MK5 Golf GTI
All Things Mk5 => Mk5 General Area => Topic started by: FJ1000 on November 02, 2015, 10:24:02 am
-
Hi Guys,
So, I own an RS4 as well as the GTi - 2 cars that suffer badly from carbon deposits in the intake and on the valves.
I recently came across a post on the RS246 forum mentioning a company called "Engine Carbon Clean" that offer a 30min mobile cleaning service, with some trusted RS246 users having used the service and noticing a benefit:
http://forum.rs246.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=117370
Unlike the likes of terraclean, this system passes hydrogen through the intake, rather than cleaning agents through the fuel which would do nothing for the carbon issues. A full carbon clean for my RS4 costs from £600, so this could be a big cost saving if it works, as well as the convenience of not having to leave my car at MRC tuning or AMD.
http://www.enginecarbonclean.com/
I decided I'm going to put this to the test on both my cars, and have organised before and after dyno tests (3 pulls before and after) from 9am this coming Saturday.
http://www.rollingroadsussex.co.uk/
I wanted to post on here as both the rep from Engine Carbon Clean (chap called Gary) and my contact at the dyno facility (Luke) have said they have capacity for a couple more vehicles if anyone wants to join us.
I'm paying £180 for the 2x carbon cleans (normally £99 each), and the optional dyno test works out at £82.50 for each car, although prices may come down if we have more cars. I am asking Engine Carbon Clean to at least subsidise my dyno runs as this ought to be good marketing for them.
Anyone interested in joining us? Let me know and then I can look into pricing/discounts.
-
Terraclean also offer an intake cleaning service
I don't think it will do anything tbh. needs proper cleaning by manually removing buildup.
-
Interested in the results
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
:popcornsoda:
-
As above. The only way to clean the inlets/valves properly if by removing the manifold/s
-
Yeah BMW's method is walnut shell blasting. You can guarantee the OEMs will have researched this very thoroughly and if they deem medium blasting as the only way to do it properly, you can pretty much take aftermarket solutions as being either partially or completely ineffective.
-
Well that's the thing. I'm not expecting it to be fully effective at all, only partially effective.
- Is it worth paying hundreds for the fully effective solution, when the carbon is just going to quickly build up again, if there is a partially effective solution that costs much much less?
- Partially effective could mean a lot of things. Do you get a tiny recovery in power, or is it something like half of your power loss back vs. stock (optimistic)?
Those are the question i've been asking myself, and what I intend to answer!
-
Oh it's a worthwhile experiment for sure and pretty cost effective. I just have an all or nothing approach to things, so would rather just tackle it during other work, such as cam chain and / or intercooler replacement. A clogged injector is a good excuse to attack it too.
My valves at 83K (injector replacement) weren't that bad and I decided to leave them. I think if they're cleaned mechanically first, this system might keep them clean again afterwards if done annually or something.
-
Well that's the thing. I'm not expecting it to be fully effective at all, only partially effective.
- Is it worth paying hundreds for the fully effective solution, when the carbon is just going to quickly build up again, if there is a partially effective solution that costs much much less?
- Partially effective could mean a lot of things. Do you get a tiny recovery in power, or is it something like half of your power loss back vs. stock (optimistic)?
Those are the question i've been asking myself, and what I intend to answer!
Do it once and do it properly.
Remove the PCV system.
run decent oil
keep it well serviced with good air filtration
it should limit it coming back. meaning you may then be able to run a treatment such as this every few services
-
:popcornsoda:
-
This may become more and more relevant as the TFSI engines age and build up becomes a real problem, could be a cheaper and quicker way to restore some life in a TFSI engine.
While my engine is fairly low miles and not likely to benefit from this service, I'm still keen to seen dyno results, but also consider things like doing an MPG run and maybe even an MOT emission test as well, for full understanding of the results...
-
I can't see how this can do much, as others have said VW would have def looked into how best to do it and they still take the inlet off and manually remove the carbon, I just had my edition 30 done by a Audi master tech, he has a few tools he made to scrap round the back of the valves etc but basically it's manual labor that's needed. BMW use the walnut blast so at the very least a hard medium needs to be blasted at the carbon to remove it, can't see how this can do barely anything without blasting the carbon.
