Rather than take advice from armchair experts take some advice from someone who actually knows what an engine looks like and has got genuine experience and knowledge.
On the 1.8T's we occassionally see a motor where the cam has picked up and the turbo has sideways movement on the spindle. These are invariably cars that are on LL servicing. Problem is that the small bore feed pipe to the turbo blocks up with crap from worn out oil and the turbo is starved of lube. This also happens on the diesel engines. LL servicing is salesmanship for fleets.
Some cars NEED much shorter servicing. Good example is the Ford 1.6TDCI. We have done at least a dozen of these where the turbo has failed. problem is again dirt in the oil. These engines get very dirty internally and the turbo feed pipe gets blocked, worse still it has a small gauze filter in it which blocks solid and bang goes the turbo. Some dealers just replace the turbo and new one fails soon after, on these you MUST replace the pipe and banjo connection with filter then change oil after 1000 miles. On a 1.6 TDCI HALVE the recommended oil change interval.
Frankly there is an awful lot of bad advice and nonsense given out on this forum. the old saying that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing comes to mind.
|
I'm no expert - just been driving for 40 + years - but may I ask Workshop Tech's advice (or any other engineer on here)?
My impression is that every car should have its oil changed at intervals no longer than 1 year or 10,000 miles, whichever comes first.
Is that right? An oil change every 10,000 / 1 year, a major service every 20,000 / 2 years, seems so simple, and if it makes major failure later on less likely, cheaper in the long run.
|
A single service in 3 years is very appealing to a fleet manager / buyer and all the problems surface after the cars have long gone on to pastures new
|
A single service in 3 years is very appealing to a fleet manager / buyer >> and all the problems surface after the cars have long gone on to pastures new >>
Ah, once again this oft quoted myth is propagated. Theory is complete bunkum and without any foundation.
But then people believe that UK's fleet managers/buyers have such power over the world's major manufacturing companies that they can get them to risk the manufacturer's reputation in order to save the UK fleet manager a few hundred pounds in servicing costs!
As for harm done to engines, the only evidence you get anecdotes from mechanics who say "I once saw an engine which .... ".
and all the problems surface after the cars have long gone on to pastures new >>
Where are all these problems surfacing?
Where is all the real data from the real Engineers?
|
|
|
|
My impression is that every car should have its oil changed at intervals no longer than 1 year or 10 000 miles whichever comes first.
I stick to the manufacturer's schedule, because I assume they know best. For my Focus it's 12,500 miles or 1 year, whichever occurs first.
|
Have driven a 1.8T passat ( a few years ago) on long life and it rarely made it past 15k, it did 96k in 4 years mostly motorway and was not puched very often.
Current Octavia (1.9TD) is coming up to 50k and seems to want servicing every 18-19k, going like clockwork so far.
Would I buy either car at the end of the lease - no. Both lease cars and hence I have no choice on service regime.
The Honda that filled the gap between was serviced on 12500 mile intervals - any coincidence that Honda's are seen as reliable and long lived?
|
My friend who is a VW technician of over 20 years experience told me not to buy a longlife serviced car. That's good enough for me.
Dox's post sums up very neatly my views on why such things exist.
Edited by DP on 20/01/2010 at 09:03
|
And jbif's counter to that seems pretty logical to me as well!
Why would manufacturers risk their reputation?
Question for WT from his earlier comment, what percentage of cars on LL servicing are going wrong, then, to back your claims? And can it definitely be atributed to the LL servicing?
Edited by b308 on 20/01/2010 at 09:35
|
All a manufacturer cares about, and all that affects their reputation is what happens in the 3yr warranty period. At the end of the warranty period, the fleets renew cars almost without exception, and most private buyers who are affluent enough to drive a new car will renew too, as they want to retain warranty cover, and don't want to be going down the route of MOTs. If the car's been good to them in that time, they are likely to buy another.
What happens to a car after three years and its first owner is no concern of a car manufacturer, and doesn't harm its reputation with the people who can afford to buy new cars. There is no business reason at all why they should give two hoots about what happens to their cars a year or two out of warranty, except maybe to sell replacement parts for it.
|
All a manufacturer ... At the end of the warranty period, the fleets renew cars ... >>
There is a World out there and there is a market for cars outside of the UK. little Englander fleet managers absolutely do not have any influence on manufacturer's servicing schedules.
