RS4 service interval and owners
Discussion
Thats because to us the oil is free!
And the likely hood of any Audi technician having the money to own a B7 RS4 is pure fantasy.
If the oil is still clean and not contaminated with fuel, there is no benefit in changing it early. If however you want to change the oil as soon as there is any hit of quality drop off then of course you can.
If you do lots of cold starts and short runs then I would suggest 5000 miles oil changes wouldn't be a waste of money, but My opinion at 3000 it would be.
The RS4 has a large sump and the AVS oil is pretty good, unless your giving it death from cold every day and cruising at 150mph for hours at a time, I cant see you would be doing any harm running it for 12-14k as indicated by the dash.
And the likely hood of any Audi technician having the money to own a B7 RS4 is pure fantasy.
If the oil is still clean and not contaminated with fuel, there is no benefit in changing it early. If however you want to change the oil as soon as there is any hit of quality drop off then of course you can.
If you do lots of cold starts and short runs then I would suggest 5000 miles oil changes wouldn't be a waste of money, but My opinion at 3000 it would be.
The RS4 has a large sump and the AVS oil is pretty good, unless your giving it death from cold every day and cruising at 150mph for hours at a time, I cant see you would be doing any harm running it for 12-14k as indicated by the dash.
TT, this came up in conversation with Audi recently (my car has a hesitation problem at high revs - but no problem showing on diagnostics).
I did challenge the statement, because as you know these cars can use alot of oil & you are continually replacing with new - why does it get so so black then. I had mentioned that I had seen pics of other B7's with the valves really gunked up...Whether this is a problem or not (& whether this is related to me), just thought this was an odd thing to say.
I've now been on two rolling roads with power ouput from 301 - 346, had people drive it, listen to it (they say there is some sort of problem) & seen for myself other B7's pull away from me in 3rd & 4th gear.
I had to get the rolling road figs before they would look at my car again - also said they would be able to diagnose from seeing the results...
The car is in on Tuesday - the MAF unit is going to be replaced & the Service Manager will come with me on a test drive. If that doesn't work, I was told they would do a live feed to the Techs in HQ.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
I did challenge the statement, because as you know these cars can use alot of oil & you are continually replacing with new - why does it get so so black then. I had mentioned that I had seen pics of other B7's with the valves really gunked up...Whether this is a problem or not (& whether this is related to me), just thought this was an odd thing to say.
I've now been on two rolling roads with power ouput from 301 - 346, had people drive it, listen to it (they say there is some sort of problem) & seen for myself other B7's pull away from me in 3rd & 4th gear.
I had to get the rolling road figs before they would look at my car again - also said they would be able to diagnose from seeing the results...
The car is in on Tuesday - the MAF unit is going to be replaced & the Service Manager will come with me on a test drive. If that doesn't work, I was told they would do a live feed to the Techs in HQ.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
I looked at the power graph. Its not massively wrong, but its not right. Where you torque curve drops away above 3000-3500 ish it should be less server so its almost flat (it will never actually be flat) until about 5500-6000 then it should drop right off. Power = torque x rpm, so by having the same sort of torque you have at 3500 at 5500 will give you the missing 100bhp or so. Hope that makes sense.
You would hope to see a big dip or something to prove somthing is wrong and you aren't getting that, which wont help who ever you show it to at the Audi Centre much.
THat said this is pretty much what you would see if the MAF was playing up so hopefully that will fix it.
Did the rolling road operator measure the Air fuel mixture while you were doing the power run?? this plotted on the graph also would have been really helpful.
If the MAF doesnt fix it and the air fuel mixture is ok, then you might just have a duff engine. We have changed one, but that properly blew up, customer ran it out of oil and it thought a rod. Helfully he filled it up again before we checked it and we turned a blind eye and did it under warranty. (ssshhh dont tell anyone)
Dont worry about the black carbon like stuff you see pictures of down the inlet manifolds, there is no way of changing this and it wont cause that much drop off in power.
