, you don't get the issue I have Maverick, and I don't have the energy to explain it all again.

Time to get ready for the Budget. Can't wait to see all ALP heads nodding in unison behind Wayne Swan ... the intellectual giant and economic wizard that he is!

God help us all.

And you objected when you thought Maverick was getting personal, but it's OK for you to get personal about a leader elected by the majority in our democratic system.

Government would be better if using a higher quality parliament, but the people have mandated the use of a parliament meeting the minimum standard.

In reply to the earlier question about whether the engine will be satisfactory long term if the piston is replaced rather than the whole engine, the answer would be yes. A hairline piston crack will not usually damage the bore in an engine, so a new piston and rings can be installed. I expect VW will replace the entire set of pistons, rings, and big end bearings, and your engine will last as long as a new crated engine would.

However, if there is scoring the story could be different - I don't know if these blocks can be re-bored at all. If yes, then all would be OK with a set of oversized pistons. If no, clearly the block would need replacing.

Coaster

11-05-2010, 07:31 PM

Why the F are you talking politics? :mad:

I have to agree with BBP, no one should have to worry about what grade of fuel they choose, as long as it is equal to or better than the minimum. Having said that, I always use 98 RON.

Also, following on from cameronp about different brands of fuel, I know in Perth and Adelaide, there is only 1 refinery each, so I would assume the sulphur content would be exactly the same for each brand in those cities. Maybe the larger cities have more than 1 refinery and there may be some subtle differences between them. I would not rely on anecdotal evidence from users and tout 1 brand over any other.

BBP

11-05-2010, 07:44 PM

And you objected when you thought Maverick was getting personal, but it's OK for you to get personal about a leader elected by the majority in our democratic system.

Government would be better if using a higher quality parliament, but the people have mandated the use of a parliament meeting the minimum standard.

Nice one. I like it !

MaccaTSI

11-05-2010, 08:04 PM

When I bought my car the min recommendation for fuel in the 118TSI was 98RON. VW revised it not long after and changed the minimum to 95RON.

see here: http://www.caradvice.com.au/38849/new-volkswagen-engines-revised-for-95-ron-unleaded/

Personally, I don't use anything less than 98.

The article states that they took into account the Aussie fuel standards and felt that 95 was appropriate, but surely there was a reason it was originally 98. At the time I thought it was to make the car more marketable because I'd seen complaints that the car required 98 and made it seem more expensive to run.

Recommendation or not, I don't want to take any chances and want to use the best fuel I can put in there

MaccaTSI

11-05-2010, 08:09 PM

Back on the topic of engines blowing up, I've got mine booked in for next week to get a couple of things looked at. They said they'll plug it in when I take it in to see if it needs the update after I asked about it.

It's a bit rough when cold but seems to warm up ok. Also a few times there's been a clicking/grinding noise from the back followed by a puff of smoke.

So hopefully my car is not about to go down the same route as others on here... eek

cameronp

11-05-2010, 08:27 PM

Interestingly, when the 1.4 twincharger was first released (2007), Europe was on the Euro4 fuel and emissions standards, which allow the same maximum sulfur content (50ppm) as in current Australian 95RON and 98RON. So you would think that there is nothing fundamentally stopping the engine from working with Australian fuel. I guess that doesn't rule out the ECU having been misprogrammed for it, though.

Am I right in understanding that the owner's manual for the 118TSI recommends using 98RON fuel, with 95RON being the minimum (and resulting in reduced power output)? In that case, I reckon both BBP and Maverick are right: you would have to be pretty daft to use 95 regularly, but if doing so results in engine damage, Volkswagen have some serious explaining to do.

prise

11-05-2010, 08:56 PM

If the block is alloy, then I would expect the cylinders to have liners, so perhaps these are replaceable.

The 1.4 has a graphite cast iron block with an open deck design - no liners.

Also we're making an assumption here that it is fuel related - it is possible that they made an error in the ECU calibration when doing the SW variant for the Australian market. It wouldn't be the first time a product was sold with a software error!

flappa

11-05-2010, 09:12 PM

Aren't they detuning the Golf R for Australian Conditions ? Couldn't it be possible they "should" have detuned the TSI for OZ as well. Higher temps, lower fuels etc etc etc.