What happens to a car after three years and its first owner is no concern of a car manufacturer ... >>
I think any point of rationally debating this topic went out of the window when you made that statement. I am out of this thread.
|
We could have a rational debate, or you could just strop off.
Ignoring the temporary effect of the scrappage scheme which has boosted private sales significantly, the fleet / business market historically accounts for some 60-65% of new registrations in the UK. In Germany, it's less than that, but in a bigger market, so still worth 1.5 million registrations a year, (and VAG have a 47.5% share of this market).
Besides which, low service costs in the first 3 years are of benefit to private and fleet buyers alike.
A car manufacturer is a business. It worries about margins and units. Its not run by engineers, but by accountants. If they can sell more cars through a TCO reduction, without adversely affecting the experience of its core customer base, it's a no brainer. Why does a manufacturer care what happens to its cars after 3-4-5 years? The only experience that counts, and the only people to whom a reputation matters is the customer base. And that is the people or companies who renew their cars every three years. How does a turbo going pop at 90-100,000 miles when a car is on its second or third owner impact the number of sales of a new car? It simply doesn't.
You might not agree with my argument, but I am struggling to see how I am being irrational.
|
|
And jbif's counter to that seems pretty logical to me as well! >>
And for those who are fond of "engines going wrong" anecdotes, there are plenty in the opposite category quoted on this forum from time to time.
recent ones include:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=81384&...e
" ... on the other hand, might change the oil once a year despite that representing 40k or more miles, .... had not failed on any count when he sold it with 228k on it. ... "
and other quotes from that thread:
" ... owned from new, it has almost 60K on the clock and in all that time it has NEVER been serviced, just had the oil topped up .... I can't comprehend how it still runs but it seems to keep chugging along. "
and the reply to it by yorkiebar (who I think runs a garage):
"That syndrome is far more widespread than you may think or believe ! "
another one from that thread:
" .... As for cars that have never been serviced - this is common. Some main dealers ,from what I've heard, don't actually do anything when you take it in to be serviced. There are 10, 15 year old cars that have never had new spark plugs. ... "
and finally from that same thread:
" ... Any car that will not do 30,000 miles without a service is not fit for purpose in that it's too fragile for modern motorists... "
So there you go. Concrete anecdotal evidence beyond any reasonable doubt that cars nowadays can go many thousands of miles beyond their scheduled service without any harm.
|
|
|
|
|
The two VW's (both 1.8Ts) I had as company cars were set to normal service intervals. Longlife service intervals were disabled at the request of the lease company.
|
Longlife service intervals were disabled at the request of the lease company. >>
rtj70 - Fantastic. Thanks for that real-life fact. Demolishes the myth that it is lease companies who want longlife servicing.
|
>> Longlife service intervals were disabled at the request of the lease company. >> rtj70 - Fantastic. Thanks for that real-life fact. Demolishes the myth that it is lease companies who want longlife servicing.
My leasing company didnt, and cars on long life servicing were CHEAPER on lease rates.
What will you do with that Jbif?
|
|
|
|
Not VAG but there's great upset from Mercedes owners since they moved from variable servicing, which would see low mileage cars go to 2 years, to fixed annual servicing.
MB said it was to avoid uncertainty over service intervals for fleets as they never knew when the call for service would pop up, but for private owners the cars now have to be service twice as often.
|
|
|
>>Why would manufacturers risk their reputation?
Call me a cynic, but I presume manufacturers want their cars to have zero faults before 3 years / 60,000 miles (hence no warranty claims or incovenient extra days off the road for their customers). By that point fleet customers (who buy most of the cars) will have disposed of them and come back for more. Happy manufacturer and happy major customer, neither of whom care much what happens after that. The other factors are servicing costs and residual value, but VAG seems to have got both of those right for the fleet buyer too.
|
On that basis - "zero faults before 3 years" - surely the safest plan for the manufacturer would be for 10k servicing, not LL?!
I've no axe to grind, but it seems to me that we are seeing the same as we did when we moved from 3k servicing, then to 6k, then to 10/12k/annual... the Prophets of Doom appear and say all is not well and your car will fall appart unless you change the oil/engine at regular intervals... thing is they didn't when it happenned before and there is no concrete proof that I've seen that proves LL does harm your car now... technology moves on and so should we.