Maybe it does something slightly to the surface of the carbon deposits to smooth it to some extent which slightly improves air flow and hence engine power slightly without actually removing and amount of carbon ?.
Tbh if this system is meant to remove deposits the best way would be to use a bore scope to look at the back of the valves before and after the 'clean'. This can be done without removing the inlet manifold.
I would def be interested to see those results, that would be the proof of what it actually does
-
Very curious in how this plays out.
-
No borescope available at the dyno facility unfortunately, and the carbon cleaning guy doesn't have one either.
I'm thinking about buying a cheap usb type borescope off amazon (could be hours of fun at home too!). Could someone talk me through how I'd feed it through to see the valves without messing anything up?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
:popcornsoda:
-
No borescope available at the dyno facility unfortunately, and the carbon cleaning guy doesn't have one either.
I'm thinking about buying a cheap usb type borescope off amazon (could be hours of fun at home too!). Could someone talk me through how I'd feed it through to see the valves without messing anything up?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hmmm, if I was a cynic I would say, wonder why the carbon clean chap who's job is to remove carbon doesn't have a way to see how well it worked ;) ;).
I'm not sure what needs to be removed to see the valves. I know my mechanic did it without removing everything.
-
Cheap USB one and go in through the IAT sensor hole in the inlet manifold
It will do nothing to remove the build-up. Waste of money. IF it WERE that good, they would have a borescope, they would show you before and after.... They don't... All they have are their claims without any proof to back them up
-
Cheap USB one and go in through the IAT sensor hole in the inlet manifold
It will do nothing to remove the build-up. Waste of money. IF it WERE that good, they would have a borescope, they would show you before and after.... They don't... All they have are their claims without any proof to back them up
Cool, ordered a USB borescope
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B015Q1KXCW?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00
Thanks for the tip on the intake air temp sensor, will give it a go!
There are some before/after borescope valve pics on their website, but I want to do my own tests.
As well as dyno and borescope, if I have time, going to try and get some before and after MAF readings too. Might not get time to do that but will try.
-
I only saw one picture on this page: http://www.enginecarbonclean.com/cleaning-engine-components.php
No way on earth was that done through this process. Please do post up your results though
-
To all those that are saying it's a waste of time... It may well be! I'm just glad someone's taking the time to prove/disprove it properly.
-
I'm not sure a dyno would be accurate enough to measure any benefits either tbh. There's usually a 3-5% error on most dynos, and if the benefits exceed that tiny percentage, I'd be surprised. At the end of the day, the ECU will keep cramming boost in until the target is met, and a small build up of carbon won't block boost enough to reduce power. Any benefits in cleaning them will be felt at the lower end of the rpm range.
-
I think an emissions test would be more relevant tbh.
Not every worthwhile task can be measured in power gains.
-
To all those that are saying it's a waste of time... It may well be! I'm just glad someone's taking the time to prove/disprove it properly.
I Agree, it's good of FJ to share this.
I also agree regarding the dyno being the wrong tool to measure the results. After the inlets were done on my car, it didn't feel any quicker,but did tick over much better and also start better and 'feel' more responsive and smoother. Well worth doing but it took the technician a few hours with various tools, scrapers and a vacuum cleaner to suck out the carbon he dislodged. Makes you wonder if this thing does even remove a single fair size peice of carbon deposit, where does it go ?, it doesn't sound like it sucks it out ?, must just go through the engine ???, not sure I would want that !
-
The main reason I'm doing this is because of the large power losses due to carbon buildup on the RS4. It's not unheard of to lose 30 or 40 bhp, maybe even more! The only sure fire way to recover that power is a proper manual clean. But I found it interesting that some RS owners had tried this service and thought it made a noticeable difference, so I'm checking it out. I'm including the golf out of interest really.
As well as the before and after dyno results, I'll also have MAF readings and some borescope images. I did some logging of air flow readings on the golf and got a few images inside the intake last night. I'm planning to do the same on the RS tonight.
Good idea on the emissions, I might ask the dyno facility if that's something we can measure too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
When I had mine done I noticed an improvement. So much so that I plan to treat it as service task that I'll have repeated when a borescope image indicates that it'd be worthwhile. Every 2 or 3 years may see something to clean off without letting it build up into a heavy crust.