Brian

11-05-2010, 09:12 PM

I may be wrong, but wasn't this motor detuned from 125kW to 118kW to suit Australian fuel?
This should have resulted in a ECU map to suit OZ fuels I would have thought. Has VW got it wrong from the start?
I purchased mine 2nd hand at 8000K and is going great. Have used BP, Caltex and Mobile 98 since I've had it and can't discern any difference in performance or economy between the fuels. But who knows what the previous owner used.
Booked in for a reflash on the 20th and then an APR upgrade.
Hope everyones outcomes are positive.
Brian

Golf Mark 6

11-05-2010, 09:37 PM

The 1.4 has a graphite cast iron block with an open deck design - no liners.

Also we're making an assumption here that it is fuel related - it is possible that they made an error in the ECU calibration when doing the SW variant for the Australian market. It wouldn't be the first time a product was sold with a software error!

Does this mean that if there is damage they'll have to re-bore the engine?

Corey_R

11-05-2010, 10:11 PM

More likely that they'll just replace the engine - as per all the other cases.

Diesel_vert

12-05-2010, 12:36 AM

The 118 kW motor hasn't been detuned for Australia, as the Volkswagen website in Germany shows the same output of 118 kW (160 PS). It also says to use fuel that has a minimum RON of 95, is sulphur free (i.e. 10 ppm) and conforms to EN 228, of which I've already commented on (http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/f112/95ron-98ron-petrol-gti-mk6-41822-3.html#post470503). Same goes for the 90 kW (122 PS) TSI and the 155 kW (210 PS) TSI in the Golf GTI. In fact, the 199 kW (270 PS) motor in the Golf R is the only one which explicitly states that, although 95 is the minimum recommendation, 98 is required to achieve maximum performance.

Currently, according to the Fuel Quality Standards Act 2000 (http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/fuelquality/standards/petrol/index.html), the maximum limit for sulphur is 150 ppm for regular unleaded (91) and regular unleaded E10 (93~94), and 50 ppm for premium unleaded (95) and super premium unleaded (98 ). Pathetic, really.

It is the desire of the Rudd government to harmonise Australian Design Rules (ADRs) with United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN ECE) vehicle regulations, by introducing Euro 5/6 standards (and hence, by deduction, 10 ppm petrol) as soon as possible, but they made the mistake of consulting with the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) (http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/9BC9C83D6EB72A2ACA25771C0004EF33) and the Australian Petroleum Industry (AIP) (http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/5CE3D1C2627F6A7BCA2576F60002BB87) beforehand, who essentially said they support it but want it delayed. So its been delayed. :bangheadwall:

The majority of the European population would use premium if they don't have to use super premium in the same way the majority of the Australian population would use regular if they don't have to use premium. However, enthusiasts, which are the minority of the population, would recommend using super premium (with good reason). And it's mostly enthusiasts who hang out on these forums, hence the type of responses you've received, BBP (some of which is uncalled for).

BBP is correct in arguing that if Volkswagen say 95 is fine, then it's fine, as 95 is no dirtier than 98, unlike what some have been saying - I certainly wouldn't worry about it in a pinch. However, also consider that we enthusiasts are also correct in saying that super premium has indeed a higher concentration of cleansing additives than premium (at least BP Ultimate does, don't know about Caltex Vortex 98, Mobil Synergy 8000, Shell V-Power, etc). But I'm not here to tell how to run your life, your decisions are your own and don't let other members tell you otherwise.

Back to the engine failure - I'm no engineer but I'm of the impression that relatively high sulphur levels (I'm talking about 50 ppm vs 10 ppm, not anything silly like 150 ppm), whilst documented & demonstrated to be harmful to fuel consumption, TWC's and DPF's, shouldn't adversely affect engine performance to the extent that piston heads are cracking. I'm happy to be proven otherwise, but so far I believe there is a more fundamental problem here.

Corey_R

12-05-2010, 09:43 AM

The way it was explained by BMW in an article from months back (I can't find it at the moment, so I'm talking from memory here), is that the higher concentration of sulphur causes issues, especially during the "lean burn" process of the latest modern engines, which can cause ring failure, piston failures, and thus can also cause damage to the cylinder itself.

Now in relation to the 118TSI.
If you look at the specs for the MKV Golf GT Manual. The engine had the same torque, and slightly more power (125kw @ 6000rpm vs 118kw @ 5900rpm). But it also consumed 7.7L/100km vs only 6.2L/100km in the 118TSI Manual. Now there's only 30kg difference between these two cars, so not enough to influence fuel consumption during an ADR test. I don't know what the aerodynamic efficiency rating of both cars is, but I doubt that it has any factor (especially since ADR is on a rolling road anyway). So pretty much changes to the engine and/or ECU have allowed for 1.5L/100km less fuel to be used in the 118TSI.

