I am running at 90K with no probs it is a 2006 model, am I in the danger zone?

I am running at 90K with no probs it is a 2006 model, am I in the danger zone?

The danger zone actually seems to have passed by that point!

They seem to be failing much earlier than that or running for a very long time

I am on 64K miles now, hopefully past the danger zone because my car has been out of warranty since September.

Am I right in thinking you work for a Skoda/VW dealership? How many 1.9s do you see with turbo problems compared to 2.0s?

Correct I do.

This week I have done three turbos, 2 1.9s and one 2.0. Its an above average week. One of the 1.9's was a genuine failure, one of the blades on the exhaust turbine has broken and making a noise. The other 1.9 is difficult to say exactly what came first but lets just say there is no oil in the engine its all in the inlet system and exhaust, I found the shaft from in the turbo stuck in the back of the MAF and that was that. New engine required.

The 2.0 is more prone to go I think, that may be as its more popular though so its difficult to say realistically. However i think if you car is well serviced and oil levels are checked regular you shouldnt have a problem. Most of the failures I do are down to lease vehicle ownership whee the driver cares little for the car (a sweeping statement I know, not all lease car owners are that way inclined).

However i think if you car is well serviced and oil levels are checked regular you shouldnt have a problem.

Mine had been serviced twice on variable servicing and had the oil checked about every 5k miles.

It sometimes needed topping up but wasn't run below the minimum mark on the dipstick and it still failed!

The 2.0 is more prone to go I think, that may be as its more popular though so its difficult to say realistically. However i think if you car is well serviced and oil levels are checked regular you shouldnt have a problem. Most of the failures I do are down to lease vehicle ownership whee the driver cares little for the car (a sweeping statement I know, not all lease car owners are that way inclined).

I now own a 2.0, so I've got an even greater interest in this!

Without having any statistics, I'm inclined to agree with what you say about the main cause of failures, i.e. lease cars, however I think it perhaps goes even further than that...

My mate also has an Octavia Estate, it's a 1.9 lease car. He's well known as being heavy footed. He certainly doesn't look after the car as if it was his own, it's longevity is not something he'd be worried about. I'm not sure if he's ever checked the oil (his own admission)!

However, I also was interested to note that he's on the variable service. Now, with my 2.0, I've thought about the fixed v variable issue, I've decided I'll probably go variable because I am generally a very gentle driver and I do almost entirely motorway miles. In the 3-4 weeks I've had the car, it's been almost entirely 65-70mph cruising for approx 45 mins a time.

Now my mate also drives mostly motorway miles, although the fact that he gets less mpg from a 1.9 2WD than I get from a 2.0 4WD speaks volumes about our comparative driving styles. But whereas I have opted to choose the variable servicing because I think my driving style/conditions are suitable, he's on variable servicing because it's ( a ) the default, and/or ( b ) more cost effective. The fact that variable servicing might not actually suit his driving style isn't a factor.

So that's my point really. While it's certainly true that lease drivers are less likely to care about the car and drive it with consideration, it's also a factor that they are likely to be on the variable servicing scheme which might not be the best option.

Perhaps if lease cars were serviced using the fixed scheme, they might fair better when it comes to turbo failure??

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with variable servicing here, I'm saying that perhaps many people (lease drivers and non-lease drivers) are on variable servicing when perhaps they shouldn't be?!

But the whole thing about variable servicing is that it's.... variable! So it should alter the amount of miles between services, dependant on driving style and other conditions.

Steve.

But the whole thing about variable servicing is that it's.... variable! So it should alter the amount of miles between services, dependant on driving style and other conditions.

Steve.

Well, you'd think that might be true, but unfortunately, it's not the case.

They (i.e. VW/Skoda) recommend variable only if you:

* drive longer distance journeys

* limited number of cold starts

* daily mileage over approx 25 miles

* constant speed

* car used regularly

If all the car had to do was reduce the service interval (under less than ideal driving conditions), they wouldn't need to specify all the above!

