Flame Suit On - Another Rolling Road Day
Why would any of this stop one enjoying their vehicle?
For ~100 years automotive engineers have endeavoured to optimise airflow in the internal combustion engine.
Along comes FSI, courtesy of some nonsensical emmissions regulations, and suddenly everyone is happy for their internals to be covered in s**t?
Ask yourself, whether, if it wasn't an FSI engine, you'd concur the design wasn't optimal?
Getting Audi to address the DRC issue didn't take owners more than <Ctrl C>, <Ctrl V> (one of our helpful members made the circular available for free!) and an envelope and stamp...
Everything to gain and nothing to lose.
Just my $0.02...I'm watching the tennis...
PS: I do drive my car. But at the track (see Audi RS4 publicity material) the Audi 504 spec oil gets up to >125C...
Question for you....is the 5w-30 up to the job?
Should I:
a) Drive the car with the OEM oil and claim on the warranty if it fails, or
b) Use an unapproved 5w-40 oil which invalidates my warranty but saves my engine in the meantime?
For ~100 years automotive engineers have endeavoured to optimise airflow in the internal combustion engine.
Along comes FSI, courtesy of some nonsensical emmissions regulations, and suddenly everyone is happy for their internals to be covered in s**t?
Ask yourself, whether, if it wasn't an FSI engine, you'd concur the design wasn't optimal?
Getting Audi to address the DRC issue didn't take owners more than <Ctrl C>, <Ctrl V> (one of our helpful members made the circular available for free!) and an envelope and stamp...
Everything to gain and nothing to lose.
Just my $0.02...I'm watching the tennis...
PS: I do drive my car. But at the track (see Audi RS4 publicity material) the Audi 504 spec oil gets up to >125C...
Question for you....is the 5w-30 up to the job?
Should I:
a) Drive the car with the OEM oil and claim on the warranty if it fails, or
b) Use an unapproved 5w-40 oil which invalidates my warranty but saves my engine in the meantime?
58 C6 RS6 Stage 2+
58 C6 A6 Allroad 2.7 TDi
Previous:
2000 B5 S4 MRC 550 Saloon
2007 B7 RS4 Saloon
1994 S2 Coupe
58 C6 A6 Allroad 2.7 TDi
Previous:
2000 B5 S4 MRC 550 Saloon
2007 B7 RS4 Saloon
1994 S2 Coupe
Arthur,
You still have a conceptual problem with the difference between a knock and a misfire.
A misfire occurs, and is registered by the ECU, when the mixture fails to ignite.
A knock occurs, and is registered by the ECU, when the mixture detonates.
Misfires are logged and if enough occur will cause a CEL
When knocking occurs, timing for that cylinder is retarded.
When you get both misfires and knocking due to "bad gas" you most likely have low octane fuel that causes the knocks, and excessive deposit forming elements that foul the plugs.
Carbon deposits on the intake valves can wrap around to the seal area and "glow" causing preignition.
I, and others, have measured 5% torque reduction on the street when the engine is showing timing <beep>. I can guarantee that it was not due to an intake airbox airflow problem at 100+ mph, with a clean airbox and filter.
You still have a conceptual problem with the difference between a knock and a misfire.
A misfire occurs, and is registered by the ECU, when the mixture fails to ignite.
A knock occurs, and is registered by the ECU, when the mixture detonates.
Misfires are logged and if enough occur will cause a CEL
When knocking occurs, timing for that cylinder is retarded.
When you get both misfires and knocking due to "bad gas" you most likely have low octane fuel that causes the knocks, and excessive deposit forming elements that foul the plugs.
Carbon deposits on the intake valves can wrap around to the seal area and "glow" causing preignition.
I, and others, have measured 5% torque reduction on the street when the engine is showing timing <beep>. I can guarantee that it was not due to an intake airbox airflow problem at 100+ mph, with a clean airbox and filter.