Again - I'm no mechanic, but this really seems to be in the area of what the BMW article was talking about, and other Euro manufacturers were discussing.

break

12-05-2010, 11:01 AM

It's the old case where you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

Let them put 95 octane, or even crappy 98 octane (ie. mobil/caltex etc.) in their cars and whine about engine failure while we all use our BP Ultimate and enjoy the benefit of less engine problems and more power.

Syd118TSI

12-05-2010, 11:10 AM

If you look at the specs for the MKV Golf GT Manual. The engine had the same torque, and slightly more power (125kw @ 6000rpm vs 118kw @ 5900rpm). But it also consumed 7.7L/100km vs only 6.2L/100km in the 118TSI Manual.

There's some confusion regarding this (I've seen it quoted in reverse) but the AU Volkswagen site actually says:

"The Golf 118TSI Comfortline travels 100km on just 6.5 litres,* or 6.2 litres* with a DSG transmission."

To me it makes perfect sense that with the additional gear of the DSG it should use less fuel.

7.7L/100KM vs 6.5L/100KM is still a substancial difference, but given that the GT was presented as a sporty drive it's understandable that they'd sacrifice a little economy for speed (0.3 seconds quicker on the 0-100) as those buying the GT badge weren't doing so specifically with fuel economy in mind.

dopey

12-05-2010, 11:24 AM

It just comes down to the tuning. The GT had a richer tune, and probably ran a little more boost. That's why it was more powerful and used more fuel. Same as when you get an APR flash, really.

Put simply, the 118TSI is running a tune that is too lean for our poor quality fuel. It would be absolutely fine overseas where the 95+RON fuel is cleaner, but it's on too much of a fine line for this countries fuel supply, hence the cases of pinging and detonation that are occuring. The new update they are doing will simply be a "safer" computer tune - I will be interested to see how much richer they run now.

I really hope this new tune puts an end to the broken engine stories, it's a real shame to see this happening to an otherwise fantastic car.

Zaul

12-05-2010, 11:35 AM

Unless I'm mistaken, there is no refinery in Adelaide. All fuel is now shipped in from interstate. The only refinery that did exist at Port Stanvac is about to become a desalination plant.

nicandlance

12-05-2010, 11:45 AM

Mine went in this morning and I got it back in around 40 minutes. Was also given a free voucher for a car wash.
Hopefully I can relax now and not have to worry about my engine blowing up!

Zaul

12-05-2010, 01:27 PM

Is there scientific basis for people to recommend BPUlitmate as THE fuel to be using in their new VW's? I have read the thread that Coreying posted here and aside from dating back to pre mark VI engines, most of the posts seem to be anecdotal rather than based on science or content of the fuel.

How/what have people noticed in terms of their Mk VI's and preference for certain brands?

Also what is CaltexVortex98 like in a GTI?

Mods, feel free to move this if it's too off topic and should live an another area.

Corey_R

12-05-2010, 01:48 PM

At any BP Ultimate bowser, there is a brochure with information on the fuel and their guarantees.

But there have also been "scientific tests" conducted by various car magazines and shows in various countries (including Australia) which have compared identical cars on rolling roads with fuel from the different manufacturers and performed tests for both power and economy. BP Ultimate has always gone very well in these.

I don't have any specific links on hand unfortunately. I do remember a Fifth Gear episode a few years back where they did this with the help of local lab coats and came to the same conclusion of BP Ultimate being superior (even to other 98 octane fuels, including Shell).

Someone in a thread here who worked at the refinaries also stated that BP Ultimate is the only 98 octane fuel available in Australia which is "refined to be a 98 octane fuel", rather than is taken from the "regular unleaded fuel" and then has octane and other additives added to it. Again, no idea if this is true or not.

What I will say is that with my personal experience, with decent consistency, after I have filled me car up for a few tanks in a row of Caltex Vortex 98, on cold starts the car "struggles" whilst idling and sounds as though it's going to stall. It doesn't sound pretty. Changing back to BP Ultimate immediately resolves this issue. I'm in "The Hills Shire" area of Sydney and get my fuel from a few different Caltex/Woolworths and BP stations in the area, so it's not like it's a single case of a single service station having their pump labelled wrong or having dirty tanks etc.