Blimey, a car that did 150/200k without any problems would have been main a feature in motoring mags 30 years ago... now they are so commonplace it wouldn't even make the back page...
Edited by b308 on 20/01/2010 at 10:41
|
>>there is no concrete proof that I've seen that proves LL does harm your car now...
What do you make of MB apparently back-tracking on LL servicing?
|
|
>>Longlife service intervals were disabled at the request of the lease company.
That's interesting, because the lease company will have a financial reason for opting to spend more on servicing than VAG recommends. Do you know what that reason was? Was your company's policy to keep cars longer than the warranty period?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Honda did dabble with variable service intervals on the very first new model Jazz's but switched back to fixed 12,500 mile intervals after about 3 months.
My two Hondas ran perfectly for over 150,000 miles on this regime and consumed not a drop of oil between them.
My 2.0 CRD Skoda is set to long life but I've asked the dealer to set to fixed when it's next in (they'll probably want three days to do it :-) ) and I plan to have the oil changed every 6 months (about 8,000 miles). But this one does burn / use a lot of oil anyway so the oil is probably 'fresher' than the Hondas were - if you see what I mean.
|
|
|
|
|
|
>>from someone who actually knows what an engine looks like and has got genuine experience and knowledge.
You're making the mistake that most people from the trade make when posting in this forum in over valuing your experience.
Yes, you've seen some engines that have failed. But, you can't have wide enough visibility of the vehicle population to know if that is or isn't significant. You can't place these failures in any context of cars which didn't fail - because you haven't seen the cars which didn't fail.
>>Frankly there is an awful lot of bad advice and nonsense given out on this forum.
I don't agree.
If it is such bad advice, why don't we see many or long threads bemoaning the choice of long life servicing, asking where cheap turbos may be had, asking for running in advice after engine rebuilds, etc, etc.
|
Yes you've seen some engines that have failed. But you can't have wide enough visibility of the vehicle population to know if that is or isn't significant. You can't place these failures in any context of cars which didn't fail - because you haven't seen the cars which didn't fail.
That's a fair point, the majority of cars on LL are going to be fine I am not stating otherwise. But the point is that nearly all the turbo spindle and cam failures we see on on cars that have had extended service intervals. And it something that is easy to keep on top of with more regular oil changes.
If it is such bad advice why don't we see many or long threads bemoaning the choice of long life servicing asking where cheap turbos may be had asking for running in advice after engine rebuilds etc etc.
There is a big demand for rebuilt turbos. Call up one the big turbo rebuilders and speak to them. 99.99999% of the motoring population have never seen this site. We probably do an average of one turbo replacement a week and we serve a small town, Most of our customers travel no more than 15 miles to reach us. Proportionately that is a lot of failures dont you think?
bear in mind we dont work in isolation. We get to hear what is happening. We get recoveries brought in and know the local AA and RAC patrol blokes and we get to hear what is breaking down and why.
Finally I would say that 95% of techs think LL is a bad idea. They are happy about it in another way though, because they get plenty of costly work doing turbos and PD cams!
|
But the point is that nearly all the turbo spindle and cam failures we see on on cars that have had extended service intervals. And it something that is easy to keep on top of with more regular oil changes.
OK, but, how does that help someone who wants to decide whether or not to buy a car which has been on longlife servicing. Yes, in general, more servicing means fewer failures, but, where do you draw the line?
Finally I would say that 95% of techs think LL is a bad idea.
Yes, most techs earn more bonus doing servicing, and most garages make more profit from servicing than more risky jobs like engine overhauls.
|
Yes most techs earn more bonus doing servicing and most garages make more profit from servicing than more risky jobs like engine overhauls.
Its other way around in the independent sector. Servicing is cut throat (VW now price matches us). Major engine work is far more profitable and not risky if done properly. Not everybody operates a bonus system, we dont. Turbo replacement is very profitable because its usually a distress repair and the customer is less price sensitive. We can normally diagnose quiuckly and do the job quickly and profitably because we are practised at it, we also have a good relationship with a turbo rebuilder and get good prices and service. I did metion them once but it got deleted as an 'advertisement' which it wasnt!
|
>>not risky if done properly
That's a big "if".
