Some good news about camshaft wear...

[rickoshea]

The RS4 that i have just bought has had cams replaced inc followers at 73k miles, car was serviced on Longlife (until then, now has proper oil in it). Its a common problem with Longlife oil in general. Have come across a few 2.5 TDI's with the same problem.

IMO, Longlife oil *is* proper oil - IMO a very high quality oil spec. However, again - IMO, *no* oil can last up to 20K miles / 2 years without breaking down / containing too much contaminant ( water / petrol etc ). This is where I believe that the Longlife Service interval schedule is fundamentally flawed; esp. when deployed on a 140bhp per litre engine.

[audiboy]

OK, i agree with that statement. Yes it is proper oil, but im sure you got the jist of my remark. Im sure there is someone here that will provide fact sheets about how great longlife oil is, but TBH IMO, in real life the "longlife" idea, doesnt lead to a very longlife.

[chancha]

OK, i agree with that statement. Yes it is proper oil, but im sure you got the jist of my remark. Im sure there is someone here that will provide fact sheets about how great longlife oil is, but TBH IMO, in real life the "longlife" idea, doesnt lead to a very longlife.

I think the whole argument here though is that cars that have not been subject to the longlife service schedule have also been affected... whether the cars are 8 or 9 years old having chocolate camshafts does not negate manufacturers responsibility in my opinion...

[TopBear]

Now on 5 pages, and I've still not read ANY 'good news'

[S4INT]

Now on 5 pages, and I've still not read ANY 'good news'

LOL

My car has had oil changes at every 10k miles or less all its life - and the camshaft(s) still wore out. The fact that only 1 lobe wore out leads me to believe that it isn't necessarily oil related, although it "could" be a contributing factor.

[Nige_RS4]

Now on 5 pages, and I've still not read ANY 'good news'

LOL

My car has had oil changes at every 10k miles or less all its life - and the camshaft(s) still wore out. The fact that only 1 lobe wore out leads me to believe that it isn't necessarily oil related, although it "could" be a contributing factor.

Surely that's a good reason why only 1 cam lobe showed signs of wear? If the oil filter is partially blocked then there may not be sufficient pressure to reach the top of the engine, especially if the worn lobe was at the end of the block where it may have to travel furthest???

[S2tuner]

Now on 5 pages, and I've still not read ANY 'good news'

LOL

My car has had oil changes at every 10k miles or less all its life - and the camshaft(s) still wore out. The fact that only 1 lobe wore out leads me to believe that it isn't necessarily oil related, although it "could" be a contributing factor.

OMG Now I know it!!! It's the remap, I forgot to tick the "wear all camshaft lobes" box when I did the remap, and therefore your remap only wore one of your lobes!!!!



Now here's the good news

[S4INT]

Surely that's a good reason why only 1 cam lobe showed signs of wear? If the oil filter is partially blocked then there may not be sufficient pressure to reach the top of the engine, especially if the worn lobe was at the end of the block where it may have to travel furthest???

Why would the oil filter be partially blocked? We are all using good quality oils and in my cars' case it was changed regularly.

As I said previously I guess oil degradation "could" be a factor, but having discussed this issue with MRC, I don't believe that oil starvation is a factor.

However, I am no expert and will gladly be corrected by those "in the know"

[S4INT]

OMG Now I know it!!! It's the remap, I forgot to tick the "wear all camshaft lobes" box when I did the remap, and therefore your remap only wore one of your lobes!!!!



Now here's the good news

I hope you didn't tick the "camshaft wear" box when you mapped the A3 as well.....

[neckarsulm]

The good news is that not all cars are affected so buying one doesn't mean you are definitely going to need to spend £3k on cam work.
Mine's a typical used but unabused example, not especially cherished but not habitually driven hard.
If you already have had the problem and forked out £3k then that's not good news for you obviously.

As for my comment regarding cam wear being more common on RS4 than S4 being down to the cams handling 380 bhp rather than the 265 of the S4, sure this extra 50% power must have some effect on what is an identical part?
If not then please excuse my ignorance and do post a constructive comment as to why not.

[Timmilne]

I can't believe that you all accept this as readily as you do. Even GM can make high horsepower engines that last for several hundred thousand miles without the camshafts wearing out–and have been doing so for fifty years. Nissan Skylines will run 600+ HP on standard cams. Ever hear of Porsche cams wearing out?

Why aren't you all protesting to Audi? They trade heavily on the integrity of their engineering. Progress Through Technology "Vorsprung Durch Technic" doesn't immediately bring chocolate camshafts to mind.

Maybe Audi shouldn't be in the business of making High-performance cars if they can't make camshafts that don't wear out. It's pretty basic stuff.

[Timmilne]

One other thing worth noting...

If you run either a Skyline, EVO or any kind of tuned American muscle, you'll be changing oil every 5,000 miles or less. American muscle car owners habitually change their oil almost every month. Maybe Audi is deluding everyone with a promise that they can run a 140 bhp / litre turbo-charged engine on annual oil changes, never mind bi-annual Long Life changes.

[easto]

Its a fair point about Audis expectations of the engines capability to last. Mines had long life servicing until I got it (roughly 10k intervals)...and for anyone whos not an enthusiast then they would surely deem this as perfectly adequate servicing intervals as the car tells them when its ready and Audi put this on the car!
Audi MUST expect the standard cars to at least last as long as other variants and not the 50-60k that some get to and then require cams.
Or are they expecting everyone to come back to them for 3k+ worth of extra work on their books....?
I guess someone at Audi HQ might be reading this and thinking 'oh <beep>, they've cottoned on that our cams are about as solid as a runny poo'
Hope so...cos if mine are or likely to be screwed i would like them to replace free of charge!

[Contigo]

I'd love to protest to Audi about it but as has been said I don't think we have a case as so many cars have been remapped, althugh I'd like them to prove that one, I think the least they can do is ackowledge that there is a problem with the cams and do inspections on these cars from time to time. I think we need a set of cams mailing in to various dealers. Does anyone know how the guy got on who was meant to be analysing a set of Paul's cams?

Does anyone know anyone at Audi who would give a feck about this? Maybe we could get a template together for 1) People who have a new engine after cam failure 2) People who have caught the problem in time and replaced the cams and 3) People who are concerned about cam wear

Surely if we mails enough of these complains to Audi asking them as a goodwill gesture to check our cams periodically and rectify them if they are wearing?

[dhali]

i honestly think they dont give a sh!!. Look at the DRC issue on the RS6, they replace it whilst under warranty and then basicly tell you to Feck yourself when the warranty expires.
on another note, when the original concept of an uprated engine/cylinder heads for use in the RS4 came about surely they must have bench tested it to the equivalent of thousands of miles? Would they not have taken it too pieces and checked for wear etc? or am i just being silly?