Syd118TSI

12-05-2010, 02:12 PM

It's a shame that BP don't have a deal with one of the major Supermarket chains like Caltex and Shell do (or am I wrong on that front?).

Corey_R

12-05-2010, 02:24 PM

They don't. But then personally I'd prefer that our grocery prices hadn't increased to compensate for the fact that they're giving you a discount on fuel ;)

In addition, the efficency provided by BP Ultimate usually makes up for the fact that it is 4c per Litre more expensive than Caltex or Shell due to your "shopping ticket discount".

Diesel_vert

12-05-2010, 02:24 PM

Firstly, the facts (or what we know so far).

There is manufacturer requirement of all Mk5 Golfs with FSI motors to use 98 to obtain maximum performance, whereas the only Mk6 Golf with that same requirement is the 199 kW motor in the Golf R.

I believe it was evo magazine (God bless them) who wrote two articles regarding fuels; firstly, it confirmed BP (UK) Ultimate's and Shell (UK) V-Power's claim of maintaining engine cleanliness; and secondly, it showed a comparison between 95 and 98 on a Mk5 Golf GTI and BMW M5, showing 98 having higher power and torque outputs on the GTI, but stuff all difference on the M5. Not exactly a "scientific" test but interesting nonetheless.

BP (AUS) Ultimate does indeed have a higher concentration of cleansing additives than premium, that much we do know. And in Australia, there is no difference in sulphur content between 95 and 98 (capped at 50 ppm). I don't know why 95 is derided as "filthy dirty". The only difference is the RON, MON and additive concentration. And anyway, both are "filthy dirty" compared to European petrol (capped at 10 ppm).

Now for the subjective bit - perceived difference? Well if the Mk5 Golf FSI is designed to use 98, then of course it'll feel lethargic on 95 - that's where the unsubstantiated "filthy dirty" reputation of 95 began on this forum. I also believe (with some skepticism) that BP Ultimate does keep the engine clean. Personally I've not noticed any major differences from the four majors (I always fill up at places with a high turnover), though I freely admit I always try to use BP Ultimate, and failing that, Mobil Synergy 8000 - just because I'm an enthusiast and I believe I can tell the difference. :P

parso_rex

12-05-2010, 02:54 PM

I'd be interested to see what they have modified in the Flash. Have they just taken timing out to stop detonation or have they also added fuel and dropped boost cooling the intake charge as well.
If I had the car before and after I could tell you.

This was happening on a few Subaru 2.5L Turbo motors a couple of years ago. The Euro 4 rating that they had to comply with at the time meant they had to ditch the older 2L motors forged pistons and opt for hypereutectic cast alloy instead. The pistons started to drop like flies cracking ringlands at the slightest hint of detonation. A lot of motors ended up being replaced with new long or crate motors - no rebuilds.
I hope this isn't s similar story with the TSI's

Syd118TSI

12-05-2010, 03:11 PM

They don't. But then personally I'd prefer that our grocery prices hadn't increased to compensate for the fact that they're giving you a discount on fuel ;)

Agree 100% - Though my other half likes shopping at a particular supermarket so I'm always going to have access to the 4c off per litre 'saving' (or should I say rebate?).

In addition, the efficency provided by BP Ultimate usually makes up for the fact that it is 4c per Litre more expensive than Caltex or Shell due to your "shopping ticket discount".

I was also thinking of the convenience of using other service stations :)

Zaul

12-05-2010, 03:42 PM

Idle

12-05-2010, 03:43 PM

Agree 100% -
I was also thinking of the convenience of using other service stations :)

Plus that the "4c off" is often less than that — around our way the competition is often 2c under their posted price, so it's only "2c off".

Add to that the time you waste queueing on "discount cycle" days and it doesn't look much of a saving at all.

Syd118TSI

12-05-2010, 04:12 PM

Plus that the "4c off" is often less than that — around our way the competition is often 2c under their posted price, so it's only "2c off".

Add to that the time you waste queueing on "discount cycle" days and it doesn't look much of a saving at all.