I'm rather surprised you're trying to tell me that servicing isn't a good source of low risk profit - especially when you consider all the similarly low risk and high profit friction parts which tend to follow on.
|
>>not risky if done properly That's a big "if". I'm rather surprised you're trying to tell me that servicing isn't a good source of low risk profit - especially when you consider all the similarly low risk and high profit friction parts which tend to follow on.
No its not a big if. The only time we have come unstuck is trying to get away with cheap recon parts because the customer was very strapped for cash.
Friction parts are a good markup. But if you ask me would I rather have a man spending an hour doing a service or doing a turbo swap job, then its easily the latter.
|
|
|
|
>> >> Yes most techs earn more bonus doing servicing and most garages make more profit from >> servicing than more risky jobs like engine overhauls. >> Its other way around in the independent sector. Servicing is cut throat (VW now price matches us). Major engine work is far more profitable and not risky if done properly. Not everybody operates a bonus system, we dont. Turbo replacement is very profitable because its usually a distress repair and the customer is less price sensitive. We can normally diagnose quiuckly and do the job quickly and profitably because we are practised at it, we also have a good relationship with a turbo rebuilder and get good prices and service. I did metion them once but it got deleted as an 'advertisement' which it wasnt!
Perhaps some one could explain to me please, if WorkshopTec was unable to mention a particular firm as it was deemed to be advertising then how is it that a certain lady on this forum is given carte blanche to advertise herself and her company for services available in the legal field. Whilst I am the first to concede that there are many very knowledgeable people who contibute to this forum, especially our very own "boys in blue" they are of course not touting for business. Could it perhaps be a case of *something rotten in the state of Denmark* !
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe the LL users, rather than private owners, treat them like white goods. Oil topped up only when alarm bells ring, or service is due?
|
Plenty of info on oil here:
www.opieoils.co.uk/technicalinfo.aspx
I change my engine oil more regularly than specified but then my engines are modified and driven hard. Doesn't do them any harm anyway!
|
|
|
A by product of LL is that faults which could have otherwise fixed (via quicker service) go on undetected for longer period. That can also lead to higher failures for LL engines.
The reason for oil change is that oil molecules lose their lubricating structure over the time. But R&D on oil technology improved oil so that they hold their lubricating property for a much longer period. That's why we saw rise of LL servicing schedules.
|
A by product of LL is that faults which could have otherwise fixed (via quicker service) go on undetected for longer period. That can also lead to higher failures for LL engines. The reason for oil change is that oil molecules lose their lubricating structure over the time. But R&D on oil technology improved oil so that they hold their lubricating property for a much longer period. That's why we saw rise of LL servicing schedules.
Thats partly my point in my earlier post, ie if people check their oil regularly and only ever top up with the exact spec of oil required, I dont belive there should ever be a problem.
Where VAG have gone wrong is they have assumed everyone has a precise engineering orientated Germanic brain, and the sad fact is that so many people are idiots (to use the words of Dr House MD) !
|
|
|
|
|
OK, but, how does that help someone who wants to decide whether or not to buy a car which has been on longlife servicing. Yes, in general, more servicing means fewer failures, but, where do you draw the line?
I think this answers its own question. You buy the car (all other things being equal) that has had more services per distance/time - fairly obvious I would have thought.
Yes, most techs earn more bonus doing servicing, and most garages make more profit from servicing than more risky jobs like engine overhauls.
Fact or just supposition? Even it were true generally of all garages, they would need to employ less mechanics to service their customer constituency and/or be able to sell & maintain more cars with a smaller fixed cost base - again, fairly obvious - so not convinced it's some kind of garage cartel conspiracy at work.
Not sure servicing is all low risk either - just look at the number of queries on here about servicing problems & litigation etc.
All in all, I'm more persuaded by those with actual experience - HJ & WT in this case - that LL servicing is based on not wholly 'scientific' grounds & can often compromise whole life vehicle costs, especially down the line.
|
(all other things being equal)
Yes, but how much is it worth? You wouldn't suddenly value a long lifed service car at zero - where do you draw the line? Not obvious.
