Engine Decoke as seen on Wheeler Dealers (Terraclean?)

[_bryan_]

A B6 s4 doesn't have carbon build up as per rs4 due to not being direct injection. And for that reason I wouldn't bother, just keep it serviced regularly and use a decent fuel.

Bryan.

[al42]

Well I have owned my Jaguar 2.7 diesel 2007 since new and its been regularly serviced. I have always used either a fuel additive or a premium diesel such as BP Ultimate or Shells top diesel. However just had a 120000 mile service and decided to have a Terraclean done which was carried out today. I will let you know if there is a difference in a couple of weeks.

[KungFuPanda]

There won't be.

Just post us a picture of a kebab or something in the takeaway thread instead.

[anotherswifty]

better late than never on this thread. I guess Terraclean have probably built up their base in the UK now, but what earlier posters were after is proof.
This post from another forum with emission tests b4 and after seem pretty definitive.
http://www.jaguarforum.com/showthread.php?t=45958

[Riley Blue]

Far too small a sample to be conclusive, I'll need far more than that to convince me I should spend out on it.

Edited by Riley Blue on Saturday 27th May 20:22

[mgv8]

There are cleaners or "detergents" in fuel and have been for some time. Also, cars with ECU should run well most of the time so this is a thing of that past. Even if that is a problem the fuel will clean them out once fixed. Just should not be needed.

[anonymous-user]

anotherswifty said:

proof.

Luckily, we don't consider 'proof' to be a single sample with no validation.......


For example, what was the engine temp (oil and water) engine speed, fuel type, preconditioning cycle, ambient temperature, ambient pressure, for each of those tests. Also, had for example, the engine oil been changed between tests .

We also would need to see the emissions test equipment calibration and pre/post sample span data to determine if the result were valid. And even if they were, they are only showing a small improvement of tail pipe opacity and not any of the other pollutants (NOx, THc, NMHC, CO etc).

And even then this is a sample size of one, meaning it is statistically irrelevant.

Diesel MOT emisisons test is pointless. It is by no means any measure of the engines tailpipe emissions because it is an unloaded test. Rev car, look what comes out the back, and the answer is mostly air. In fact, do 4 tests in a row and you;ll see the numbers for opacity drop each time in a typical car as the exhaust is blown clean and the exhaust heated each time.


If you want to prolong the life of your car i suggest the following:

1) put good fuel in it, even if only occasionally ie once every 20 tanks of supermarket fuel, put a tank of 'ultimate' or 'super' or what ever you local garage sells as it's performance fuel. This fuel has a higher percentage of detergents.

2) Drive it hard occasionally. Especially if you do lots of low speed round town stuff, get out, work it, get it proper hot (oil/water/exhaust etc)

3) If you own a diesel, after around 50kmiles, pop the egr valve, intake throttle and maybe intake manifold off for a clean in the sink. Generally easier than you might think, and i want all that baked on carbon to go down the sink plug and NOT through my engine into my DPF / Catalysts etc



The fundamental issue though is that really, the 'cleanliness' of the inside of your engine is pretty irrelevant. They are designed, tested and validate to run to around 150K miles without attention, and the engine management system is quite capable of accounting for the (tiny) differences in airflow due to 'dirty' valve back faces or slightly contaminated EGR valves etc.

There is NO fundamental reason why an internally 'clean' engine will have better emissions than a dirty one. On a modern direct injection engine (gasoline or derv) the single biggest factor in emissions performance is the injector nozzle state. Worn nozzles mean poorer atomisation and more particulates, and no amount of 'detergent' is going to fix a worn injector nozzle. (hint, it also won't 'clean' it either, because they operate at high fuel pressures, high enough to actually cut through metal, so a little bit of soft carbon isn't going to be staying around in the nozzle now is it)

[Mr2Mike]

Max_Torque said:

The fundamental issue though is that really, the 'cleanliness' of the inside of your engine is pretty irrelevant.

To a point of course. Even on port injected engines, excessive carbon deposits e.g. from a lengthy period of high oil consumption can cause problems.

However I have seen no evidence that this particular brand of snake oil (sorry I mean "highly refined fuel") will clean carbon deposits off so easily, when nothing else does. If any of the believers had a go at rebuilding an old engine they would discover just how difficult carbon build ups can be to remove.

[bazza white]

On a direct injection car this cleans the inlet manifold and inlet valves how ?

[rallycross]

bazza white said:

On a direct injection car this cleans the inlet manifold and inlet valves how ?

The only thing that will clean up carbon deposits on a direct injection BMW is something like walnut blasting see photos in link below

http://blog.modbargains.com/get-nuts-feed-bmw-n55-...

[bazza white]

rallycross said:

The only thing that will clean up carbon deposits on a direct injection BMW is something like walnut blasting see photos in link below

http://blog.modbargains.com/get-nuts-feed-bmw-n55-...

That's my point it's being sold as a "possible solution" to carbon buildup on cars with problems, those with issues from buildup it won't touch the the stuff it will possibly clean up won't cause issues.


It's £99 to have some smoke blown out the exhaust.