I personally believe that these engines benefit from being 'driven' rather than crawling around at low rpm for too much of their life, 12 month servicing minimum (I do low mileage and some short journeys to work and home so I slip in an extra oil only change as this kind of use could be termed as 'arduous conditions' according to the hand book) , good quality fuel of 98RON minimum (as the sticker in the filler cap says) and the best engine oil such as an ester based one which has a 'clean' fully synthetic base rather than your regular synthetic oils. This is worth a read http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/esters-in-synthetic-lubricants/ (http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/esters-in-synthetic-lubricants/)
I do track days every now and then which helps to keep the lungs clear. :driver:
Below is a direct quotation from the technical staff of VAG with complete acknowledgment of the FSI intake valve deposit issue, and it's impacts, including: decreased performance, misfires, catalytic converter damage ... etc.
"Gasoline engines with direct injection of the fuel into the combustion chamber, i.e., not into the intake port, suffer especially from the problem of the formation of carbon deposits on components. Carbon deposits form especially in the neck region of intake valves. A more exact analysis of how these carbon deposits form leads to the following result: Oil and fuel constituents first form a sticky coating on the components. These constituents are chiefly long-chain and branched-chain hydrocarbons, i.e., the low-volatility components of oil and fuel. Aromatic compounds adhere especially well. This sticky base coating serves as a base for the deposition of soot particles. This results in a porous surface, in which oil and fuel particles in turn become embedded. This process is a circular process, by which the coating thickness of the carbon deposits continuously increases. Especially in the area of the intake valves, the deposits originate from blowby gases and from internal and external exhaust gas recirculation, and in this process, the blowby gasses and the recirculated exhaust gas come into direct contact with the intake valve.
Especially in the area of the neck of the intake valves, excessive carbon deposits have extremely negative effects for the following reasons: In the case of Otto direct injectors, the successful ignition of the stratified charge depends to a great extent on the correct development of the internal cylinder flow, which ensures reliable transport of the injected fuel to the spark plug to guarantee reliable ignition at the spark plug. However, a coating of carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve may interfere so strongly with the tumble flow that ignition failures may occur there as a result. Under certain circumstances, however, ignition failures can lead to irreversible damage of a catalytic converter installed in the exhaust gas tract for purifying the exhaust gas. Furthermore, the coating of carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve causes flow resistance, which can lead to significant performance losses due to insufficient cylinder filling, especially in the upper load and speed range of the internal combustion engine. In addition, the carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve may prevent correct valve closing, which leads to compression losses and thus sporadic ignition failures. This in turn could irreversibly damage the catalytic converter. There is the potential for small particles to break away from the coating of carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve and get into the catalytic converter. These hot particles may then cause secondary reaction and corresponding local damage of the catalytic converter. For example, a hole may be burned in the structure of the catalytic converter.
Globular deposits are found especially on the valve stem downstream from a partition plate in the intake port. Due to the dripping of high-boiling hydrocarbons from the partition plate towards the valve neck or valve stem, globular carbon deposits eventually form there by the sequence of events explained above. These deposits on the valve stem can result in flow deficits due to undesired swirling and turbulent flow around the globular carbon deposits. This may persistently interfere with the formation of stable tumble flow from cycle to cycle.
A possible solution would be to keep these sources of deposits away, for example, from the intake valve, by completely eliminating exhaust gas recirculation and the introduction of blowby gases into the intake port. However with the combustion behavior of modern reciprocating internal combustion engines, at least external exhaust gas recirculation and the introduction of blowby gases into the intake port are absolutely necessary for reasons of emission control and fuel consumption, so that this approach is not possible. "
-
The main reason I'm doing this is because of the large power losses due to carbon buildup on the RS4. It's not unheard of to lose 30 or 40 bhp, maybe even more! The only sure fire way to recover that power is a proper manual clean. But I found it interesting that some RS owners had tried this service and thought it made a noticeable difference, so I'm checking it out. I'm including the golf out of interest really.
As well as the before and after dyno results, I'll also have MAF readings and some borescope images. I did some logging of air flow readings on the golf and got a few images inside the intake last night. I'm planning to do the same on the RS tonight.
Good idea on the emissions, I might ask the dyno facility if that's something we can measure too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very interested to see the results, esp the scope images. When is the clean booked for ?