Fact or just supposition?
How much have you and your family spent on servicing compared with fixing major faults over the last few years (or would have spent had you not done DIY).
For a garage, servicing is really money for old rope. There's no real skill involved, and there's no need to employ the more highly trained and expensive technicians to do it.
not convinced it's some kind of garage cartel conspiracy at work.
I don't think I said or implied that there was.
Not sure servicing is all low risk either - just look at the number of queries on here about servicing problems & litigation etc.
Yes, that's because servicing forms the bulk of garage's work, and will therefore attract a proportion of complaints.
in this case - that LL servicing is based on not wholly 'scientific' grounds & can often compromise whole life vehicle costs especially down the line.
All servicing regimes, and indeed most engineering decisions are based upon some form of compromise or assumption of usage; there's no simple black and white answer other than the bland and simple truth that servicing your car more often is likely to reduce the chance of serious failure. Again, however, where do you draw the line?
|
To be honest, a key attraction of the LL servicing on my Merc was that it would only need to go into the garage half the number of times that a car on annual servicing would.
I find going to garages an extremely stressful process. Some sweeping generalisations follow (!) but they never fix the things I want fixing, they always leave stuff off, pipes not reconnected, oil filter loose etc, they damage the car AND I get ripped off in the process.
I think most manufactures build good cars these days. They're let down by poor franchised dealerships. In my ideal world cars would be sealed for life and never need to go to a garage. In the absence of that, LL servicing is the next best thing.
|
|
|
Just to remind ourselves, this is HJ's advice on oil changes from the FAQ page:
After the first year or 10,000 miles, whichever comes first, I recommend using either a good semi-synthetic oil such as Texaco Havoline 5w/30 (Ford dealer 'bulk' oil), or a fully-synthetic such as Mobil 1, and changing it every 5,000 miles or every six months, whichever comes first.
If you are a higher-mileage driver doing 15,000 miles a year or more, consider stretching your oil changes to 6,000 miles. If you do 25,000 miles or more and use fully-synthetic oil, consider stretching to 7,500 miles but no further.
Do BR's generally agree, or think this is overcautious or out-of-date?
|
If you are a higher-mileage driver doing 15 000 miles a year or more consider stretching your oil changes to 6 000 miles. If you do 25 000 miles or more and use fully-synthetic oil consider stretching to 7 500 miles but no further.
I think that's over-cautious.
My Volvo S60 2.0T petrol has done 153,000 miles on Volvo's recommended 12,000 mile service / oil change regime. I haven't stripped the engine down, but it pulls smoothly, idles quietly, uses about half a litre of oil between changes, and comfortably passes the MOT emissions each year. The spark plugs come out a nice tan colour after their 36k duty cycle, and it starts instantly hot or cold. From that little lot, I can reasonably safely assume it's still in good shape internally. Aside from the alternator and clutch, and of course service parts, all the mechanical components, including the turbocharger, are original.
Looking back through the service history, it seems it's had all manner of oil used, from fully synthetic Mobil1 to semi synthetic Fuchs, but always with a genuine Volvo filter element (FVSH before I bought it, and I've used genuine filters since).
Based on this car, and assuming that 150+k on original mechanicals and turbo without incident is considered a more than acceptable innings, I can say 12,000 mile intervals are fine for a long life, based on the usage this car has had. It did 80,000 miles in its first three years, so the odds are it spent a lot of time with the engine hot, and the friend I bought it off used it primarily for a 40 mile a day commute. In other words, it's never really seen "round town", short journey use, which I suspect has contributed to its long term wellbeing.
Given a different engine design and different usage pattern however, who knows whether 12k intervals are sufficient. From my own point of view, 12k is approximately the maximum manufacturer interval I would stick to before adding intermediate oil changes to the schedule. Our old Scenic dCi had 18k intervals, to which I added a 9k intermediate change. This was based on the long intervals being implicated by some in the premature turbo failures these engines used to suffer from. Interestingly, Renault themselves brought the intervals down to 12k on the later engines, which was further evidence.
I guess it comes down to the type of engine, the quality of the oil used, and probably most importantly, how the car is driven and what type of journeys it does.
Edited by DP on 20/01/2010 at 14:44
|
|
|
I dont agree at all really, it is way over cautious.