Oil goes black because of carbon blow by, and the fact that to fuel correctly at 8000rpm, the injectors in RS4's are probably a tad too big to fuel correctly at say 1000rpm, thats way they get all choked up and fluffy (over fueling) when they get started up and driven road the car park and switched off again.
If your engine uses more that 1 litre of oil per 1000k (600 miles) then its not right. Otherwise is within Audi spec.
Typically the cars I see do about 1 litre to 1000 miles.
Just out of interest where are you taking the car (which Audi centre)
You would hope to see a big dip or something to prove somthing is wrong and you aren't getting that, which wont help who ever you show it to at the Audi Centre much.
THat said this is pretty much what you would see if the MAF was playing up so hopefully that will fix it.
Did the rolling road operator measure the Air fuel mixture while you were doing the power run?? this plotted on the graph also would have been really helpful.
If the MAF doesnt fix it and the air fuel mixture is ok, then you might just have a duff engine. We have changed one, but that properly blew up, customer ran it out of oil and it thought a rod. Helfully he filled it up again before we checked it and we turned a blind eye and did it under warranty. (ssshhh dont tell anyone)
Dont worry about the black carbon like stuff you see pictures of down the inlet manifolds, there is no way of changing this and it wont cause that much drop off in power.
Oil goes black because of carbon blow by, and the fact that to fuel correctly at 8000rpm, the injectors in RS4's are probably a tad too big to fuel correctly at say 1000rpm, thats way they get all choked up and fluffy (over fueling) when they get started up and driven road the car park and switched off again.
If your engine uses more that 1 litre of oil per 1000k (600 miles) then its not right. Otherwise is within Audi spec.
Typically the cars I see do about 1 litre to 1000 miles.
Just out of interest where are you taking the car (which Audi centre)
http://image.automobilemag.com/f/features/6693427/...
THis is power at the wheels, not calculated flywheel power, the numbers arent much help but the curves prove the point. You can see how the torque keeps going until arount 6000.
THis is power at the wheels, not calculated flywheel power, the numbers arent much help but the curves prove the point. You can see how the torque keeps going until arount 6000.
Tame Technician said:
Oil goes black because of carbon blow by, and the fact that to fuel correctly at 8000rpm, the injectors in RS4's are probably a tad too big to fuel correctly at say 1000rpm, thats way they get all choked up and fluffy (over fueling) when they get started up and driven road the car park and switched off again.
The reason the RS4 has to be over fueled, is because the injectors are not in an ideal position in the combustion chamber. So it has to be over fueled, to prevent hot spots in the head, thus causing damage. I was told this (before the RS4 ever got here) by an R&D engineer who saw this engine being bench tested during development. Ideally they should have re-designed the head, instead of just trying to convert the 40v version from the S4.
Tame Technician said:
I looked at the power graph.
Power = torque x rpm, so by having the same sort of torque you have at 3500 at 5500 will give you the missing 100bhp or so. Hope that makes sense.
Power graph? From another forum?Power = torque x rpm, so by having the same sort of torque you have at 3500 at 5500 will give you the missing 100bhp or so. Hope that makes sense.
Power = sort of...
Ipswich Audi, first thing in the morning.
Thanks for getting back - keep you posted.
Mac
Well at least it played up, All that seems to happen when I road test with customers is they say, oh its not doing it now.
I'm sure Ipswich will get it sorted. Sounds like it could take a while though.
If it wasnt the MAF I was going to say fuel pressure, with have a lot of high pressure pump and sensor failures with FSI engine, but if the mixture was OK then thats unlikely.
Best of luck.
I'm sure Ipswich will get it sorted. Sounds like it could take a while though.
If it wasnt the MAF I was going to say fuel pressure, with have a lot of high pressure pump and sensor failures with FSI engine, but if the mixture was OK then thats unlikely.
Best of luck.