-
I've no doubt it will help within the combustion chamber, the same way adding water vapour does, but passing a hydrogen gas over hardened deposits won't shift them without some form of aggressive chemical reaction. I looked up these 'Hydrogen cleaning' sellers and found this on one of the websites:
How HYDROGEN clean carbon deposit in the engine?
When hydrogen (H2) enters the compression chamber via intake manifold, without pressure, in petrol or diesel engine, temperature in engine causes that hydrogen molecules (H2) "tear up" the hydrogen protons (2H +). Active H + reacts with the carbon, deposits and the oxide precipitate substances in the engine. Carbon and sludge is chemically transforming into hydrocarbon (HC) in the gaseous state and throws it out of the engine through the exhaust system. After treatment, there is no need to change engine oil and filter.
The above is utter nonsense, but even if it werent, the extreme heat referred to is not present in the intake manifold or the back of the inlet valves
After a further look at the website: http://www.enginecarbonclean.com/technology.php seeing as you just add tap water, it's just a glorified form of electrolysis.
Hydrogen gas passing over carbon deposits will not shift them in any way, shape or form in normal atmospheric conditions which is what is present during this treatment
Spraying a very fine mist of water in to the inlet will have the same effect on cleaning the combustion chamber. An example of this would be a car with a failed headgasket where water has made it in to a cylinder... have you ever noticed how clean the piston is in this instance?
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fa23%2Ftimsrv%2F10.jpg&hash=cf23b0815da7492d5dd6cebf8d817a09696dc88f)
-
and the best engine oil such as an ester based one which has a 'clean' fully synthetic base rather than your regular synthetic oils. This is worth a read http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/esters-in-synthetic-lubricants/ (http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/esters-in-synthetic-lubricants/)
Indeedy. I heartily recommend this stuff - http://www.opieoils.co.uk/p-68897-fuchs-titan-race-pro-s-5w-40-ester-fully-synthetic-engine-oil.aspx
Really good stuff and was formerly known as Silkolene. I used it exclusively in my old VR6 turbo from 0 miles (forged piston / rod rebuild) to 65K miles. Stripped it down (due to turbo letting go) and there was zero wear on any part and zero staining on the castings like you get with that Castrol sh*t.
-
The main reason I'm doing this is because of the large power losses due to carbon buildup on the RS4. It's not unheard of to lose 30 or 40 bhp, maybe even more! The only sure fire way to recover that power is a proper manual clean. But I found it interesting that some RS owners had tried this service and thought it made a noticeable difference, so I'm checking it out. I'm including the golf out of interest really.
As well as the before and after dyno results, I'll also have MAF readings and some borescope images. I did some logging of air flow readings on the golf and got a few images inside the intake last night. I'm planning to do the same on the RS tonight.
Good idea on the emissions, I might ask the dyno facility if that's something we can measure too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I can totally see that on the RS4. Bunged up valves across 8 cylinders is going to have quite an impact, up to 10% losses as you've said. Bunged up valves across 4 cylinders and a turbo, not so much of an impact but it's still worth doing if just to improve the idle and part throttle quality. And they just look nasty caked in crap!
-
See bottom of this page
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=86&t=1522030&mid=173159&nmt=AUDI+S6+V10+-+Carbon+Clean
-
:popcornsoda: :popcornsoda: :popcornsoda: :popcornsoda: :popcornsoda: :popcornsoda: :popcornsoda: :popcornsoda: :popcornsoda:
-
From what I know about cleaning metals using a hydrogen furnace i wouldn't bet against it -it might just work I'm looking forward to the results
-
Any after results? Keen to see what it brought to the table :popcornsoda:
I've seen plenty of "terraclean thumbs up" style threads and very little to no-one saying it was a waste of money, or, that they retrieved no benefit from it. I know this particular process is slightly different to terraclean too.
I'm fairly sure if I get a 6 cylinder diesel next I'll get this done soon after purchasing.
A before and after mini write up would be great - a before/after dyno graph with 'bum dyno' and economy feedback is even better :happy2: - ?
-
For all you naysayers and snake oil enthusiasts, it better than a kick in the nick nacks. Obviously a proper job is best but I for one am very interested in these results. I'm happy to do dyno runs before and after as well just waiting on the the outcome of this.
