I aint going first....

[lichfielddriver]

Proper stats and dyno/driving/mpg results (from the real world) might persuade me...

 

maybe

[SuperbTWM]

I would put my bets on the 'flow transformer' creating a lot less disappointed owners than the 2.0 software update will.

[lichfielddriver]

I would put my bets on the 'flow transformer' creating a lot less disappointed owners than the 2.0 software update will.

 

Didnt the Tardis have one of those?

[tobingj]

It is a long time on from this post but curious if the recalls have been successful?

 

Also Injectors were mentioned- incorrectly but....related to this issue was an article

 

http://www.independent.ie/life/motoring/car-news/irish-volkswagen-boss-confirms-some-of-107000-vehicles-here-will-be-recalled-in-2016-as-he-apologises-for-emissions-scandal-34128463.html

 

7th paragraph states that some cars will have the injectors changed as well.

Mr Himmer said they were trying to come up with a solution for the diesel engines involved: 1.2, 1.6 and 2.0 litre diesels.

He said there was different software for each engine. “It is complicated,” he added, revealing that some engines will need a change of injectors as well as software.

 

I have had my first external service outside of warranty. 3 years or a 150,000 km... or whichever comes first.

 

I am driving a 2012 superb with a miserable 65,000 km on it and the mechanic has just warned me the injectors need to be changed out.  I am trying to deal with skoda Ireland to see what fall back I have on this. I am officially out of warranty but curious if anyone here as part of this campaign has had their injectors changed out.

 

Thanks.

 

tobingj-  aka Skodaman in local traffic radio broadcasts

[locomansimon]

Had my 2.0 ltr done, its CRAP, flat as a fart and 7 mpg down am now in dispute with skoda, awaiting full diagnostic check ( which they want me to pay for, I have refused to pay !) It has ruined what I thought was a brilliant car!

[lichfielddriver]

Had my 2.0 ltr done, its CRAP, flat as a fart and 7 mpg down am now in dispute with skoda, awaiting full diagnostic check ( which they want me to pay for, I have refused to pay !) It has ruined what I thought was a brilliant car!

 

 

 

[chimaera]

I hadn't come across this thread before and there are a few technical points that bugged me

 

The flow rectifier doesn't change the airflow from turbulent to laminar. In general, in flow situations we want the flow to be turbulent because it results in lower wall friction and better flow efficiency.

 

What the flow rectifier does do is to change the velocity profile. Now why does this matter?

 

The MAF sensor actually measures flow velocity, which the ECU then converts to a mass flow rate using a bunch of calculations and other data it collects (it's going to be some sort of correlation with atmospheric pressure based on an equation of state). Now, in a pipe, the flow velocity is not normally uniform across the diameter of the pipe due to friction at the wall. The velocity is higher in the centre than at the walls. The variation will change depending on mass flow rate, air temperature, pressure, etc.

 

The velocity profile can be measured experimentally under a range of flow conditions and some correlations added to the ECU code to allow the MAF calculation to be done, but it's another layer of error in the calculation. When the calculated data is being used to optimise engine performance, the more error that exists in it, the less optimised the engine performance will be.

 

So this brings us to the flow rectifier. What this device does is to even out the flow velocity across the pipe so that there's less/no variation in flow velocity. Now when the MAF sensor measures the flow velocity at the edge of the intake it can assume that the velocity is the same at all points in the pipe and the MAF calculation becomes more accurate and allows better optimisation of fueling.

[Breezy_Pete]

 

 

[snip] the MAF calculation becomes more accurate and allows better optimisation of fueling.

And probably higher EGR rates, no? Ref.

[lichfielddriver]

i just need bigger turbos then....

 

 

[TheRobinK]

i just need bigger turbos then....

 

 

 

Turbos or superchargers..? Either way, the 1.6 diesel fix is shaping up nicely. Looks like your underbody protection has fallen off though. Prolly be another recall for that.    :p

[lichfielddriver]

I hadn't come across this thread before and there are a few technical points that bugged me

 

The flow rectifier doesn't change the airflow from turbulent to laminar. In general, in flow situations we want the flow to be turbulent because it results in lower wall friction and better flow efficiency.

 

What the flow rectifier does do is to change the velocity profile. Now why does this matter?

 

The MAF sensor actually measures flow velocity, which the ECU then converts to a mass flow rate using a bunch of calculations and other data it collects (it's going to be some sort of correlation with atmospheric pressure based on an equation of state). Now, in a pipe, the flow velocity is not normally uniform across the diameter of the pipe due to friction at the wall. The velocity is higher in the centre than at the walls. The variation will change depending on mass flow rate, air temperature, pressure, etc.

 

The velocity profile can be measured experimentally under a range of flow conditions and some correlations added to the ECU code to allow the MAF calculation to be done, but it's another layer of error in the calculation. When the calculated data is being used to optimise engine performance, the more error that exists in it, the less optimised the engine performance will be.

 

So this brings us to the flow rectifier. What this device does is to even out the flow velocity across the pipe so that there's less/no variation in flow velocity. Now when the MAF sensor measures the flow velocity at the edge of the intake it can assume that the velocity is the same at all points in the pipe and the MAF calculation becomes more accurate and allows better optimisation of fueling.

 

 

Everything ive ever read about performance or tuning has been....bigger valves, gas flowed head, open up the chambers, polish the ports....not restrict the airflow..

 

more air in, more air burned, more power per ltr

 

this "thing" they wanna fit invokes memories of dad saying "put your hand over the carb, that'll stop it"

[terrytowelling]

A diesel hasn't got a throttle ,  it's always wide open , the engine speed is dependent on fuel, having said that  I wouldn't like to put my hand over the intake 

[Breezy_Pete]

The 'flow rectifier' isn't part of a plan to make the car go better, it's to make it less NOx-producing.

