VW UK Action plan for EA 189 EU5 engines

517 posts in this topic

On 2/12/2017 at 20:06, CWARD said:

Andy, what do these modifiers look like?

Unfortunately in German (I think) but this video explains the 'fix' and shows the flow modifier:

 

 

It looks like this:

DB2015AU01434_small.JPG.jpg

 

Another good website explaining the problem, difference between 1.6 and 2.0TDi and shows the different air intake flow conditioners:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/12/vw-flow-straightener-really-works/

Edited by S400DDS
Photo added
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the modifier is positioned in front of the Mass Air Flow sensor. It effectively disrupts the air flow which will give the effect that the air density is less and the ECU will meter out less fuel at the injectors, pretty much the same way as it does on hot days which decreases power. The emission will be less due the combustion being even leaner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, CWARD said:

Interesting that the modifier is positioned in front of the Mass Air Flow sensor. It effectively disrupts the air flow which will give the effect that the air density is less and the ECU will meter out less fuel at the injectors, pretty much the same way as it does on hot days which decreases power. The emission will be less due the combustion being even leaner.

 

Not really as the updated software will take in to account any difference due to the flow modifier.

 

If all they need to do was run the engine leaner, a simple map would have sufficed.

 

Instead of running leaner, the ECU will now have a more accurate reading of flow and therefore correctly match the fuel and EGR rates to reduce emissions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

?

Is that to reduce emissions to meet those that were at the original EU Euro 5 emissions tests, and to allow the vehicle to be driven without issues outside of a Temperature Controlled building, only maybe having more Regens than before 'The Fix' 'No worse MPG or lack of BHP / Torque, just at a different RPM range... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be better if somebody could dub over this in English explaining how this new cheat is better than the old cheat and the effects it will have long term on the EGR/DPF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sad555 said:

It would be better if somebody could dub over this in English explaining how this new cheat is better than the old cheat and the effects it will have long term on the EGR/DPF

 

They have removed the original cheat. There is no 'new cheat' to my knowledge, instead the newer software is able to meet the Euro5 requirements without it. This is likely to be by changing when the fuel is in injected and changing the EGR rates as combustion simulation technology has improved. The real world emissions will still be higher than the Euro5 figures but that's "normal" for more vehicles.

 

From the information I've seen so far:

- Maximum torque/power haven't changed although the torque curve has

- MPG is harder to confirm, some people have had increases whereas others decreases

- EGR rates are likely to be higher to reduce combustion temperatures and therefore NOx emissions

 

There is no information about long term effects on the EGR/DPF, if there is an increased failure rate it'll be very hard to prove it's the fault of the update. Plenty of the cars having the fix are already at the age where EGR/DPF issues aren't uncommon.

 

As for your vehicle, it's completely up to you currently:

- If you worry about NOx emissions and do the majority of your driving in areas where it's an issue, get the fix done

- If you worry about the changes in performance/economy/longevity of your car, don't get the fix done

 

If you refuse the fix, you can have it done at a later date where there may be more information about long term effects.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was initially referring to the jokey vids you get on YouTube with a video of Hitler's being dubbed over with any sort of social comment,but for me your comment  "If you worry about the changes in performance/economy/longevity of your car, don't get the fix done" sums it all up,especially longevity with my car coming out of warranty as I had always thought of Diesel cars good for many miles but it appears some manufacturers are getting higher than thought failures with EGR/DPF which was a fix/design to achieve better omission figures still we live and learn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The grid before the MAF will disrupt the airflow which will not allow it to get a more accurate reading as it is a hot/cold wire type sensor that is used. If the aim was to create vortex that can then be measured with a different type of MAF sensor that would be fine but that is not the case as the same type of MAF is being used. The vortex MAF would normally just have one or two bars in the air intake otherwise the air flow is too turbulent. That turbulance from the grid would be impossible to measure economically.

Also amazing if this grid works so well that it's not fitting to the latest cars too :o 

 

Langer's I love your faith but I'm not convinced. I've already driven my brothers VRS back to back with mine and the difference was very noticeable when driving normally i.e. below 2500rpm, it felt gutless requiring more revs to perform the same. As for the DPF and EGR faults this could just be compared to older models and if failure rates increase in younger models that have been updated then there must be a reason for it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, CWARD said:

Langer's I love your faith but I'm not convinced. I've already driven my brothers VRS back to back with mine and the difference was very noticeable when driving normally i.e. below 2500rpm, it felt gutless requiring more revs to perform the same. As for the DPF and EGR faults this could just be compared to older models and if failure rates increase in younger models that have been updated then there must be a reason for it.

 

I have little faith in the fix which is why I've refused it. I'm also fortunate enough to have the ability to flash the pre-fix SW version if the dealer updates it ;)

 

In my pervious post I was giving a relatively unbiased explanation of how I've seen this play out so far. The change in torque curve could explain the issues your brother is facing as some Tiguan owners are reporting similar symptoms.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seemed like you were defending the magically air flow modifier in that it would help the MAF get a more accurate reading. It is doing anything but improving the accuracy. 

 

If they do fix yours it would be interesting to see how your car performs especially as you could revert it back in the same day for a comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CWARD said:

It seemed like you were defending the magically air flow modifier in that it would help the MAF get a more accurate reading. It is doing anything but improving the accuracy. 

 

If they do fix yours it would be interesting to see how your car performs especially as you could revert it back in the same day for a comparison.

 

If I do end up with fix I'll probably run it for a few days so I can monitor EGR/DPF as they are the undocumented areas :)

 

Hadn't realised the comments were in response to the 'flow transformer'. Unfortunately, I have little knowledge in regards to fluid mechanics and understanding air flow, therefore the following may have little basis in reality so please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

VW claim that it's there to create a 'laminar [smoother] air flow that can be more easily measured'.