Yeah, you're exactly right. I just remembered another BP that I pass on my way to and from work, as well as on other common routes that I undertake. On more than one occassion I've not bothered to stop at a Woolworths branded Petrol station because it was excessively busy only to find the BP 1km or so down the road completely empty with a petrol price only 2c greater than the discounted Woolworths price. The convenience alone is obviously more than worth the minor 'saving'.

Diesel_vert

12-05-2010, 04:40 PM

Thanks Diesel-vert.

While I don't want to be pedantic that EVO Magazone article compares fuels in the UK, not here. I would assume they'd be refined to a higher standard that what happens here.

I'm guessing there's no recent comparison of local fuels.

Whilst fuel in the UK may be different to our fuel, my opinion is that RON is RON, so I don't think the sulphur content (or lack thereof) would unduly affect their results.

Swallowtail

12-05-2010, 05:07 PM

Well having just read through all of this I think the quote of the thread so far has to be:
I've got an XF Jaguar, the Golf is "just" for the wife (Quotes added). And that's all I am going to add to this one, any more and I'll end up getting infracted.... :D

Corey_R

12-05-2010, 05:23 PM

Lol yes... I should infract you for that comment alone! hehehe. Take your snobbery back to your Passat forum :P

:D

Diesel_vert

12-05-2010, 05:23 PM

Unlike Aussies who are impressed with Euro badges, I think you'll find that the Continentals view Volkswagen as bread 'n' butter cars. Nice tasting bread 'n' butter mind you, but bread 'n' butter nonetheless.

After all let's not forget that the word Volkswagen translates as "the people's car", lest we start becoming Euro snobs.

logger

12-05-2010, 05:54 PM

I'd be interested to see what they have modified in the Flash. Have they just taken timing out to stop detonation or have they also added fuel and dropped boost cooling the intake charge as well.
If I had the car before and after I could tell you.
I am interested in this too and will be closely looking at my VCDS data logs before and after I get around to getting the ECU re flashed. Fortunately I have my own very detailed label file for the CAV engine and should be able to pull a lot of info not usually visible in VCDS.

Also I find is amusing that this thread has drifted into a fuel type/quality discussion, when it is not necessarily the smoking gun here.

Is there any trend developing as to which TSIs failed? I suspect it wont be the people who cane their cars any more that those who drive gently. I have a theory that high cycle cars might be more prone to this problem, but this is speculative. By this I mean cars that do lots of short trips and specifically cars that do a lot of cold starts. For what its worth my TSI tends to do long trips on the highway, and I do at times cane it a fair bit and I always use 98 ron fuel form major brands. Who knows I might be the next victim.

Be interesting to hear from people who have had TSI engine failures.

How Many KMs?
Do you mainly do a lot of short trips?
Do you mainly do fewer longer trips?
Do you alway drive in a gentle manner?
Do you flog the car and give it a bit of a hiding from time to time?
Do you only use 98Ron fuel?

Even a few responses might show a trend, if indeed there is one.

coastie

12-05-2010, 06:22 PM

It's a shame that BP don't have a deal with one of the major Supermarket chains like Caltex and Shell do (or am I wrong on that front?).

Get a Citibank BP Mastercard and get 5% off all BP fuel purchases and 0.5-1% off everything else spent on the card in the outside world. It's more off than the shopper dockets and your don't need the piece of papers

Ozram

12-05-2010, 06:23 PM

I'd also add to your list logger. I'd like to know if there is a bad batch of engines, have the failures occurred on certain build date models?

Syd118TSI

12-05-2010, 07:00 PM

Get a Citibank BP Mastercard and get 5% off all BP fuel purchases and 0.5-1% off everything else spent on the card in the outside world. It's more off than the shopper dockets and your don't need the piece of papers

I just did a quick calculation (so it may be wrong). But filling up at $1.45/litre that puts 55l at $79.95. With 5% discounted it drops to roughly $75.75 or a saving of $4.20. If you do 15,000km in a year that is 19/20 tanks of fuel with a real consumption of 7 litres/100km. To 20 x $4.20 equals a saving of $84 across the year.

Unfortunately there is a $79 annual fee on the card, so even if you always pay off the card on time you only come out $5.20 ahead for the year. So if you had to fill up at a Shell or Caltex for whatever reason a couple of times you're suddenly behind! :O

If you had two cars that do a lot of KM the sums would be a bit better as a secondary card is $30 annually. So two cards for $109, with two vehicles doing 20,000km each would total a $218.40 saving, or $109.40 once you take off the annual fee.

