Quick primer on VW TDIs?

[osidak]

My suspension was far from stock (though at stock height - lowering ruins the handling) - I would autocross and take it for mountain drives - going into curves it would settle in and carve it. The JSW even with a tweaked suspension just has this unsettling wiggle right before the suspension loads up.

That and the power to weight just felt a lot better

[speeder]

I think that the only one I would consider is the latest model sport wagon. 40 mpg on cheap fuel is plenty good enough for me and I can't get into the idea of driving someone's 15 year old VW around. As good as the cam lobes might have been, I'm just past that phase of life.


Stories about bad door lock modules don't really scare me, it's a modern VAG car and none of them are Toyotas. I wouldn't expect any modern, complex car to be 100% reliable and never break, that's just not realistic. I'm mostly concerned with catastrophic, "game over" failure modes like the injection pump issue I've read about. What is the story with those and the filter I've read about somewhere to catch the shrapnel if it implodes?

If the car is cheap enough and the odds are ok, I'll roll the dice. Always wanted one and with the miles I drive, the fuel savings will be very real. Thanks again.

[Arizona_928]

Originally Posted by speeder

I'm mostly concerned with catastrophic, "game over" failure modes like the injection pump issue I've read about. What is the story with those and the filter I've read about somewhere to catch the shrapnel if it implodes?

The idea behind the device is that it has an extra micron filter that will catch shrapnel from a failed HPFP before the contaminated fuel gets recycled back through the system and to the tank. Effectively it limits damage so that you don't have to replace fuel lines/tank, ect. However it really has not been tested, nor are they available anymore. Then again you'll see a lot of cars on the VW forum with 100k+, even a couple with 300K without serious issues.

The wagon is a good choice. I would get a vagcom to replace the DSG fluid, and so that you can DIY the fuel filters (if you're brave). They are all fun cars. The 2.0 CR really makes the car stand out against the petrol units.

[aigel]

Fuel pump failures are in the 2% range or less on the newer cars. So, you have a 1:100 chance of catastrophic failure. VW will fix the pumps under warranty, even on cars that are beyond bumper to bumper and drive train warranties. Get a stick shift to avoid the DSG issues and you'll be all set. They drive nice in stop and go with all the torque. I have had commutes with 30+ minutes of stop and go and not an issue driving a stick. My fuel costs are about $.07 / mile or less in mixed driving.

G

[speeder]

I wonder how much a mechanical insurance policy, (so-called extended warranty), costs for one of these that would cover the major failures?

[speeder]

I know that the old ones, ('03-older), are the best in reliability and the early(?) 2.0 engines are the HPFP failures...what about the 1.9 from say 2006? Absolute junk or manageable with precautions?

There are many for sale and they will not need the re-flash. And they're cheap sometimes. How bad are they? TIA.

[Arizona_928]

Those are going to run a BEW engine. Bit better then a ALH. I think they're harder to do timing belts on but that's all opinion either way. They're both 1.9l You can't go wrong with either one.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by AZ_porschekid

Those are going to run a BEW engine. Bit better then a ALH. I think they're harder to do timing belts on but that's all opinion either way. They're both 1.9l You can't go wrong with either one.

This is the exact opposite of what Osidak says a few posts back. He says that the PD/BEW engine is inferior to the ALH but timing belts are easier to change.

[osidak]

The biggest fault with the BEW engines are the cams - you add an additional lobe on each cylinder to operate the injector. This reduces all the lobes to a width that is smaller than they should be which increases wear. I can't remember seeing a single cam yet that that wasn't showing excessive wear by the time they got to 100K - if the cams wear too much they take out the lifters and injectors. Check the cost of the injectors.

They do have other little issues that can turn big (transmissions and flywheels for example). While the actual chassis is probably built a bit better than the A4's and probably even the A6 cars I personally would never own one.

[1990C4S]

I don't think a BEW will llve nearly as long as am ALH.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by osidak

The biggest fault with the BEW engines are the cams - you add an additional lobe on each cylinder to operate the injector. This reduces all the lobes to a width that is smaller than they should be which increases wear. I can't remember seeing a single cam yet that that wasn't showing excessive wear by the time they got to 100K - if the cams wear too much they take out the lifters and injectors. Check the cost of the injectors.

They do have other little issues that can turn big (transmissions and flywheels for example). While the actual chassis is probably built a bit better than the A4's and probably even the A6 cars I personally would never own one.

Originally Posted by 1990C4S

I don't think a BEW will llve nearly as long as am ALH.

Thanks. I'm seeing lots of '06 cars with 200k+ miles, so obviously the cams haven't failed on those. In my experience working on and rebuilding engines, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between the size (width) of cam lobes and wear but I'll research it further. Some motors are known for cam wear and it matters not if they have normal sized lobes.

At any rate, how hard can it be to inspect, and replace if necessary, a cam shaft on a 4-cylinder SOHC engine?? Are common VW parts expensive?

Are there any other serious flaws on those motors? HPFP? Or are those only 2.0 engines? Thanks.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by osidak

The biggest fault with the BEW engines are the cams - you add an additional lobe on each cylinder to operate the injector. This reduces all the lobes to a width that is smaller than they should be which increases wear. I can't remember seeing a single cam yet that that wasn't showing excessive wear by the time they got to 100K - if the cams wear too much they take out the lifters and injectors. Check the cost of the injectors.

They do have other little issues that can turn big (transmissions and flywheels for example). While the actual chassis is probably built a bit better than the A4's and probably even the A6 cars I personally would never own one.

Sorry if I'm beating this to death but have you seen this happen? Multiple times or just one anomaly where maybe someone ran low on oil forever because of unfixed leaks, etc.? The small lobe that operates the injector actually wore down to the point where it did not function?

Thanks again. That would be some extreme wear.

[speeder]

I did a search and apparently cam wear is an epidemic problem on those motors. It is possible that using the correct 5w40 synthetic oil exclusively and changing it religiously on time might prevent it but it's a huge issue on the cars.

I also found that the cam wear reveals itself easily on visual inspection and also with some other symptoms such as noises and performance issues. There are updated lifters and other parts available for the repair if you catch it on time plus some improved aftermarket cams for more $$.

I appreciate the education and I'd still buy one of these for cheap but with eyes open now. Thanks again!

[1990C4S]

Originally Posted by speeder

Thanks. I'm seeing lots of '06 cars with 200k+ miles, so obviously the cams haven't failed on those.

On the ALH that's the break-in period.

I have 300,000 miles on mine. I use synthetic 5W-40 exclusively, and I don't have to add oil between changes (6,500 miles).

[Arizona_928]

I would say the cam failures are more common on the brm. Either way I wouldn't let that issue be your limiting factor.

[speeder]

Which is the BRM? What years?

[Arizona_928]

05-06. Those are the gen before the 2.0 common rail.