TT, on removing the Manifold the tech guy told me there was a build up of a wet looking ball of carbon on the valves. Pictures were taken & sent to Audi UK to advise. He admitted they had seen nothing like this before.
To cut a long story short, they feel that from what they can see from the pics, the carbon build up is okay. They have recommended the Secondary Air Activation Solenoid be replaced and an Oil Consumption Test + weighing be carried out (have to drive 600 miles).
I contacted the Service Manager to see if he would ask Audi UK to reconsider the carbon build up & see if they would clean the carbon from the valves. I am concerned that this may be a contributory factor with regards to the performance. In addition, what will this carbon build up be like in the longer term & possible problems that this may cause?
He said that having seen for himself the build up of carbon on the valves, this should pose no problem (why take some pics & send them to Audi UK then?).
I have asked on numerous occasions (four today alone) for a copy if the pictures. On three e-mails this question was not answered, so I had to phone to be told that they would have to get permission from Audi UK for me to see pics of my car!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can bet you anything that if I don't continue to ask to see these pics, they wont be forthcoming.
This is just not professional & good customers should not be treated as fools.
This problem started in February to which in this time I have had to prove to Audi my car is seriously underpowered.
I am remaining positive that the fixes that are be made will transform the power on my car, but who would like to take bets that when I visit the Rolling Road the power is still down.
Maybe I will have to get my German speaking partner to phone Audi direct in Germany.
To cut a long story short, they feel that from what they can see from the pics, the carbon build up is okay. They have recommended the Secondary Air Activation Solenoid be replaced and an Oil Consumption Test + weighing be carried out (have to drive 600 miles).
I contacted the Service Manager to see if he would ask Audi UK to reconsider the carbon build up & see if they would clean the carbon from the valves. I am concerned that this may be a contributory factor with regards to the performance. In addition, what will this carbon build up be like in the longer term & possible problems that this may cause?
He said that having seen for himself the build up of carbon on the valves, this should pose no problem (why take some pics & send them to Audi UK then?).
I have asked on numerous occasions (four today alone) for a copy if the pictures. On three e-mails this question was not answered, so I had to phone to be told that they would have to get permission from Audi UK for me to see pics of my car!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can bet you anything that if I don't continue to ask to see these pics, they wont be forthcoming.
This is just not professional & good customers should not be treated as fools.
This problem started in February to which in this time I have had to prove to Audi my car is seriously underpowered.
I am remaining positive that the fixes that are be made will transform the power on my car, but who would like to take bets that when I visit the Rolling Road the power is still down.
Maybe I will have to get my German speaking partner to phone Audi direct in Germany.
Firstly I'm quite sure they only took the pictures to cover them selves. If Audi UK have said its OK, then the Audi center can only follow those instructions, Audi UK dont reconsider.
If your valves look like this, it is normal.
(Pics Posted by andyuk911)
http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r34/saaber1/val...
Thats from a 2.0TFSI with 20k on the clock. .
http://i390.photobucket.com/albums/oo344/rAudiguy/...
Thats a 4.2FSI at 19k
Its quite likely the technician has never seen this before as we dont take alot of RS4 manifolds off, we dont even see alot of petrol engines to be honest. I know I've never had an RS4 manifold off, But I have had a few off of 2.0FSI and TFSI engines, (purely to replace failed injectors) and they all look like this.
It because of the FSI direct injection, normally the fuel injector is above the inlet valve so the fuel actually cleans the valve as the engine runs, with FSI the fuel is injected inside the camber so the fuel never touches the valve. All manufacturers are now slowly moving over to direct fuel injection, its the only way to get through the emissions regulations and improve fuel ecconomy. Although personally I think its a stupid idea, but then I dont care to much for how much CO2 my car produces, the worlds motor manufactures have to care about that. All car's since like 1980 odd have the crack case fumes (oily vapor) fed back into the inlet manifold, it is the residue of this that leaves sticky oil on the valves which then attracts carbon from the crank case fumes or EGR. We have FSI engines over 120,000 miles showing no side effects of this carbon build up. If anything you would expect to see sticking valves, Jag straight six engine used to do this, so I know exactly what it feels and sounds like, and I havent seen it yet on Audi's.