WhiteJames

12-05-2010, 07:03 PM

A few points worth noting:

1. Australian fuel prices follow the TAPIS price which relates to fuel refined in Singapore and Australia. UK North Sea/USA West Texas Crude fuel would not be refined or sold in Aus or Singapore. Most fuel sold here is TAPIS fuel. 118TSI’s in Singapore are reporting the same problems as have occurred in Aus, I’m told. May suggest something to do with quality & type of fuel supplied from these refineries.

2. AFAIK Sydney only has one oil refinery – Caltex at Kurnell. I’ve been told that a number of fuel companies in Sydney use fuel from this refinery. The difference between: Shell, BP and Caltex is the additives blended in with the fuel – not the fuel itself.

3. The earlier MKV Golf had issues with either the knock or oxygen sensor (recent article on it in drive.com.au or carsguide.com.au about buying a 2nd hand MKV Golf) costing @ $600 to repair. Volkswagen do not tune motor vehicles specifically for Aus – unless it’s the Golf R. This will have to change re: 118TSI issues.

4. I’ve used all four major brands of fuel – BP, Shell, Caltex and Mobil. Differences are not distinguishable. There is a difference in the Shell V-Power Racing 100+RON with @ 5% ethanol blend, which makes the MKV GTI a little more eager. My local VW service guys say to avoid ethanol based fuel as ethanol is thicker than petrol and tends to clog filters & pumps.

5. Modern direct injection motors are finely tuned for both economy & emissions requiring consistent use of good quality fuel.

Cheers.
WJ

logger

12-05-2010, 07:45 PM

I'd also add to your list logger. I'd like to know if there is a bad batch of engines, have the failures occurred on certain build date models?

Good Point, although you'd think they would only contact that batch of owners if that was the casel.. But might as well add it.

A few questions for those who had TSI engine failures:

How Many KMs?
Do you mainly do a lot of short trips?
Do you mainly do fewer longer trips?
Do you alway drive in a gentle manner?
Do you flog the car and give it a bit of a hiding from time to time?
Do you only use 98Ron fuel?
What is your car build date?

DracZ

12-05-2010, 10:31 PM

Good Point, although you'd think they would only contact that batch of owners if that was the casel.. But might as well add it.

Covered this point earlier in the thread, but after speaking with the essendon VW service dept, it seems that not all 118TSI's are affected. I was asked to provide my VIN number to see if the update was specifically applicable to my vehicle. With this being said, perhaps its simply a case of the later 118TSI's already having this ECU update applied via factory and not simply a bad "batch" of engines so to speak.

hooba

12-05-2010, 10:31 PM

2. AFAIK Sydney only has one oil refinery – Caltex at Kurnell. I’ve been told that a number of fuel companies in Sydney use fuel from this refinery. The difference between: Shell, BP and Caltex is the additives blended in with the fuel – not the fuel itself.

Shell has its refinery at Clyde (opposite Rosehill Racecourse), but your point is valid nonetheless, BP fuel in Sydney is coming from one of those two refineries.

I prefer BP simply because it doesn't have the queues of people holding shopping dockets on TA Tuesday.

anthony

13-05-2010, 08:05 AM

After 4 VWs,I am actually more relaxed with my decision to buy a Honda Accord Euro in preferance over a Jetta 118 TSI.

OilBurna

13-05-2010, 08:32 AM

BP comes from Shell refinery except Ultimate.

logger

13-05-2010, 08:51 AM

... it seems that not all 118TSI's are affected. I was asked to provide my VIN number to see if the update was specifically applicable to my vehicle. With this being said, perhaps its simply a case of the later 118TSI's already having this ECU update applied via factory and not simply a bad "batch" of engines so to speak.

Yes that would make sense. More a case of a bad batch of ECU software causing unintended consequences. Alter this part of the ECU program and hopefully problem fixed.

ozgti

13-05-2010, 08:58 AM

Mine's a Jan 10 build and apparently needs the update as well.

logger

13-05-2010, 10:57 AM

Getting my ECU reflash done in the next couple of days.
Anyone got any good suggestions as to to what I should record beforehand with VCDS, so as I can ascertain what has changed afterwards.

parso_rex

13-05-2010, 11:20 AM

Getting my ECU reflash done in the next couple of days.
Anyone got any good suggestions as to to what I should record beforehand with VCDS, so as I can ascertain what has changed afterwards.