[chimaera]

Everything ive ever read about performance or tuning has been....bigger valves, gas flowed head, open up the chambers, polish the ports....not restrict the airflow..

 

more air in, more air burned, more power per ltr

 

this "thing" they wanna fit invokes memories of dad saying "put your hand over the carb, that'll stop it"

That's a terribly crude approach in this day and age.

 

The flow rectifier is not going to have a meaningful impact on flow volume, certainly not enough to reduce power. Since it's enabling a more accurate determination of MAF (which is used to determine fuel level), it may actually improve power. In situations where there's an error associated with a measurement like this, the engineers will tend to be conservative in their use of the data i.e. they'll go to the lower end of the error range and use that value which in this case would mean lower fuelling and lower power than is possible.

[lowedb]

I'm a bit intrigued to understand how they are modifying the spray pattern from the injectors, without, well, changing the injectors. Or was this just a bit of fluff from earlier.

[Nathanio]

I'm a bit intrigued to understand how they are modifying the spray pattern from the injectors, without, well, changing the injectors. Or was this just a bit of fluff from earlier.

 

Wasn't that for the 1.6litre engines?

[kevberlin]

Skoda are not recalling cars for the benefit of owners. The recall has been forced upon the VAG group.

I do not expect my car to be better if I agree to it being recalled.

At best, all I can hope for, is that my car has not been adversely affected.

[chimaera]

I'm a bit intrigued to understand how they are modifying the spray pattern from the injectors, without, well, changing the injectors. Or was this just a bit of fluff from earlier.

Easy enough really. The ECU can control injection duration, both pilot and main, as well as rail pressure. Quite a lot of scope for playing with the spray pattern there.

[lichfielddriver]

Easy enough really. The ECU can control injection duration, both pilot and main, as well as rail pressure. Quite a lot of scope for playing with the spray pattern there.

 

will that affect the actual pattern though?

 

[chimaera]

Go out and play with the spray nozzle on your garden hose and tell me what you think.

[TheRobinK]

Wasn't that for the 1.6litre engines?

 

No - the spray pattern change was for the 2.0 litres  which have a Bosch fuel system.

 

The 1.6 litres were originally mooted to *possibly* require a fuel injector change (perhaps to Bosch so that they could then fool with the spray pattern - the 1.6 came with a Continental system). That appears to have disappeared when the 1.6 solution was announced as being a flow rectifier.

[pretorian]

My little 1600 superb 2010 has done 315,000 miles and it's running like new nobody's getting near it,

Praetorian

[TheRobinK]

My little 1600 superb 2010 has done 315,000 miles and it's running like new nobody's getting near it,

Praetorian

 

Thats impressive. Over half a million kilometres....

 

I wouldn't mess with your car either. You just know that if there was the slightest issue after update, the buggers would claim it was mileage related and nothing to do with them.

 

Your car had definitely earned the right to be left alone. 

[E3RJE]

Just wonder any more updates after re-call's? found this on honest John sounds similar to the one on this thread.

12-7-2016: Report that VAG NOx software fix to 2014 Tiguan 2.0TDI 140 DSG has resulted in a significant clatter under load at speeds up to 40mph and engine speeds up to 1,600rpm. Suggests that the software fix reduces fuelling and therefore torque at low rpm.

11-8-2016: Another report of a Tiguan TDI, this time a 2012, developing "a horrible rattle in engine when changing up between 2 and 4." VW told owner she needs to pay for a diagnostic test and if it shows that it is due to the fix then they will refund. She had the fix done by a mobile unit from VW direct. She asked the nearest VW dealer how much this diagnostic test would cost and they quoted £100 but also said they had seen several Tiguans with this problem following the fix and that there was updated software that could be applied and if she'd had the emissions fix with them they would suggest doing this first before a diagnostic test. She needs to get onto the original supplying VW dealer and tell him to sort it out FoC or she will sue.

14-8-2016: Third report of knocking from the engine of a Volkswagen Toguan 2.0TDI after the VAG EA189 emissions software fix, this time on a 2013 Tiguan. It recently went to the VW dealer to have the software update supposed to address the emissions problem. Prior to the update the car was running perfectly well, but after the change it started to rattle very noticeably under light to moderate acceleration along with increased fuel consumption. Subsequently the dealer took it back for investigation (apparently involving info from the VW factory) which took a week (owner was provided with a loan car). This resulted in a further software modification. Owner got car back a week ago. Since then it has started to exhibit the same rattling and fuel consumption symptoms. Having given it what he thinks is a reasonable amount of time and mileage, owner will report the present problem on Monday 15th and see what the dealer proposes to do.

17-8-2016: Fourth report of emissions modification to a a 31k mile 2012 VW Tiguan 2.0TDI failing and leaving the owner with a noisy, unresponsive machine completely at odds with the driving experienced prior to modification. The car was returned to the dealer who, in concert with Volkswagen, retained the car for almost 6 weeks. It was returned last week and, if anything, is worse, possibly dangerous with unreliable throttle response. The dealer visited the owner's home on 16th August, acknowledged the issues but has done nothing. He cannot fix the car to a satisfactory standard and will not buy it back. Owner had the car from new and it is modified for disabled use.

This owner states: "We are at a loss. Full independent assessment and anticipated legal costs seem to preclude court action even if you can find a Lawyer prepared to take on VW. None of the Magazines or Newspapers will respond. I have many letters to the parties without acknowledgement or response. I will happily provide all the effort and paperwork if someone would shine a light on these cheating so and so's Do You have an Answer? Could You publish a full article there are many in trouble with this engine?"

[chimaera]

Most people only post on the internet to complain about stuff. At this point there must be hundreds of thousands of vehicles processed across the EU and we're seeing a handful of complaints.