Arthur,ArthurPE wrote:
the 'droop' in torque could be:
air flow
dyno correction
stability/traction systems, torque retardation/limitation
most likely a combination
\
You can log the "droop" or "boost" in torque at 5500 rpm under full throttle with VAG-COM. The engine computes torque, based on engine sensors and factory characterization, for the traction control system. It is quite accurate and matches dyno results. When the engine is making full power, you'll see the torque boost. When the engine is not making full power, you will not see the boost. This will be accompanied with excessive timing <beep> ... even after resetting both ECU's.
Sorry, but others, have "been there, done that" close to 2 years ago. These were the "signs", along with an extensive oil analysis record of multiple engines, that led us to the intake valve deposit issues.
RI_RS4 wrote:Arthur,
You still have a conceptual problem with the difference between a knock and a misfire.
A misfire occurs, and is registered by the ECU, when the mixture fails to ignite.
A knock occurs, and is registered by the ECU, when the mixture detonates.
Misfires are logged and if enough occur will cause a CEL
When knocking occurs, timing for that cylinder is retarded.
When you get both misfires and knocking due to "bad gas" you most likely have low octane fuel that causes the knocks, and excessive deposit forming elements that foul the plugs.
Carbon deposits on the intake valves can wrap around to the seal area and "glow" causing preignition.
I, and others, have measured 5% torque reduction on the street when the engine is showing timing <beep>. I can guarantee that it was not due to an intake airbox airflow problem at 100+ mph, with a clean airbox and filter.
durrr.....
I have no misunderstanding, technically or 'conceptually'...
misfires occur all the time randomly, they are counted and if repeatative, set a code...I know the difference between a misfire, detonation and preignition...I fully understand these fault conditions of the internal combustion engine...
if the ECU 'hears' a knock after spark, it's detonation, before the spark, preignition...
there are seperate codes for each...as I posted...
detonation is NOT normal...the map is set within limits to avoid it, if it knocks, something is wrong, a code it set...there is a margin of error, say lugging up a hill may enter this threshhold, but load and rpm are factored in...
all you naysayers: put your money where your mouth is:
get 4 or 5 cars, remove the engine
dyno it on an engine dyno
using the same dyno and standards as Audi, EEC, etc.
have independent experts do the test and observe/witness the test
use the results to sue Audi...make it a class action...there's 2000 cars in the US, everybody who believes the same as you guys ante up...
if 1/2 believe HP is over rated, 1000 x $100 ~$100,000, that should be enough to get the testing done...heck, if you can convince a lawyer (and his engineer) he'll pay for the right to represent and sue...
anything else is hot air and wasted effort...mere idle speculation
free advice is worthless...
the engine can not measure its own torque...RI_RS4 wrote:Arthur,ArthurPE wrote:
the 'droop' in torque could be:
air flow
dyno correction
stability/traction systems, torque retardation/limitation
most likely a combination
\
You can log the "droop" or "boost" in torque at 5500 rpm under full throttle with VAG-COM. The engine computes torque, based on engine sensors and factory characterization, for the traction control system. It is quite accurate and matches dyno results. When the engine is making full power, you'll see the torque boost. When the engine is not making full power, you will not see the boost. This will be accompanied with excessive timing <beep> ... even after resetting both ECU's.
Sorry, but others, have "been there, done that" close to 2 years ago. These were the "signs", along with an extensive oil analysis record of multiple engines, that led us to the intake valve deposit issues.
it can affect variables to reduce it:
traction slip, yaw, temp, rpm, knock, A/F, etc.
but it can not measure torque...how could it?
it can only look at a table and estimate, based on measurable parameters, what it should be, not what it is...
it does give a number for torque reduction...
and timing will do that, but there is NO way to know what is causing the timing to be retarded to reduce torque...could be any one of numerous things...any of the inputs used to estimate torque...
but again, even a 30% restriction on the valves WILL NOT impact flow because the valve seat opening is MUCH smaller and the limiting factor...
in fact a restriction reduces flow on a much smaller order than it increases velocity...net flow, no real change
engine dyno, timed runs, or top speed...the ONLY way to know true crank HP
cant beleive your still going on about all the techy <beep>...ArthurPE wrote:definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again expecting different resultsbooski wrote:Same discussion over and over and over again......... Aaahhhhhh
as much as i admire a man with knowledge, i'd much rather stare at these all day...
i love tennis too
Arthur
for an engineer, you do not seem to be able to read the English. You think you know what I say, but you do not. Here is what I wrote:
You are correct about one thing ... what is causing the timing to be retarded to reduce torque...could be any one of numerous things.