If the build up on the valves wasnt there, the volumetric efficiency of the engine (air flow) would be improved and you would gain a little power, BUT That build up on the valves will not cost you 100bhp no matter what. I recon if you removed the heads and spent a day decoking the hole thing you would gain 10-15bhp max.
Given how smooth the power graph is, even though its down on torque, my best educated guess is either the manifold flap fault is preventing it from making toque at higher rpm (which is what variable length manifolds are for after all) OR as soon as the ECU sees any engine fault code it goes to a default map and runs at reduced performance.
You will have to wait and see how it performs after they replace the faulty manifold and or flaps.
The oil consumption test will prove if the engine is any good, in terms or bore/piston ring wear. If the car passes you can feel confident its a good mechanical engine, and the fault will be something electrical or ancillary. If your car fails the oil consumption test, basically using more than 1 lire of oil in 1000km/600miles, (but checked vary accurately by weight, but rule out expansion for heat etc) then Audi Uk will likely authorise a new one to be fitted. I did one is an V8 S4 last year for that very reason.
If your valves look like this, it is normal.
(Pics Posted by andyuk911)
http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r34/saaber1/val...
Thats from a 2.0TFSI with 20k on the clock. .
http://i390.photobucket.com/albums/oo344/rAudiguy/...
Thats a 4.2FSI at 19k
Its quite likely the technician has never seen this before as we dont take alot of RS4 manifolds off, we dont even see alot of petrol engines to be honest. I know I've never had an RS4 manifold off, But I have had a few off of 2.0FSI and TFSI engines, (purely to replace failed injectors) and they all look like this.
It because of the FSI direct injection, normally the fuel injector is above the inlet valve so the fuel actually cleans the valve as the engine runs, with FSI the fuel is injected inside the camber so the fuel never touches the valve. All manufacturers are now slowly moving over to direct fuel injection, its the only way to get through the emissions regulations and improve fuel ecconomy. Although personally I think its a stupid idea, but then I dont care to much for how much CO2 my car produces, the worlds motor manufactures have to care about that. All car's since like 1980 odd have the crack case fumes (oily vapor) fed back into the inlet manifold, it is the residue of this that leaves sticky oil on the valves which then attracts carbon from the crank case fumes or EGR. We have FSI engines over 120,000 miles showing no side effects of this carbon build up. If anything you would expect to see sticking valves, Jag straight six engine used to do this, so I know exactly what it feels and sounds like, and I havent seen it yet on Audi's.
If the build up on the valves wasnt there, the volumetric efficiency of the engine (air flow) would be improved and you would gain a little power, BUT That build up on the valves will not cost you 100bhp no matter what. I recon if you removed the heads and spent a day decoking the hole thing you would gain 10-15bhp max.
Given how smooth the power graph is, even though its down on torque, my best educated guess is either the manifold flap fault is preventing it from making toque at higher rpm (which is what variable length manifolds are for after all) OR as soon as the ECU sees any engine fault code it goes to a default map and runs at reduced performance.
You will have to wait and see how it performs after they replace the faulty manifold and or flaps.
The oil consumption test will prove if the engine is any good, in terms or bore/piston ring wear. If the car passes you can feel confident its a good mechanical engine, and the fault will be something electrical or ancillary. If your car fails the oil consumption test, basically using more than 1 lire of oil in 1000km/600miles, (but checked vary accurately by weight, but rule out expansion for heat etc) then Audi Uk will likely authorise a new one to be fitted. I did one is an V8 S4 last year for that very reason.
Edited by Tame Technician on Tuesday 12th May 16:13
TT,
What do Audi consider acceptable levels of iron and aluminium in the oil on a normalised basis?