There's to many pessimists on this site at times. We don't all have engineering degrees or doctorates in the inner workings of fuel stratified engines, and forgive me but there does seem a tendency to Lord it over the layman or anyone with an independent thought ( unless a scene queen big cat). But what we the masses have is hope we have hope and that is something we must cling to. :signLOL:
-
You say pessimists, I prefer the term realists. :happy2:
How are you going to conduct the dyno run? are you going to have it done in the morning and then have the work done at the dyno place and then it dyno'd afterwards?
Because if you go back another day with different humidity this can effect the BHP by 2 or 3% easily swaying the figures.
That even being said I did 2 runs back to back in my car, one did 355ft lb and the other did 380ft lb..... free torque gains just by dynoing it again!
-
That even being said I did 2 runs back to back in my car, one did 355ft lb and the other did 380ft lb..... free torque gains just by dynoing it again!
You see positive thinking thats what we like :signLOL:
As for the dyno runs im going to conduct them in a hermatically sealed vessel free from outside interactions. :signLOL:
It would be as you know a rough guide. In theory if you conducted enough dynos this would allow for any statistcal variation caused by outside factors so you would be able to say with some confidence it would never be 100 % though.
-
It would be as you know a rough guide. In theory if you conducted enough dynos this would allow for any statistcal variation caused by outside factors so you would be able to say with some confidence it would never be 100 % though.
It wouldn't actually work like this. What it would do is provide you with more data points for your analysis which would give you greater resolution on the same variation. When the causes of your variation are constantly moving and are random you cant isolate and remove them as you cant turn them into a constant value. You'll have a more detailed average though.
This also indicates that a good emissions test with as many parameters as possible measured may be the best method to examine the benefits and changes through cleaning.
-
It wouldn't actually work like this. What it would do is provide you with more data points for your analysis which would give you greater resolution on the same variation. When the causes of your variation are constantly moving and are random you cant isolate and remove them as you cant turn them into a constant value. You'll have a more detailed average though.
Makes sense and I agree. As you know using an average is a very basic statistical test. Could you not use a correction value to account for the different variables or a specific test which allows/factors in the variables. just a guess with my limited knowledge of statistics.
This also indicates that a good emissions test with as many parameters as possible measured may be the best method to examine the benefits and changes through cleaning.
I also agree with this I think it's a good idea but would it not be open to effects from the same variables biasing the dyno results.
-
It wouldn't actually work like this. What it would do is provide you with more data points for your analysis which would give you greater resolution on the same variation. When the causes of your variation are constantly moving and are random you cant isolate and remove them as you cant turn them into a constant value. You'll have a more detailed average though.
Makes sense and I agree. As you know using an average is a very basic statistical test. Could you not use a correction value to account for the different variables or a specific test which allows/factors in the variables. just a guess with my limited knowledge of statistics.
This also indicates that a good emissions test with as many parameters as possible measured may be the best method to examine the benefits and changes through cleaning.
I also agree with this I think it's a good idea but would it not be open to effects from the same variables biasing the dyno results.
The problem lies in defining a correction value. To do this you'd need to determine what the offset is and to do this you'd have to know precisely how external factors influence your results. When you know their behaviour and effect you can devise a formula to apply to your results. You'd have to do this for each and every external influence. It'd be complex, more so than is practical.
I'm not an expert on Dyno testing but I've had enough conversations with Jim at JKM about this to have a broad appreciation of all the factors that can affect results.
I do have some experience of data analysis, Gauge studies and capability studies with my job which can involve quantifying performance of test equipment, analysis and correction.
For an emissions test I feel you're correct in pointing out that there are still variables at play but they are fewer and more predictable so therefore easier to determine and factor out.
Much more than this then I think you'd need a lab! :rolleye:
One factor which is really important is to use a Dyno operator where you know calibration and maintenance are performed regularly. JKM's for instance are known as 'heartbreakers' and they are correctly maintained and supported by the manufacturer. They are also repeatable (can measure the same parameter more than once with the same result in the same session) and reproducible (can measure a full set of parameters under different environmental conditions at a different time with the same results). A well set up and maintained Dyno can deal with many of the issues concerned with environmental influences such as temp, humidity, etc but the variable that can't be known is your vehicle. Tyres, clutch, dragging brakes, heat soak...the list goes on and on.