I'd say 10K miles for a good semi-synth oil and at least 15K miles for a fully synth. If you change more often than 15K miles on fully synth oil you are burning your money.
Thaose that dont believe me should have a look t the blurb on the following URL from Opie oils :-
www.opieoils.co.uk/pdfs/DO-SYNTHETICS-REQUIRE-A-30...f
|
|
Bear in mind what you're talking about when you mention fully-synthetic. Proper fully-sythetics are ester based and I believe thats what Opie refer to when they talk about fully-synthetics
|
Relevent or not?
But when the head was lifted offen the ould BX diesel at 168,000
the bores were like new, no ridge, & the hone marks still perefectly visible.
The mechanic seen fit to remark on it.
Run on Tractor oil changed every 5,000, with a Knect? filter, at each change
I currently run on Semi Synthetic changed every 10,000 with a filter as well
Should be good for another 100,000 ie take her to 300,000. (TDI Galaxy)
PS
the tractor oil was Case No 1, and actually a good oil for that generation of turbo diesels.
cheers
M
|
I would like to know from people who are for long life servicing how many miles they run their cars for before they sell them on, and why they are vehemently opposed to an interim oil change as it is so cheap and easy to do.
I think there are 2 types of people here
1. Those who run their cars for a few years at relatively low mileage and sell them on, thus avoiding the long term problems that long life servicing can cause.
2. The mega mileage people who regularly change their oil in order to make their car last 150,000+ miles.
I doubt whether many people opposed to regular oil changes are 'mega mileage' people, therefore they will not get to the point when their cars will have signs of wear.
And do these people spend any of their time in workshops actually being witness to the problems that mechanics see from day to day. Again, I doubt it.
I know Humph's mates Mondeo TDCi did 200,000+ miles with negligible servicing, but what was the reason for selling? Who is using that car now, and what is it like?
|
|
I use a simple rule for oil changes. Our cars are garage serviced at the manf's recommended interval and I change the oil myself half-way between routine services. This means every 6K on the Fords, which use the cheapest 5W30 that complies with Ford's spec. Our VAG TDI, which is on the standard LL service schedule, uses synthetic, DPF-friendly, 507 spec liquid gold 5W30, and is getting an interim oil change at about 9-10K miles. And yes, I wash the cars most weekends as well.
|
It is not possible to compare wear rates on cars built before the mid 1970s and now. Then many machining operations had a degree of error built in so tolerances were variable.
Today computer control, laser measurement and CAD mean that designs are better and manufacturing tolerances far closer than 30 years ago.
Ditto for oil design..
But if you do stop start motoring , town driving or harsh conditions (dirt in air), then 20k service times are too long - for air filters for example..
If you look at a simple pollen filter after 10k miles in dusty conditions, it does not work...
Horses for courses. As I am a master of short journeys and stop start motoring annual oil and filter changes irrespective of mileage are de rigeur. Works for me.
But to suggest UK fleet buyers have no impact on servicing schedules is risible..
|
I bought a Vectra CDTI with 70k miles up its one fleet owner had serviced it twice with the 30k intervals recommended at the time using LL oil (so the service book said!). I changed the oil immediately and using semi synthetic every 10k up to 120k in total. At 116k it started to develop a smoking habit of the blue oil variety.
30k interval for an engine oil in a diesel! What the hell was i thinking of. You live and learn eh? Off to wash the car in the dark.........
|
Jbif: ''Concrete anecdotal evidence''
Are you sure??!!
|
I've not been through the whole thread, but posters keep talking about engine oils. So what if the engine oil can stand 30,000 or 300,000 miles. When I book my car in for a service, I want them to service the WHOLE car, not just the engine.
I want them to look at the brakes, check the clutch, grease the hinges, check the tyres, have a poke and a prod about with a fresh set of eyes, not just change the engine oil, I can do that
|
|
What you want or believe them to do and what they do are 2 different things. An interim service is simply an oil and filter change in most cases
|
so
why does Seat, only offer 10k mile services with the Altea 1.9PD
and Volkswagen ship golfs and tourans with Variable servicing on the 1.9PD..
same engine.
|
What you want or believe them to do and what they do are 2 different things. An interim service is simply an oil and filter change in most cases
My Indy man serviced my car last Tuesday. A short service, oil change etc. He checked the whole car over, changed the brake and clutch fluid, cleaned the brakes, checked and cleaned the plugs and a more expert eye than mine over the car. My 12 year old car drives like a new one again. Money well spent.
|
I agree with workshop tech 100% & think that number cruncher is taking an unbalanced view!