You seem to assume that it's airflow related. I believe it is not, since you can not only feel but measure the difference when the engine is making power, using only the ECU.
My current hypothesis is that IVD and CC deposits are causing early ignition, causing the ECU to pull back timing. But, it is just that, a hypothesis. I'm all for someone proving it wrong.
Quite frankly, Arthur, you are acting as if you are an agent of Audi that is trying to dissuade others from challenging the factory on engine performance in public.
for an engineer, you do not seem to be able to read the English. You think you know what I say, but you do not. Here is what I wrote:
Here it is after your filter:The engine computes torque, based on engine sensors and factory characterization
The torque that the ECU reports using all available sensors has been correlated at the factory by engine dyno characterizations.the engine can not measure its own torque...
it can affect variables to reduce it:
traction slip, yaw, temp, rpm, knock, A/F, etc.
but it can not measure torque...how could it?
it can only look at a table and estimate, based on measurable parameters, what it should be, not what it is...
it does give a number for torque reduction...
and timing will do that, but there is NO way to know what is causing the timing to be retarded to reduce torque...could be any one of numerous things...any of the inputs used to estimate torque...
You are correct about one thing ... what is causing the timing to be retarded to reduce torque...could be any one of numerous things.
You seem to assume that it's airflow related. I believe it is not, since you can not only feel but measure the difference when the engine is making power, using only the ECU.
My current hypothesis is that IVD and CC deposits are causing early ignition, causing the ECU to pull back timing. But, it is just that, a hypothesis. I'm all for someone proving it wrong.
Quite frankly, Arthur, you are acting as if you are an agent of Audi that is trying to dissuade others from challenging the factory on engine performance in public.
tennis? oh, yea, she's playing tennisjonathonturner wrote:cant beleive your still going on about all the techy <beep>...ArthurPE wrote:definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again expecting different resultsbooski wrote:Same discussion over and over and over again......... Aaahhhhhh
as much as i admire a man with knowledge, i'd much rather stare at these all day...
i love tennis too
I read what you stated, but you then assume it's accurate, like an actual measurement...RI_RS4 wrote:Arthur
for an engineer, you do not seem to be able to read the English. You think you know what I say, but you do not. Here is what I wrote:
Here it is after your filter:The engine computes torque, based on engine sensors and factory characterization
The torque that the ECU reports using all available sensors has been correlated at the factory by engine dyno characterizations.
You are correct about one thing ... what is causing the timing to be retarded to reduce torque...could be any one of numerous things.
You seem to assume that it's airflow related. I believe it is not, since you can not only feel but measure the difference when the engine is making power, using only the ECU.
My current hypothesis is that IVD and CC deposits are causing early ignition, causing the ECU to pull back timing. But, it is just that, a hypothesis. I'm all for someone proving it wrong.
Quite frankly, Arthur, you are acting as if you are an agent of Audi that is trying to dissuade others from challenging the factory on engine performance in public.
the real problem: YOU think you know what you say
your 'hypothesis'...you're killing me here
I'm probably right about more than 'one thing'
I've got you pegged
I'm an agent of a little place called 'reality', experience it, embrace it, love it, you may like it, or perhaps not...
this is not a 'conspiracy', I am not an 'agent' of Audi (sounds like a old secret agent movie, lol)
all I'm trying to do is disuade people to save their money...there is no issue with the engine...
on the other hand, I laid out a clear path forward, in fact the only path forward...engine dyno and sue...
it took a lawyer for BMW to fix the rear subframe issue
and for Audi to recall DRC on US RS6's
Audi will not be swayed by pseudo science or seat of the pants evaluations...man up, go for it and fight them...it's the big leagues, but if I can sue and win vs BMW, so can you...but you must take the first step, and it ain't here...you're either 'preaching to the choir' or a bunch of heretics that have no time for, or 'faith' in your 'message'
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 198 guests