A good Dyno is great tool for monitoring what's going on in performance terms but intake cleaning can be very subtle in it's effect but still very beneficial even it doesn't yield 30bhp and 60 lb/feet of extra torque! :jumpmove: :jumpmove: :jumpmove:
-
Sorry for the radio silence guys, been a little tied up at home and at work.
So the dyno results...before the clean, the golf had peak power of 197bhp. After, wait for it....197bhp!!
I also compared MAF readings which were 175g/s before and 180g/s after, but the temperature was about 4 degrees cooler on the evening I did the after runs than when I logged the before runs.
The borescope images before and after look the same to my untrained eye.
The intake looked pretty coked up to me from the borescope so I was a little surprised that engine power was right on the money for what I'd consider a healthy output, so not really any power loss to recover. This is an 85k miles car, never carbon cleaned.
The RS4 was interesting... So first thing we discovered is that the engine is down on power, made just 352bhp on the pre clean dyno. Looks like the engine is retarding timing. So to my mind that throws a spanner in the works in terms of how reliable a test subject it is. The guys seemed to spend extra long cleaning it, as they were keen to register a gain. There was a lot of revving the engine involved too, not far off an "Italian tune." The first run after the clean, the rear roller was very slightly out of position and the car registered 330bhp. The look on the cleaning guys faces! They corrected the roller position, ran it again and it made 365bhp so a 13bhp increase, 3%. The airflow was also 3% better. Take those numbers with a pinch of salt though given the car is not healthy. Will be interesting to see what it makes once MRC tuning get it in a couple of weeks. One thing I have definitely noticed is that the acceleration of the RS is definitely smoother. No doubt about it. No change in how the golf drives however.
This week the company also cleaned and did dyno runs on an S5 (V8) at Surrey rolling road. Apparently the car stayed strapped onto the dyno for the clean, and registered a 20bhp recovery in performance. Seemingly quite a sizeable increase.
So I went to get some answers but still have questions! What I'm wondering now is if their process registers some dyno gains on the rs4 because a) they Rev the engine a lot as you would doing an Italian tune and/or b) their cleaning process, whilst doing nothing much in the intake (still don't understand how it would) actually does have some cleaning benefit in the combustion chamber and downstream.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Interesting and slightly predictable results, but thanks for reporting back. What did the cleaner guys say when you looked via the bore scope and saw zero increase on the golf ?.
Them revving the ***** off the RS sounds like they were clutching at straws hoping the clean would loosen at best some carbon through moisture and reving the car would dislodge it. You may have got exactly the same results from just revving the engine like that without a clean !.
-
Any pictures to share? Knew it wouldn't shift even the slightest bit of carbon. It won't - it's simple chemistry. Good on you either way for taking the time and spending the money to test, and even more so for posting honest results/feedback
As for the Audi, the problem with even unstrapping a car from the rollers between runs can have a huge impact on the next power run depending on how they strap it down, and a dyno operator will know very well how to manipulate this. It's a shame they didn't keep the Audi strapped down during the clean, but as you say an unhealthy test subject isn't a reliable result, issues could be intermittent etc.
-
I took some video so will upload that once I get a chance to get it edited!
Here's the dyno plot...
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/771/22547763349_43ffd33cf8_c.jpg)
Unfortunately, I didn't get a chance to hang around for the "after" dyno run on the Golf, had to get in the RS4 and head home due to another commitment at lunchtime on Saturday. I picked the golf up on monday evening and did the borescope then, so no chance to speak to EngineCarbonClean about it.
When the RS4 goes into MRC tuning to be looked at, they may take the intake off to have a look at the flaps. If so, will ask them to take some pics to see what the carbon buildup is like.
Regarding the revving of the RS4, I can see how an "italian tuneup" would have some marginal benefit to the engine. I can also believe that a bit more combustible gas (and therefore perhaps more heat) may help to clean crap out of the combustion chamber on back...but do nothing for the carbon in the intake. I think that's what I experienced on the RS4.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_tuneup
The S5 results they posted are interesting though, as the car did indeed stay strapped onto the dyno. +21bhp. Is that just the italian tune effect? 313bhp starting point suggests there may have been worse carbon build up than my RS4. Mine was cleaned (properly by AMD) 10-15k miles ago by the previous owner.
http://www.a5oc.com/forums/audi-a5-s5-tech/97929-ive-got-into-engine-3.html#post1083657
-
Snake oil.... as predicted...