I too worked in the trade for over 30 years & am still in the trade & ran a fair size independent garage with 7 workshop bays & MOT bay & were extremely busy & would see a through put of 150 + cars per week. We were also no more than a few hundred yards from a large VAG dealership. I certainly wouldn't recommend longlife servicing unless its a high mileage rep. I saw many engine failures including those that had the incorrect oil used. When Rover stretched their oil changes to 12k for the 820's they had so many problems that Rover had to rediuce the service schedule.
Turbo failure risk is also enhanced by using certain fuels which create higher than average aromatic hydrocarbons increasing carbon in the oil. i am not going to discuss fuel any more as there are so many on here that claim all fuel is the same! well if they had ever worked in a fuel research lab they would know different! Yes fuel may all reach a certain spec but thats different. Recently someone posted an thread about a friend who had sadly passed away but he also had worked in a fuel lab & also confirmed what I had learned if only others would listen!
I would rather face a customer any day charging for two services a year rather than give them the bad news a turbo or engine had failed. Customers choice really.
The one thing about WT is he's a hands on no holes barred & you get it straight just like me! whether you listen is your choice but I agree the armchair critics are frustrating!
Roll on WT
|
I speak only as someone who has bought ex-lease PD diesel Golfs twice. The first was a 2002 51 130bhp with 83k on. Ran to 125k with the only problem being a new hose and a new sump (following a trip over a roundabout...). The second, a 2004 53 150bhp ran from 117k to 151k with no problems also, serviced every 18k or so.
Not sure about the company Vectra, its falling to pieces already, not helped by damage to drivers wheelarch and front bumper (car park) and a scrape down the passenger door.. But mechanically it doesn't sound brilliant.
I'm thinking of going back to a 4x4 with its 9k service intervals...
|
I hope I am not tempting fate here but my 2002 A4 PD 130 has now done 169,000 and a bit miles. All of those are on long life servicing. The car has been in the family since new so know its full history.
On average it has requested a service every 20-22K. The last service was 145,000 and the 'service' warning came up a couple of weeks ago so this time is nearly 25,000.
It usually needs a quick top up every 10-12K and this has been consistent since new. MPG has dropped to an average of 44mpg in the recent cold weather because it probably wants a new air filter and some fresh oil.
Similarly, my Dads 2006 A4 PD 170 has done almost 100K on longlife and has had no issues at all other than a handful of clutch judders when the weather is damp!!!
|
Hey this one has run and run !
I have to say that I have sympathy for Numbercrunchers view, 1.8T VAG units and 1.6d Ford/Peugeot units (also mentioned above) are both numerically common so it is likely that a fair number of problems will occur while still being a low %.
To put it another way if WT attended to ten 1.8T TTs and one 3.2 V6 TT that would not mean the 3.2 V6 is intrisically more reliable because 1.8Ts probably out number 3.2 V6s 10:1.
|
>>No further comment.
There's no need to take a huff HJ! - all I'm suggesting is that the figures are put into some form of proper context.
As an example, how many VAG cars are on longlife compared with those not on longlife?
If, say, 90% of VAG cars are on longlife, it's no great surprise that most failures seen are longlife cars.
I also agree with Cheddar's point about the simple weight of numbers of these cars.
I take issue with the criticism about balance - I'm trying to present a more balanced point of view, or at least point out that the figures and data presented so far don't provide enough information for the conclusions requested by Cheddar to be reliably drawn.
A practical question - two similar cars, one longlife, one normally serviced - how much less is the longlife car worth?
|
A practical question - two similar cars one longlife one normally serviced - how much less is the longlife car worth?
If the cars were otherwise identical the LL car is surely worth less, say at 6 years old and 70k a car having had 7 annual / 10k ish main dealer services would be worth more than one having had only 3 services at two yearly / 20k+ mile intervals.
|
>>is surely worth less
Quite possibly, but do you think the price difference would be less than, comparable with, or more than the money saved on servicing?