There are graphs of used oil analyses from the B7 4.2 FSI engine that show oil flashpoint reduced by over 150F in 250 miles of driving, let alone 14000 miles.
The VW504 spec oil is hideously under-specced for use in this engine.
There are also B7's out there ~3 years old whose valves are not sealing because of the build-up.
The inside of my 2 year old 20K mile B7 looks worse than my 5 year old 90K mile A3 TDi which I recently had cleaned due to EGR build-up.
We all know why FSI engines do not experience the same cleaning action as normal engines, and thus, leave deposits in the inlet, but thats ostensibly why the B7 has a triple stage cyclonic separator. Except the thing doesn't work.
I'm sorry but it is unacceptable for a £55K car to clog itself up after ~2 years of motoring regardless of how many cold-starts you do.
PS: The RS4 community has already demonstrated that a clean manifold can gain you 5-8% in flow (g/sec) through the engine. Even VAGCOM will tell you that. Low and behold with most RS4's dynoing at ~380hp (i.e., some way off the quoted 414hp), it is clear that a clean manifold is what we all deserve and/or the solution to the problem of under-performing cars.
What do Audi consider acceptable levels of iron and aluminium in the oil on a normalised basis?
There are graphs of used oil analyses from the B7 4.2 FSI engine that show oil flashpoint reduced by over 150F in 250 miles of driving, let alone 14000 miles.
The VW504 spec oil is hideously under-specced for use in this engine.
There are also B7's out there ~3 years old whose valves are not sealing because of the build-up.
The inside of my 2 year old 20K mile B7 looks worse than my 5 year old 90K mile A3 TDi which I recently had cleaned due to EGR build-up.
We all know why FSI engines do not experience the same cleaning action as normal engines, and thus, leave deposits in the inlet, but thats ostensibly why the B7 has a triple stage cyclonic separator. Except the thing doesn't work.
I'm sorry but it is unacceptable for a £55K car to clog itself up after ~2 years of motoring regardless of how many cold-starts you do.
PS: The RS4 community has already demonstrated that a clean manifold can gain you 5-8% in flow (g/sec) through the engine. Even VAGCOM will tell you that. Low and behold with most RS4's dynoing at ~380hp (i.e., some way off the quoted 414hp), it is clear that a clean manifold is what we all deserve and/or the solution to the problem of under-performing cars.
Edited by jp-sr71 on Tuesday 12th May 21:47
I have absolutely no idea what the specs are for oil quality drop off / contamination are. I don't think Audi even give the dealers that information. I'm back at work tomorrow so If I have time I'll have a look on ELSA and see if they give us that data. All I know is they provide us with the spec of what oil we should put in and how often it should be changed.
I'm not a chemical engineer so I don't exactly how synthetic engine oil behaves with use, but I would think that drop off in flash point is down to fuel contamination, colds starts and driver behavior more than anything else.
380 bhp is about what I would expect to see. I was trying to help someone with a car showing around 300bhp, clearly not going to be solved by a 5% increase in air flow.
Many cars (not just Audi's) never make the claimed power figures in my experience, and there are so many variables in different rolling roads, temperatures etc. To get a good curve is almost more important than the actual figure, 380 with the a good curve would fine in my eyes. Especially with Mac4RS's car as at the moment his torque drops off far to early.
I haven't seen any valves not sealing on any FSI engines, but I'm sure this would be obvious by a cylinder leakage test or even compression test if its that bad. If many people in the RS community are having this issue outside of the 3yr warranty I'm sure Audi would do good will on it.
It would be nice to know if Audi have any race engines with FSI technology and what type of oil separators they use on them.
Is anyone in the RS community developing an uprated oil separator/catch tank. Could be worth a few ££.
I can appreciate your concern and I will admit £55k is more than I will ever have to spend on a car so I can imagine your annoyance if having paid that you feel your not getting the service you think you should. But we at dealer level can only go on the information we are given my the manufacturer and our gained experience with vehicle over the years. And so far I personally haven't seen any reliability issues caused by the build up and have heard nothing from Audi about it.