Regarding the RS4s I've seen many running mid 300's and being that I can keep up (JUST) with all the ones I've raced on the move would give that some legitamacy.
Thanks for taking the time to check it out.
-
My thoughts are that any Italian Tuning plus the cleaning substance may of helped clear the exhaust more than anything else, so the extra power comes from the engine being able to expel gases a bit better.
-
Finally got the video online:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
If trying to watch the vid on tapatalk, switch to web-view (top right menu with the 3 dots on my iphone) and it should work.
Could you please let me know if it still doesn't load?
-
Just a follow up on this in case anyone is still interested in the hydrogen carbon clean process...
As the RS4 was down on power, I took it to a specialist on Monday (MRC tuning in Banbury). Who tested it and diagnosed, you guessed it, carbon buildup. They took the manifold off to confirm their suspicions. Keep in mind that the hydrogen carbon clean was just a month ago, and the car had a full CC a year ago.
Pics:
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5707/23002349583_b7f9d93b1b.jpg)
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/568/23002349543_406c980f54.jpg)
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/659/23001235574_0399e211ce_z.jpg)
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5759/23261490159_eb505c024e_z.jpg)
After the clean:
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5650/23629426125_8341a68550_z.jpg)
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/777/23002349533_f9999ab670_z.jpg)
And the result of a proper carbon clean? +44hp!
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/666/23002344973_f025b60aa0_o.jpg)
More like it! :happy2:
The grainy borescope images inside the Golf's intake hinted at the same thing, so no surprise, but was good to get a good look inside the RS4 manifold post-clean, and see the difference a proper clean has made to the power. I've sent my findings to EngineCarbonClean
-
In terms of original HP, that's an initial loss of 10-15% BHP just from carbon build up! But ultimately, a proper strip down and clean is the only way to restore a very carbon-clad engine. However, I wonder if regular use of the cleaning methods tried will help slow the eventual build up?
-
Posting to remind me to look later as I can't view any media in work.
Would love to know what the company come back with - I think they will just ignore you. I've commented on their FB pages several times asking for an explanation as to how they believe Hydrogen gas can attack a carbon based buildup...... Comments deleted
There's just no substitute for a proper manual clean, as any chemical powerful enough to dissolve all of that build up will do some pretty permanent damage to your plastic intakes, valves etc.
-
From a chemistry point of few, getting carbon build up to react with hydrogen would create reverse the processes that left the deposits (i.e. hydrocarbons, such as fuel and oils returned back into hydrocarbons). In the simplest form, it would react back into Methane but this theory is flawed as you'd need a hell of a lot of excessive energy available to force the carbon molecules to break apart and then react with the hydrogen.
And methane is highly reactive so would almost instantly react again with any oxygen, which created water and carbon dioxide and, you guessed it, soot. Which, funny old thing, is a carbon build up!
-
From a chemistry point of few, getting carbon build up to react with hydrogen would create reverse the processes that left the deposits (i.e. hydrocarbons, such as fuel and oils returned back into hydrocarbons). In the simplest form, it would react back into Methane but this theory is flawed as you'd need a hell of a lot of excessive energy available to force the carbon molecules to break apart and then react with the hydrogen.
And methane is highly reactive so would almost instantly react again with any oxygen, which created water and carbon dioxide and, you guessed it, soot. Which, funny old thing, is a carbon build up!
This is kinda the point i was getting at, pumping Hydrogen gas in to 'air' under atmospheric pressure will not provide anything close to the energy needed to force a reaction. The Hydrogen gas will do nothing other than be burned in the combustion chamber
Anyway at least the missing ponies have now been returned
-
firstly sorry for digging something out the dustbin. However it is the only way I think this post makes sense.
Then thank you to the OP and his work. I wrote about this recently after someone tried to flog me a £5000 machine. https://balancemotorsport.co.uk/carbon-engine-cleaning-does-it-work (https://balancemotorsport.co.uk/carbon-engine-cleaning-does-it-work)
I personally thought it was junk science as well. However having now researched this market thoroughly it does seem that some of the chemical products do work (after all we know over cleaner works!). I've yet to fully test (with boroscope) any method.