Is there any noticable trend in car prices because if this, or, is it in the noise in the marketplace?
|
Quite possibly but do you think the price difference would be less than comparable with or more than the money saved on servicing?
I dont know, though there is perhaps another factor, cars that are not on LL may be better looked after in other respects too, more caring owners.
|
If the cars were otherwise identical the LL car is surely worth less say at 6 years old and 70k a car having had 7 annual / 10k ish main dealer services would be worth more than one having had only 3 services at two yearly / 20k+ mile intervals.
SQ
Once a car is at 70k+, the dealer network is no longer interested in buying/selling it. Private buyers dont look at LL servicing - unless you are a backroom boffin. In fact I bet over 50% of private buyers dont even check the servicing history and accept the "Oh yeah, its been serviced recently by my local guy - I pay him in cash..."
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 21/01/2010 at 00:33
|
As an example how many VAG cars are on longlife compared with those not on longlife? If say 90% of VAG cars are on longlife it's no great surprise that most failures seen are longlife cars.
Less than half the VAG cars we see at 3 years are on LL. Seats almost never, Skoda sometimes, LL are most likely to be VW and Audi ex-company.
|
I have a Golf and Passat TDIs on LL sevicing, but I change the oil between services myself, using the proper 507.00 spec oil and Mann filters. So I agree with WT 100%.
I enjoy Workshop Tech's posts as much as I used to enjoy Aprilia's posts. Are they related at all? I think we should be told.
|
|
I wish Workshop Tech had a garage near me!
|
Two identical cars, one has long life servicing, the other serviced annually / on mileage.
Apart from jbif, who else buys the long life?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rather than take advice from armchair experts take some advice from someone who actually knows what an engine looks like and has got genuine experience and knowledge. On the 1.8T's we occassionally see a motor where the cam has picked up and the turbo has sideways movement on the spindle. These are invariably cars that are on LL servicing. Problem is that the small bore feed pipe to the turbo blocks up with crap from worn out oil and the turbo is starved of lube. This also happens on the diesel engines. LL servicing is salesmanship for fleets. Some cars NEED much shorter servicing. Good example is the Ford 1.6TDCI. We have done at least a dozen of these where the turbo has failed. problem is again dirt in the oil. These engines get very dirty internally and the turbo feed pipe gets blocked, worse still it has a small gauze filter in it which blocks solid and bang goes the turbo. Some dealers just replace the turbo and new one fails soon after, on these you MUST replace the pipe and banjo connection with filter then change oil after 1000 miles. On a 1.6 TDCI HALVE the recommended oil change interval. Frankly there is an awful lot of bad advice and nonsense given out on this forum. the old saying that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing comes to mind.
Ouch! Workshoptech. I admit I am not an automobile engineer but like Avant I have a good understanding of how they work and should be treated. I have driven diesels since before the turbo models came in. Firstly a Sierra 2.3 PDA engine, 0-60 in 3 months but decent economy. Service intervals were by the book, i.e. manufacturers recommendations. Early turbos were generally 10-12K miles, that was the same for Peugeot, Vauxhall, Ford, Toyota, Renault, Nissan, I have had the lot. However the first VAG diesel car I had offered a variable service regime for high mileage users. I did about 30-35K in those days and even now do 20-25K. The variable service was conditional upon using synthetic high spec oils. Service intervals varied between 17K and 19.5K, never more. The 17K was usally after more town driving the 19.5K was after more motorway driving, so the engine management system must be able to detect either the condition of the oil or monitor the driving style. Either way it suits me better to have variable services when required rather than chronologically. Having said all that my driving is mainly major roads/motorways in a high gear for lond periods, just cruising really. I think town work and shopping trips 'kill' engines more than any other cause. Often the engine has just reached a nice running temperature when you arrive and switch it off!
The answer is in engine choice, sensible use, servicing to suit the useage, and just about any modern engine will perform trouble free for many a long year. In over 45 years of driving I have never had to replace a clutch, gearbox or engine and have had relatively trouble free motoring by looking after my vehicles even when I didn't own them. Cheers to all. Concrete
|
|
|
|
|