I'm not a chemical engineer so I don't exactly how synthetic engine oil behaves with use, but I would think that drop off in flash point is down to fuel contamination, colds starts and driver behavior more than anything else.
380 bhp is about what I would expect to see. I was trying to help someone with a car showing around 300bhp, clearly not going to be solved by a 5% increase in air flow.
Many cars (not just Audi's) never make the claimed power figures in my experience, and there are so many variables in different rolling roads, temperatures etc. To get a good curve is almost more important than the actual figure, 380 with the a good curve would fine in my eyes. Especially with Mac4RS's car as at the moment his torque drops off far to early.
I haven't seen any valves not sealing on any FSI engines, but I'm sure this would be obvious by a cylinder leakage test or even compression test if its that bad. If many people in the RS community are having this issue outside of the 3yr warranty I'm sure Audi would do good will on it.
It would be nice to know if Audi have any race engines with FSI technology and what type of oil separators they use on them.
Is anyone in the RS community developing an uprated oil separator/catch tank. Could be worth a few ££.
I can appreciate your concern and I will admit £55k is more than I will ever have to spend on a car so I can imagine your annoyance if having paid that you feel your not getting the service you think you should. But we at dealer level can only go on the information we are given my the manufacturer and our gained experience with vehicle over the years. And so far I personally haven't seen any reliability issues caused by the build up and have heard nothing from Audi about it.
mac4RS said:
[
Interesting...was informed recently by an Audi Master Tech that if he owned a B7 RS4, he would be changing his oil every 2.5 - 3K miles...
RS6 DRCInteresting...was informed recently by an Audi Master Tech that if he owned a B7 RS4, he would be changing his oil every 2.5 - 3K miles...
Now, this is where I jumped in on this thread...why was I told this?
Is this because you REALLY need to? Maybe this assists in stopping carbon build-up (problem with the oil/engine etc?)
I'm no 'mechanic', but I have plenty of common sense and intuition to feel that something is not quite right...(I will also hold my hands up & say thankyou to Audi if my under powered car is back to top form this week - I honestly hope this is the case).
BUT, if everything is okay and all 'above-board', will somebody (by that I mean Audi) tell me in simple language WHY I CANNOT HAVE THE PICTURES OF THE CARBON BUILD UP IN MY ENGINE if there is nothing to hide. I'm begining to wonder who's car this is?
All I hear is this is normal & that's normal, but I ask you, what is normal & reasonable?
What isn't reasonable, is for me to continually contact Audi, with calls not being returned, e-mails remaining unanswered and excuses of how busy we are, staff off sick - the list goes on. NOT GOOD ENOUGH!
Is this really a Fred Carno organisation run by idiots with a glossy badge??
One happy customer of Audi...
RS6 DRC
Tame Technician said:
I have absolutely no idea what the specs are for oil quality drop off / contamination are. I don't think Audi even give the dealers that information. I'm back at work tomorrow so If I have time I'll have a look on ELSA and see if they give us that data. All I know is they provide us with the spec of what oil we should put in and how often it should be changed.
I'm not a chemical engineer so I don't exactly how synthetic engine oil behaves with use, but I would think that drop off in flash point is down to fuel contamination, colds starts and driver behavior more than anything else.
380 bhp is about what I would expect to see. I was trying to help someone with a car showing around 300bhp, clearly not going to be solved by a 5% increase in air flow.
Many cars (not just Audi's) never make the claimed power figures in my experience, and there are so many variables in different rolling roads, temperatures etc. To get a good curve is almost more important than the actual figure, 380 with the a good curve would fine in my eyes. Especially with Mac4RS's car as at the moment his torque drops off far to early.
I haven't seen any valves not sealing on any FSI engines, but I'm sure this would be obvious by a cylinder leakage test or even compression test if its that bad. If many people in the RS community are having this issue outside of the 3yr warranty I'm sure Audi would do good will on it.
