BEWARE ALL S4(B5) AND RS4(B5) OWNERS

[zorroRs4]

those who have changed thiers recentlay,if u could confirm for us if yours number ended with an F or a D?
cheers.

[simple1]

dug out my invoice, it ended with a D

[zorroRs4]

thats good news simple,
thanks 4 taking the time mate.
any body with an F?

[Golich]

How/who established the sensor has been programmed differently?

I had these replaced on my previous S4 a couple years back. They replaced one side and the DTC went, but still the power was down. In the end the dealership didn't know what was wrong and I took the car to AMD. They established the second exhaust temp sensor was faulty when they were monitoring the engine whil mapping it. However no DTC was given so to the VAG 15?? diagnostic kit everything was ok.

I find it very hard to believe a deliberate covert de-tune decision has been made by Audi.

[Turbo Joe]

"I find it very hard to believe a deliberate covert de-tune decision has been made by Audi."

If you don't believe me,by all means take your car on the rolling road and check it out. You place too much faith in Audi. Not many people knew about the common defect on the Mark 4 Golf petrols from R-W reg. If you are sitting as a passenger did you know that you could interfere with the driver's accelerator peddle via a linkage located in the passenger's footwell with your right foot. Yep you heard right the 1st time and if you didn't quite get that, read the sentence again for your sanity. Volkswagen kept this one very quiet and it took them 3 years to rectify the fault. All they needed to do was place a covering over the linkage. I know about this 1st hand because I beefed it out with them for 2 and a half years on that issue. My suggestion to you is not to put all your eggs in Audi's basket and realise that they are capable of underhanded stunts like this. Like I said before, everyone should email them and ask them what the hell is going on. I find it very hard to believe that anyone could get the replacement prefix 'F' and not notice the difference. I noticed straightaway and was back on the forecourt within 5 minutes. I wasn't the first with this problem and I guarantee I won't be the last. I say it again,everyone email em.

[Golfather]

Blower, you're one unlucky mo fo with VAG.
Why not get a Nissan?

[Turbo Joe]

Blower, you're one unlucky mo fo with VAG.
Why not get a Nissan?

Boy, I can't fault the japs and their motors especially that 350Z and the Skyline. I suppose is just a case of sticking to what you know.Unfortunately what you know sometimes can be what you don't know aswell.

[S2tuner]

Blower, I think this is BS IMHO. The sensor has a module that linearizes/amplifies the output signal going to the ECU. The module could have been programmed differently, but this shouldn't change anything to the power the car is putting out, as, good tuning doesn't mean stupid high EGTs. On the cars that I tune, I barely reach 960 degree C before turbines (measured on stock/original sensors so far) on a 2.7T, going much higher isn't going to help a lot with reliability, plus some 2.7T engines like to ping when the mixture isn't rich enough at WOT.

What you could have been experiencing at the same time though, is a MAF failure. A MAF failure is going to work out as leaner mixtures and higher EGTs, as well as ECUs going into limp-mode or EGT regulation mode, which takes some power... if the dealership isn't smart enough to figure out that your MAF is bad, they're going to tell you the EGT sensors have been "reprogrammed" so your car makes less power...


I'm ROTFLMAO at this...


Mihnea

[DaveP]

Mihnea.....

[jon@work]

I just had both sensors replaced at John Fox on Wednesday. The left and right part numbers are different - one ends with an F, the other with a G. I haven't given the old girl much of a thrashing yet, but seems OK to me so far. Its funny how you don't notice the performance dropping if it happens gradually - I thought I'd just gotten used to the power.

[Turbo Joe]

Ive just got in the original part ending in the prefix 'D'. Im gonna put this one on my car in replacement of the 'F' version and I know Im gonna feel the difference because I know what I felt when my defective 'D' version worked spuriously, it was neck breaking. 330bhp ain't to be laughed at and Im gonna have it back.

[Turbo Joe]

Blower, I think this is BS IMHO. The sensor has a module that linearizes/amplifies the output signal going to the ECU. The module could have been programmed differently, but this shouldn't change anything to the power the car is putting out, as, good tuning doesn't mean stupid high EGTs. On the cars that I tune, I barely reach 960 degree C before turbines (measured on stock/original sensors so far) on a 2.7T, going much higher isn't going to help a lot with reliability, plus some 2.7T engines like to ping when the mixture isn't rich enough at WOT.

What you could have been experiencing at the same time though, is a MAF failure. A MAF failure is going to work out as leaner mixtures and higher EGTs, as well as ECUs going into limp-mode or EGT regulation mode, which takes some power... if the dealership isn't smart enough to figure out that your MAF is bad, they're going to tell you the EGT sensors have been "reprogrammed" so your car makes less power...


I'm ROTFLMAO at this...


Mihnea

Ok I understand what you were saying but surely if the MAF was defective,surely it would come up on a 5051 diagnostic test and surely if the the module was reprogrammed, this could possibly create a catch 22 situation where the EGT's pass this new information onto the MAF, thus leading it to put out different signature codes which in turn could reduce the power of the car. I still say what I and a few others have investigated is right and it is kind of strange how Audi have not replied to the email I have sent them.Mmmmmm.

[zorroRs4]

hammm this is going to deep,
keep us informed mate plz.
cheers

[S2tuner]

Duh, I think there is serious misunderstanding of electronics and ECU systems in your cars guys...

Signature codes? never heard of that. An EGT passing information onto a MAF? That doesn't exist.

Second thing is that a defective MAF will never show up as a fault code with 5051. The MAF can only be tested dynamically while the car is being driven at WOT. This is why so many people take their cars to the dealer's and the dealer can't find what's wrong with them, because they only test the MAF while the car is sitting in the garage...

HTH,

Mihnea


@DaveP:

[Turbo Joe]

Duh, I think there is serious misunderstanding of electronics and ECU systems in your cars guys...

Signature codes? never heard of that. An EGT passing information onto a MAF? That doesn't exist.

Second thing is that a defective MAF will never show up as a fault code with 5051. The MAF can only be tested dynamically while the car is being driven at WOT. This is why so many people take their cars to the dealer's and the dealer can't find what's wrong with them, because they only test the MAF while the car is sitting in the garage...

HTH,

Mihnea


@DaveP:

Some people have so much knowledge but yet know so little in the areas that matter. I just finished replacing the prefix 'F' sensor with the prefix 'D' sensor I got from the states and am I surprised that my car is returning the neck breaking performance it provided before the defective 'D' was exchanged for an 'F'?No! Sorry S2tuner but I will say and can confirm that you are wrong on this one and Im not the only person to put back the original 'D' part and experience the return of neck breaking torque that was once experienced before. I feel that you have looked into the problem too deeply and your vast aray of electronic knowledge has ensnared you onto a rocky path.The power has returned, S4 performance is through the roof.What more do you need to confirm that Audi have indeed altered the gas temperature sensor in their revised version.Peeps, email em and and give em hell.The least they owe us is an explanation.