A quick search for laminar flow shows filters containing tubes/holes suggesting a properly designed 'flow transformer' could create a less turbulent flow.

If a flow is less turbulent, it seems sensible that a more stable and accurate reading could be made.

 

I assume this would hold true for a system using a hot wire MAF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laminar flows are important in maintaining a constant steady flow rate with no peaks and troughs. This is near impossible in a forced induction engine as the air intake varies with the increase in rpm as more air is required especially with the pull from the turbo. 

After the air filter the air has more turbulence but as it is pulled into the ducting to the turbo it decreases as it is slightly compressed. The closer is gets to the turbo the more it is pulled which removes the turbulence more. If you add a grid into that air flow it is creating more turbulence not less.

A quick Blue Peter experiment to prove this is run your kitchen tap. This normally has a fine mesh at the end of the tap, count this as your air filter. Now put a kitchen sieve into the flow of water and you will see it creates more turbulence in the stream.

 

The hot wire MAF cools down quicker the denser the air. The ECU then measures the amount of fuel supplied to match the air density. Cold weather the engine feels more powerful compared to a hot summer day. If you break up the density of air by creating more turbulence the MAF will take longer to cool down.

Another Blue Peter experiment concentrate the air flow from a desk top on your self and you get cold quick. On the same speed setting set it to oscillate and the air flow is no longer directed at you and you're not as cold.

 

I really think this is nothing more than a parlour trick by VW to fool the public.    

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See here, you have it backwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crude or not with the finished part required at the agents doing 'The Fix' on Euro 5 Emission 1.6TDI the Worlds Biggest Car Manufacturer apparently 

can not Manufacture or have Manufactured enough so that the various VW's, Skoda's, Audi's & SEAT can get done where the Owner is prepared to have it done.

 

Strange or what, as a Judge in the USA is approving the 'Fix' or Buy Back of 3 litre Diesels in the US.

 

VW are really not trying very hard in the RoW, or is it just in the UK that they are allowed to kick their heals while Dealership Employees say 

things like 99.99 of owners that have had the fix are happy with it.

?

Has anyone that had the Fix had a communications since from the VW Group asking their level of satisfaction with the Recall Action?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Wino said:

See here, you have it backwards.

 

Chimaera's explanation would make sense with any other design other than a grid or grill as it would reduce velocity around the walls of the tube due to the moulding of it into a tube which it mounted which creates obstructions around the edge. A perforated cone would have been a more effective design.

This again is only relevant on constant flow rates which you do not find in a cars combustion engine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By SomewhereInEngland
      Hi,
      This is my first post, so please forgive me if this has already been covered elsewhere or is in the wrong location. My car is a Yeti 2010 1.9TD 2WD.
      Late last year I had my car serviced, MOT’d and the EA189 applied. Afterward, my perception was that the car had occasional power loss on acceleration or power drop out under steady speed. These issues were very slight and not regular and certainly not distinct enough to be able to book the car in with Skoda with any hope of reproducing them.
      However, in late January, the car developed bad Diesel Rattle on cold days when accelerating in 2nd gear. This always occurred at 2000RPM. The issue was worse the colder the weather. The issue progressively disappeared as the engine warmed up. I booked the car into my dealer and under Skoda technical direction they adjusted the injectors.
      On return, the Diesel Rattle was less but now occurred under all loads and in all gears. At 2000RPM the engine lost power badly and would not accelerate correctly. It felt as though a rev limiter had kicked in and was dropping cylinders or the engine was not firing. The symptoms progressively disappeared over 10 miles as the car warmed up to full operating temperature.  I returned the car to the dealer, and logged a call with Skoda UK Support.
      The current situation is that the car has been with the dealer for a week now. The dealer is waiting for Skoda Technical to provide information, but I have been informed that it is being put down to an Injector failure and not related to the EA189 fix. I did suggest rolling back the fix to eliminate this as an issue, but this has not been tried as yet as far as I am aware. Apparently, the above symptoms are as a result of movement in the injector being limited by a mechanical failure or jamming in the injector. Interestingly the problem occurs at 2000RPM irrespective of light or heavy acceleration. It seems to be an engine RPM issue, not a fuel requirement issue.
      My question is, is an injector failure reasonable, or are Skoda trying to avoid an EA189 related issue? Any guidance on the validity of the injector failure proposal or any questions I should be asking would be most gratefully received. I am aware of post on EA189 issues and the reports on Tiguans, however I would like to be fair on this issue.
      Many Thanks in advance. John H.
       
       
    • By nomdeplume
      Do any readers of this blog in France have any information on what might be happening to collectively get some form of compensation for the dieselgate scandal?  I know that consumer rights in France have always been behind the curve, nevertheless something should be happening.  Thanks
    • By Egg1000
      Had the recall action performed on my '11 VRS and, well it doesn't feel quite so gutsy. Also seems to be struggling in terms of MPG compared to what I'm used to (cold weather considered).
      It also makes a peculiar hum that I'm not used to, which is slightly infuriating.
      Has anyone seen or got any rolling road readouts pre and post recall to see exactly what the differences are?
      I searched for another thread on this, but couldn't find one that had been updated recently. If someone can point me in the direction of the right thread (I'm sure I'm not the only one curious) or could enlighten me on what exactly they've done (in English) I'd be most appreciative.
      Oh and happy new year everyone.
    • By PowerMalc
      I have on order an Octavia 1.6CRDi DSG due in November (MY16). The brochure quotes 110hp not 105hp
      What engine code will it have, EA189 or EA288 and which one is the newer unit. I presume EA288
      Also can for instance a EA189 be a 1.6 and a 2.0
      What are the major differences between the two engines, are they completely different designs