It would be nice to know if Audi have any race engines with FSI technology and what type of oil separators they use on them.
Is anyone in the RS community developing an uprated oil separator/catch tank. Could be worth a few ££.
I can appreciate your concern and I will admit £55k is more than I will ever have to spend on a car so I can imagine your annoyance if having paid that you feel your not getting the service you think you should. But we at dealer level can only go on the information we are given my the manufacturer and our gained experience with vehicle over the years. And so far I personally haven't seen any reliability issues caused by the build up and have heard nothing from Audi about it.
TT,I'm not a chemical engineer so I don't exactly how synthetic engine oil behaves with use, but I would think that drop off in flash point is down to fuel contamination, colds starts and driver behavior more than anything else.
380 bhp is about what I would expect to see. I was trying to help someone with a car showing around 300bhp, clearly not going to be solved by a 5% increase in air flow.
Many cars (not just Audi's) never make the claimed power figures in my experience, and there are so many variables in different rolling roads, temperatures etc. To get a good curve is almost more important than the actual figure, 380 with the a good curve would fine in my eyes. Especially with Mac4RS's car as at the moment his torque drops off far to early.
I haven't seen any valves not sealing on any FSI engines, but I'm sure this would be obvious by a cylinder leakage test or even compression test if its that bad. If many people in the RS community are having this issue outside of the 3yr warranty I'm sure Audi would do good will on it.
It would be nice to know if Audi have any race engines with FSI technology and what type of oil separators they use on them.
Is anyone in the RS community developing an uprated oil separator/catch tank. Could be worth a few ££.
I can appreciate your concern and I will admit £55k is more than I will ever have to spend on a car so I can imagine your annoyance if having paid that you feel your not getting the service you think you should. But we at dealer level can only go on the information we are given my the manufacturer and our gained experience with vehicle over the years. And so far I personally haven't seen any reliability issues caused by the build up and have heard nothing from Audi about it.
Thanks for your input. It is not you at fault, and we appreciate you can only act on HQ's instruction.
The problem is dealing with the faceless corporate giant!
You will see on RS246.com, Audi USA dodging the issue about the oil specification and its ability to mitigate wear/combat deposition in the B7 4.2 FSI engine.
Wasn't FSI technology first introduced in Audi's Le Mans cars back in 2000?
I don't think these cars need seperators but I'll leave that to someone more knowledgeable to comment...
You can check RS246.com for commentary from an owner whose valves were not sealing due to contamination. It isn't surprising bearing in mind the level of deposit in there. Maybe this IS the reason most cars are down on power?
The same company that observed this is now working on a catch-can as a solution, or perhaps a water-meth injection system that the 2.0 TFSI owners have available to them (certainly in the US anyway).
You can also read on RS246 about an owner whose car only ever made ~365hp (on 3 seperate dynos) who obliged Audi to take the car back on the basis that it was nowhere near the 414hp quoted.
I disagree with you that 380hp is acceptable.
If Audi can't engineer the car to a 5% tolerance (~395hp), they shouldn't be quoting a 414hp figure.
I'd also expect some cars to be making ~440hp if that was the case.
I do agree, though, that Mac's car is sick.
Tame Technician said:
If your valves look like this, it is normal.
(Pics Posted by andyuk911)
http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r34/saaber1/val...
Thats from a 2.0TFSI with 20k on the clock. .
http://i390.photobucket.com/albums/oo344/rAudiguy/...
Thats a 4.2FSI at 19k
It may be normal, but is this really acceptable?(Pics Posted by andyuk911)
http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r34/saaber1/val...
Thats from a 2.0TFSI with 20k on the clock. .
http://i390.photobucket.com/albums/oo344/rAudiguy/...
Thats a 4.2FSI at 19k
Gassing Station | Audi, Seat, Skoda & VW | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff