I have an Audi A6 with the 1.8T 20V engine and from reading a previous thread on a similar subject, HJ recommends simmering the turbo to avoid damaging the turbo bearings.
Can anybody offer any advice on what driving conditions this would apply to, i.e. I presume I would need to do this after, say, a long motorway journey, or if the car has been driven quite hard? In these cases what would be the recommended 'simmering' period?
Thanks in advance!
Neil
|
I'd be interested to hear any opinions on this. As the car is a light pressure turbo the turbo shouldn't run as hot as the 180 or 225 bhp versions of this engine. I checked the manual for mine and there were no recomendations to simmer.
My 1.8t did 40000 miles as a company car before I bought it and I doubt that any company car driver would take such precautions. The engine seems none the worse for it. I guess the engine gets to simmer for about 30 seconds or so when I get out to open the garage but thats about it.
|
About a minute or so will cool the turbo, allowing fresh oil to be available on startup. The turbo in the 150 bhp engine is the KKK03 turbo, the 225bhp version uses a larger KKK04 turbo.
The benefits will be reaped at 100K miles or so.
Andrew
|
|
|
|
Yeah, my old man's had two LPTs. Neither get simmered and both ran to over 100k in 2 years before they went back.
|
|
|
|
I don't know how closely it applies to a petrol turbo but probaby similar - It always advises in modern day tractor user manuals that if you have been working the engine very hard or at high speed (over 1000 rpm and given top engine speed 2500rpm this prob translates to about 3000rpm in a car) then you should allow the engine to idle for 30 seconds prior to turning off.
I bet car turbos are subject to nothing like that kind of load, especially LPT ones, and car manufacturers must know few people will even read the manual to know they have to idle the car for a short period so I bet this kind of "use" is built into them. Still, 30 seconds after a run is hardly going to cause any issues to yourself and it'll only do the turbo good so I'd keep doing exactly what you are doing - If it puts another 10k miles on the life of the Turbo you've had your money's worth out the petrol!
|
|
When I said exactly what you are doing, I meant do exactly what Andrew Smith does - ie let the engine idle for 30 secs prior to turning off! Where is that s0dding edit button...
|
|
|
|
I am currently running an A6 1:8t with 108k miles on it. I cannot vouch for the first 90k miles that were put on in the cars frist two years where I presume the driver didn't "simmer " the turbo after it's journeys, and In the last eighteen months I hav'nt "simmered " either, but I can say that the engine is as quiet and smooth as a new unit, still performs well returning over 34mpg, without burning oil.
I put this down two two major contributary factors. The fact that it's oil has been changed as per the service schedule (ever 10k using semi synthetic) and its has been used as its was designed to. On journeys where the engine has been able to run at it's correct operating temp, where it has been used through a varied rev range. No stop start school run type journeys.
Have been very impressed with the vehicle.
|
10k miles is too long an interval on semi-synthetic oil. By this time the viscosity improvers will have degraded significantly, causing the oil to thicken up. The ripped up polymers which will make up about 20% of a 10W-40 mineral base oil will not lubricate your engine well at all. If you want to leave your oil in for ages, best to use Redline oil, probably the 10W-30 and change the filter every 5k. This has better laod bearing capabilities than a 10W-40 mineral base oil. You might be able to go 15k between oil changes on this stuff.
I dont like this engine. 150bhp with a turbo isnt great. I know of engine tuners who think the 20v head is just a marketing excersise. I would have to agree. It doesnt even flow as well as the old 16v KR head with its poor exhaust valve design. A friend of mine gets 210bhp using just 7psi of boost, and an aquamist kit on his 1800 turbo 16v. No real lag an the turbo comes in at 3k. Why didnt VW do this? Im not sure. Anyone have any ideas?
Ben
|
Whoa there. This is not a performance engine. It's a light pressure turbo, thats why there is only a 25bhp hike over the standard 20v 1.8. The key to the engine is that boost is available from 2000rpm making this a pretty drivable engine. In the audi incarnation its also a smooth and quiet with none of the turbo whistle that I've heard Golf drivers talk about. If you want a performance engine then VAG do a two versions of this engine in a much higher state of tune which should be better.
I doo agree with you about the 20v thing though. I think that engines became a lot less tractable when multivalve engines were introduced. Part of the reason that I went for the LPT engine in the first place.
|
Yeah true. I only mentioned it to illustrate how much useable power can be achieved using little boost pressure.
The main criticism with the 20v engine is that its design does not allow radical enough cam profiles to be used to achieve any decent performance.
Ben
|
|
|
I heard there are various performance upgrades availabe for this Audi engine. Do you have any knowledge/experience of the stage 1 ECU chip upgrade?
Thanks,
Neil
|
No.
Chips increase boost pressure. This can probably be achieved by using a bleed valve for less cash. No one has let me play with their 1.8T. Be careful increasing the pressure though, get a competant tuner to do it. I have only increased boost pressures by about 10% over standard on cars i have had fettled. You may wish to look at other ways of increasing power as well. For example, a better intercooler like the one VW used on the 225 bhp models, or an Aquamist kit could improve power "more safely" than just adding boost. Using these "stage 1" chips etc will inevitably shorten the life of your turbo. Additionally, turbos are more efficient at certian engine speeds, so increasing the overall boost pressure will not neccesarily increase power smoothly throughout the rev range. This can produce a real hump in the torque curve and unpleasant power delivery. Thats one reason im not that great a fan of turbo cars- and im certainly not an expert on them.
Ben
|
|
|
|
|
Ben,
You commented.......A friend of mine gets 210bhp using just 7psi of boost, and an aquamist kit on his 1800 turbo 16v. No real lag an the turbo comes in at 3k. Why didnt VW do this? I'm not sure. Anyone have any ideas?......
The reason 150bhp or a LPT is sufficient as follows:
Had to do a rare nippy (but careful and safe) run for me yesterday to collect some parts, cross-country on A & bumpy B roads. Because I chose to "push the envelope" no-one came close or stayed with me over 80 miles. Only 90bhp TD!
Once you get much over 130bhp the roads and traffic conditions will cap progress anyway.
David
|
Hmm. Its still great for over-taking though. A month or so ago he borrowed a P reg M3 Evo. In gear accelration in his mk.2 golf was noticeably better than the M3, though of course it could not match the BMW off the lights, or top speed. But the Golf delivers exactly what he wants, good mid-range power and not bad top-end. Its a really driveable car, and offers excellent fuel economy considering the performance- much better than the M3.
Ben
|
Yeah you're right Ben, can't put a price on the sheer fun quota of petrol coursing through fuel lines.
Just being an old grouch.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't bugger about with it and accept it for what it is. This is a great LPT engine and will do zillions of miles if looked after.
|
|
|