Where are these recommendations set out? I come at this issue from knowledge of the BMW variable system, which might well be different and/or more advanced. So I might be expecting too much.

If the above conditions are true, then I'd agree - I'd go for fixed as well!

Steve

Well, you'd think that might be true, but unfortunately, it's not the case.

They (i.e. VW/Skoda) recommend variable only if you:

* drive longer distance journeys

* limited number of cold starts

* daily mileage over approx 25 miles

* constant speed

* car used regularly

If all the car had to do was reduce the service interval (under less than ideal driving conditions), they wouldn't need to specify all the above!

That's doesn't match with what dealers tell people - cars just come from the factory with it set on variable and it's never mentioned in the vast majority of cases.

Bought a 100k Octavia recently with the police siren noise coming from the turbo. Must have taken it to a dozen dealers and independents for a diagnosis.Never got any consensus of opinion.Phoned Skoda; they were amazed the turbo had lasted so long! Took the plunge and had the turbo removed.Not good news! New turbo fitted.

Isn't it amazing VAG/Skoda et al can't fit a reliable turbo! My son had to have a new turbo fitted in his Seat.

Where are these recommendations set out? I come at this issue from knowledge of the BMW variable system, which might well be different and/or more advanced. So I might be expecting too much.

If the above conditions are true, then I'd agree - I'd go for fixed as well!

Steve

It's in a PDF I downloaded from the VW site. I can try and find the link later when I've more time, although I'm quite happy to email it to you.

That's doesn't match with what dealers tell people - cars just come from the factory with it set on variable and it's never mentioned in the vast majority of cases.

Agreed, and you describe my experience exactly. I doubt it's a priority when selling cars...

Anyway, here's what VW have to say about it:

Volkswagen Servicing Plans : Volkswagen UK

Bought a 100k Octavia recently with the police siren noise coming from the turbo. Must have taken it to a dozen dealers and independents for a diagnosis. Never got any consensus of opinion.

I've highlighted the key point there.

Mine has made the "police siren noise" from purchase at 58k, now 80k.

Every Octavia taxi I go in (& that's most working days) make that noise too ...

The taxi drivers I speak to, seem to vary between 30k & 330k between turbo failures.

My local dealer have been very good, however, the Warranty people say it's a "characteristic" rather than a "fault", so their hands were tied.

Although I can fully understand why you'd go for the piece of mind of swapping it rather than risk a sudden catastrophic failure & potentially an even bigger bill.

To misquote Clint Eastwood, "Are you feeling lucky TDI driver?"

I'll just keep checking my oil & looking out for loss of power or heavy smoke & keep my fingers crossed.

cheers ... Darren

I now own a 2.0, so I've got an even greater interest in this!

Without having any statistics, I'm inclined to agree with what you say about the main cause of failures, i.e. lease cars, however I think it perhaps goes even further than that...

My mate also has an Octavia Estate, it's a 1.9 lease car. He's well known as being heavy footed. He certainly doesn't look after the car as if it was his own, it's longevity is not something he'd be worried about. I'm not sure if he's ever checked the oil (his own admission)!

However, I also was interested to note that he's on the variable service. Now, with my 2.0, I've thought about the fixed v variable issue, I've decided I'll probably go variable because I am generally a very gentle driver and I do almost entirely motorway miles. In the 3-4 weeks I've had the car, it's been almost entirely 65-70mph cruising for approx 45 mins a time.

Now my mate also drives mostly motorway miles, although the fact that he gets less mpg from a 1.9 2WD than I get from a 2.0 4WD speaks volumes about our comparative driving styles. But whereas I have opted to choose the variable servicing because I think my driving style/conditions are suitable, he's on variable servicing because it's ( a ) the default, and/or ( b ) more cost effective. The fact that variable servicing might not actually suit his driving style isn't a factor.

So that's my point really. While it's certainly true that lease drivers are less likely to care about the car and drive it with consideration, it's also a factor that they are likely to be on the variable servicing scheme which might not be the best option.

Perhaps if lease cars were serviced using the fixed scheme, they might fair better when it comes to turbo failure??

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with variable servicing here, I'm saying that perhaps many people (lease drivers and non-lease drivers) are on variable servicing when perhaps they shouldn't be?!

Mine was on fixed servicing every 10,000 miles, oil checked regularly but turbo failed at 54k miles/2years old. New engine fitted as a result.

Isn't it amazing VAG/Skoda et al can't fit a reliable turbo! My son had to have a new turbo fitted in his Seat.

Its not just VAG, a friend has a peugeot 407 TDi, and its had 4 turbos in 2 years. They have just replaced the whole engine, because of the last failure.

I've been following this thread with interest, as I've got a leased 2.0TDI, that I might want to buy at the end of the lease contract.

I'm on Variable servicing, which works out as approx. 12months (17-20k) apart.

My driving consists of a 8 mile daily commute, with a few 20-30 mile A-Road drives, and some 120-150 motorway journeys, although the M25 in rush-hour is often more like Urban driving.

As its a lease vehicle (and it permanently gets filthy), I rarely (if ever) wash it, and people tend to think that I don't look after it. I check the fluid levels regularly, and make sure that its mechanicals are kept in good condition (as far as the lease company will allow).

Am I likely to be at any higher risk of turbo failure, or is it just a lottery? From the varied answers here, it sounds like it can be a lottery as even well maintained vehicles are suffering. Do I need to worry about it giving up after the lease period (80k or 4 years), or just accept that failure is likely, and budget for that if I buy it?

Total lottery , so budget for a replacement.

Is maintenance included and is it still inder warranty?

Hope the turbo fails just beforehand and then get to buy it with a shiny new one fitted.

Total lottery , so budget for a replacement.

Is maintenance included and is it still inder warranty?

Hope the turbo fails just beforehand and then get to buy it with a shiny new one fitted.

:iagree:

My Brother I L has a 2.0TDI A3 - 4years old (not sure of miles but probably 70-100k ) same problem £1400 just been quoted - not happy on "quality " motor : he seemed to think the audi badge would protect him from this type of event!:confused:

My Brother I L has a 2.0TDI A3 - 4years old (not sure of miles but probably 70-100k ) same problem £1400 just been quoted - not happy on "quality " motor : he seemed to think the audi badge would protect him from this type of event!:confused:

Can you clarify, has it failed (cloud of smoke / tow truck etc) or has it been diagnosed as too loud? Hopefully the latter, in which case get a second opinion.

regards ... Darren

Mine screams like a bitch under full throttle and whines like a police siren/owl/tuning an old wireless under partial loads. Dealer is aware of it but nothing has been done about it.

Time for a second opinion methinks.

Mine screams like a bitch under full throttle and whines like a police siren/owl/tuning an old wireless under partial loads. Dealer is aware of it but nothing has been done about it.

Time for a second opinion methinks.

As I said in an earlier post, mine has made those noises for at least the last 50K miles, and still pulls like a train.

Can you clarify, has it failed (cloud of smoke / tow truck etc) or has it been diagnosed as too loud? Hopefully the latter, in which case get a second opinion.

regards ... Darren

Sorry Darren - didn't ask him - I was saying on phone I had just got a price of £78 for first (fixed service regime) service & was surprised how cheap. He said "how about £1400 for a new turbo on my A3 2TDI (& some explitives not usually used by him!):eek:

Edit : I will ask when I spk next.

I'll probably change my mind in a few thousand miles when mine fails, but I can't help wondering...

I wonder if the problem with these turbo-diesels (TDIs!) is that because the turbo has given diesel engines performance comparable with (NA) petrol engines, people drive them like petrol engines, but I wonder, was this really the design intention? Perhaps they were meant to be driven like diesel engines, with only occasional high-rev thrashing?

I can't help feeling that if you wish to drive enthusiastically and regularly, a petrol engine should be your choice??

I've not got any facts to base this on, it's not even a hunch really; I'm just wondering if there could be any truth in this... There's probably huge holes in my arguement though, so feel free to blow it out of the water