You can just log the usual load,rpm,throttle position, AFR,manifold pressure and timing parameters. The thing is you really need to log these things at differing loads as they may have only applied a fix to say a part throttle area and left the full throttle area alone. Where you have the transition between the two chargers happening is one place to look look as are the places where boost comes on and of course peak boost
Ideally you would keep a copy of your original file and then compare it with the recall version, you'd need to have some way of getting yourself a copy of that though. I can do the map comparisons but thats of little use to you down there.

logger

13-05-2010, 11:50 AM

Should be able to grab mist of those and easy enough to save them to a file. I can record from 1 to 12 parameters simulataneously. Only issue is the more I grab the slower the sample rate. So might only be once very 2 secs with all 12 being logged.

I was thinking of grabbing:-

002,1,Engine Speed,(G28 ),Specification (Idle): 680...730 RPM
002,2,Engine Load
002,3,Injection Timing
002,4,Intake Manifold,Pressure (G71)
003,3,Throttle Valve Angle
003,4,Ignition,Timing Angle
112,1,Exhaust Gas,Temperature Bank 1
241,2,Boost Pressure,(actual)

Can you take a quick peek at tsi.txt (http://www.nimblefeet.com/QF/tsi.txt) and tell me what group will give Air Fuel Ratio?

Keep in mind I can only grab 12 at a time max.

team_v

13-05-2010, 12:06 PM

logger

13-05-2010, 12:20 PM

Would the aftermarket tune prevent the engine failures as it has already been remapped for different variables?
Depends if the remap variables are in the regime that is effected, I would think. It is quite possible that they are not. It is possible that the VW fix changes stuff that an after market tune does not even deal with.

Or would you have to get the dealer remap and then re-flash the ecu with the aftermarket tune again?
Yes, thats the path I am intending to take.

Transporter

13-05-2010, 12:32 PM

So what happens to people who have got an aftermarket ECU tune?
would you have to get the dealer remap and then re-flash the ECU with the aftermarket tune again?

IMO it is quite possible that aftermarket remap, chip or any mods could undo what VW attempted to fix. But that's only my opinion. ;)

Tim

13-05-2010, 12:34 PM

Corey_R

13-05-2010, 12:37 PM

So what happens to pepople who have got an aftermarket ecu tune?

Would the aftermarket tune prevent the engine failures as it has already been remapped for different variables?
Or would you have to get the dealer remap and then re-flash the ecu with the aftermarket tune again?

Guy_H had this to say in relation to your question over here (http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/f112/dealer-service-campaign-118tsi-114twin-charge-basically-recall-44405-3.html#post504698)

Already had some APR cars that have had the factory reflash done, no problem to re do the APR with the updated VW specific code once you have had the VW work done!

logger

13-05-2010, 01:39 PM

Which all ties in with the VW "fix" modifying something unrelated to what the tuners tune. Have just got myself an 10 minute Pre-fix log of numerous parameters. Cold start through to near max boost. Will be interesting to compare it with an afterwards log to see what, if any, changes are visible. I still have a hunch the issue is not where everyone around here is looking, and will report back if it turns out to be the case.

cme2c

13-05-2010, 01:47 PM

Good Point, although you'd think they would only contact that batch of owners if that was the casel.. But might as well add it.

A few questions for those who had TSI engine failures:

How Many KMs?
Do you mainly do a lot of short trips?
Do you mainly do fewer longer trips?
Do you alway drive in a gentle manner?
Do you flog the car and give it a bit of a hiding from time to time?
Do you only use 98Ron fuel?
What is your car build date?

Perhaps it may be of interest to get these questions answered by those who haven't had a problem, like me. Not particularly scientific, but a control group of sorts. The Golf is mainly driven by my wife, whose most common workplace is about 4 kms from our place. We are in the northwestern suburbs of Sydney ( it was 1 degree outside this morning) so it gets cold starts. It goes in next Wednesday to be reprogrammed.

How Many KMs? 9000
Do you mainly do a lot of short trips? Yes
Do you mainly do fewer longer trips? No
Do you alway drive in a gentle manner? No
Do you flog the car and give it a bit of a hiding from time to time? Yes
Do you only use 98Ron fuel? Yes
What is your car build date? 07/09

Transporter

13-05-2010, 03:25 PM

Since the fault happen in such a short time from new, I would also ask the question about how the engine was run in? But as logger said, who knows what causes it?

Transporter

13-05-2010, 03:30 PM

You would need to know exactly what the VW retune does to know for sure. You would think that most tuning companies would be looking at it pretty closely to make sure if they need to revise their maps they do.
Have their been any cars with aftermarket tunes suffer similar engine failures?

I 100% agree with that and until they find out for sure what cause the pistons cracking, I wouldn't be very comfortable with retuning or using other than VW tune, because if someone would get the same problem again within the warranty, they (VW) could blame everything on the aftermarket tune and wipe their hands clean.

Tim

13-05-2010, 03:33 PM

its all speculation at the minute. Be good to hear some accurate info to base opinions on.

Transporter

13-05-2010, 03:47 PM

Yep, my speculation would be that it is a bad badge of pistons or pistons not suitable for application and VW fix (at least for now) is to downtune the engine a bit. :frown:

prise

13-05-2010, 07:27 PM

Can you take a quick peek at tsi.txt (http://www.nimblefeet.com/QF/tsi.txt) and tell me what group will give Air Fuel Ratio?
You want to get the lambda value. A lambda of 1.0 means the mixture is stoichometric (~14.7:1), less than 1 is rich, more than 1 is lean. Sometimes it is displayed as an equivalence ratio which is the inverse. The easy way to work out what is being displayed is to check and see if the reading goes above or below 1.0 at high load and RPM. If it goes down below 1.0 it will be lambda, ie getting richer.

I would start with:

031,1,Lambda Control,Bank 1 (actual)
031,2,Lambda Control,Bank 1 (specified)

This should give you the target value and achieved value. If pulling a raw sensor reading then you should take the one before the catalyst which would normally be sensor 1.

In combination with the RPM, manifold pressure and ignitiion timing info you have already identified it should give a pretty good indication if any significant changes to maps have been made. Theres some other interesting data there on the knock sensing but its going to be impossible to interpret the readings unless we had access to the interface spec for the sensor.

I assume that you will wait until the coolant temperature has stabilised and try to repeat the test at a equivalent ambient temperature.

logger

14-05-2010, 04:15 PM

Thanks Prise. Just got my car done. I grabbed some "before" logs including 12 parameters including the Lambda as you suggested. Post update I was initially snookered, because the reflash changes the reported ECU program from mark G to mark BA. This meant VCDS could not do the advanced measuring values. So I have just corrected my label files to reflect this. It is all working again and I can see everything I want to. Nothing obvious but I have only done a 5 minute real quick after mod log. So there is not enough info to really compare. Cursory look shows max loads and max EGTs are still the same. Car feels gutless but this is most prob because I disabled the APR tune 24 hours ago to test, pre flash. So anything will feel gutless by comaprison. About to go for a 200km drive and will try to do some better logs. Will report back.

coastie

14-05-2010, 05:09 PM

How Many KMs? 26570
Do you mainly do a lot of short trips? No 38 km to work most days
Do you mainly do fewer longer trips? No weekend mainly 250 kms runs
Do you alway drive in a gentle manner? No
Do you flog the car and give it a bit of a hiding from time to time? Not really
Do you only use 98Ron fuel? Yes
What is your car build date?[/QUOTE] Dec 08

Have had the supercharger clutch replaced and the DSG Mechatronic unit replaced.

nicandlance

14-05-2010, 07:27 PM

DracZ

14-05-2010, 07:39 PM

Brendan_A

14-05-2010, 07:41 PM

VW are not going to tell us the truth even if we asked them.

prise

14-05-2010, 07:51 PM

Ok, all this technical talk is baffling me a bit... the question is...
after having this update done, are we guaranteed that our engines won't blow up?
I (and I'm sure many others), have taken a big risk choosing this car - one that we thought was a quality machine... (well, on paper anyway)
Am I going to regret this in a few years time?

Nic, recalls and SW updates are unfotunately a fact of car ownership these days. Every one of the four new cars I've owned previously has had some type of defect that has neede to be rectified and my last car also had a SW update to correct problems with an incorrectly calibrated sensor. This didn't stop them being dependable transport dopwn the track after they had been 'de-bugged'. In this day of internet and instant communication we get to hear about the 1 in a 1000 case where a mechanical failure occurred whereas 10 years ago we would have been blissfully unaware. Ultimately you are relying on the knowledge and backing of one of the worlds largest car makers that has already made over a million TSI engines.