What I can say is water is the number one - i once drove a car 90 miles with a failed headgasket. It got through 27 litres of water. When I stripped it it was super clean. The engine just had a new HG and never missed a beat. This is important as some seem to pour scorn of water getting into an engine but in high humidity and at high rpm an engine ingests vast amounts of water.
The secret of course is not pouring a whole pint in at once...
So all you need is 27 litres of water and a head gasket failure :-)
-
firstly sorry for digging something out the dustbin. However it is the only way I think this post makes sense.
Then thank you to the OP and his work. I wrote about this recently after someone tried to flog me a £5000 machine. https://balancemotorsport.co.uk/carbon-engine-cleaning-does-it-work (https://balancemotorsport.co.uk/carbon-engine-cleaning-does-it-work)
I personally thought it was junk science as well. However having now researched this market thoroughly it does seem that some of the chemical products do work (after all we know over cleaner works!). I've yet to fully test (with boroscope) any method.
What I can say is water is the number one - i once drove a car 90 miles with a failed headgasket. It got through 27 litres of water. When I stripped it it was super clean. The engine just had a new HG and never missed a beat. This is important as some seem to pour scorn of water getting into an engine but in high humidity and at high rpm an engine ingests vast amounts of water.
The secret of course is not pouring a whole pint in at once...
So all you need is 27 litres of water and a head gasket failure :-)
Hey Julian, good to see you're still around!
Water wouldn't work on intake valves as well as it does in combustion chambers unfortunately, but it is a massive oversight that got past an unbelievable amount of engineers! A motoring faux pas to go down in history!
Anyway, I have another suspension dilemma. I might give you a buzz later.
It's Kev with the Corrado from years back btw.
-
HI Kev
do you mean the efficacy of water as a way of cleaning? I think i am going to get the steam cleaner into my 100k Fiat (sorry for swearing on here) and do some before and after shots / compression test / 0-60 times.
i can't sell it as a service as it's free to all but may be a useful endeavour.
julian
-
No water is good, I meant more from a temperature perspective. Water would flow through the intake ports as water droplets and not steam, so not hot enough to break down the carbon. Quite a few TFSI guys run water/meth injection and it has a very marginal effect on valve cleaning.
-
No water is good, I meant more from a temperature perspective. Water would flow through the intake ports as water droplets and not steam, so not hot enough to break down the carbon. Quite a few TFSI guys run water/meth injection and it has a very marginal effect on valve cleaning.
wonder what a steam cleaner will do ;-)
-
No water is good, I meant more from a temperature perspective. Water would flow through the intake ports as water droplets and not steam, so not hot enough to break down the carbon. Quite a few TFSI guys run water/meth injection and it has a very marginal effect on valve cleaning.
wonder what a steam cleaner will do ;-)
I could find out tonight... I have 6 (3 pairs) dirty valves left that need cleaning and a steam cleaner...
-
We could be onto something here boys & girls..... one home shopping channel steam cleaner per port!
-
I wonder if that's all there is to these hydrogen cleans then...a mist of water into the intake manifold.
Would explain why they do f-all
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
OK the results.
1 litre of distilled water. Injected into the brake vacuum line. Caused a check light as it only has a MAP sensor , no MAF , so with the vacuum gone it can't run! (so now you know how to disable a car with just a MAP sensor!)
The before and after pics of the piston were rubbish as I only saw the before pic it has now gone forver. You could see that some flakes had come off and it was slightly cleaner. I estimate though you'd need to to 2.5 litres a week for 10 weeks to see much difference.
The stupid camera was set up to save again under same file name. Thereby erasing what you did the last time. Nice firmware work.
Anyway i did see 10psi gain in static compression (1 cyl tested) but this could be a blip.
The real proof is the Race Technology AP22 data. Good little box this. Had it for 10 years. Always works. Uses virtually no battery.
2 runs only. Always room for improvement on either one but tried to keep everything I could control equal.
Run 1 - dirty - 11.65 sec max HP 96
Run 2 - clean - 11.7 sec max HP 94
So in essence as you'd expect - 1 litre - no real change - as your engine would munch through much more than that in a day anyway.