TDI Cam Timing Adjustment (for rough idle) How-to (with pics)

narongc73 said:

Don't you mean from 4.9 to .5?

Click to expand...

No. It's an advance of the cam shaft. A clock wise bump on the 18 mm bolt.

darkhorse said:

No. It's an advance of the cam shaft. A clock wise bump on the 18 mm bolt.

Click to expand...

I didn't think it would run well at 4.9. then again mine ran fine at -4.4. hey whatever works.

Cam timing in a Skoda Octavia BXE

FrAN_oC said:

Thanks again! Without this post I was going mad!!!

Now its at 0.0º and varies to -0.5º under hard acceleration. Now my car Is alive again!!

The strange thing is that older PDs are different. I am used to old PDs, and I was going the wrong side. Now everything is fine, and I am happy that I didn't broke anything.

Good fuel consumption, lower temperatures (water, oil... and I suppose EGT), and black smoke is back again!! My car is chipped so it's smoky,

Thanks everyone who posted at this post. It really helped me!

RGDS from Spain!

Click to expand...

Fran, I have a Skoda Octavia TDI PD BXE also! And have the same will of adjusting it after 70.000 km .

Please, make it clear the readings you have after the adjusting procedure, as it seems that sometimes you mention the angle of advance and sometimes the torsion value.

My torsion value is -1,65 at present and I think it is a little retard. Want to put it 0.5 to 1.0 .

What do you fellows think?

By the way my car is running very well, but I want to improve.

Regards,

OldBeaver
From Chile

Hallo,

I have got a question about cam timing on 1,9PD 77Kw BKC. Im trying to find one information, but I cant find it :-(

In service manual for mentioned engine, there is only one thing about timing, which means the use of original special locking tool for it. Every engine of the same or similar S.N. has got value of -3.9 after use of it. My question is why "0" is the right number, if there is -3,9 with original tool.

One interesting information:
I played with timing on brake with my car and there was -10Hp and -15Lb-ft with change to -5.8 from original -3.9. Now Im on -2.5, but unfortunatelly I dont have access to brake anymore.

Thank You for answers and sorry for my poor english.
Vigo

I'm also interested in this. I recall having similar value after TB service on my BKC. Any ideas?

See this thread.

It seems more like it's finding the new 'sweet spot' after replacing the timing belt. As far as I know, there is no way for us, average users/owners, to know what the torsion is supposed to be after a timing belt and/or a cam change.

Tony

Ok that explains some unknown things, but still, why some has exactly -3.9 with null tool. That can not be coincidence. Ill go back to -3.9 from my actual -2.5 to see If I will find any difference.

Looks like -2.4, -2.9 and -3.9 are common values for European PD engines.

Vigo: do you have any negative symptoms with -3.9 timing? Like rough idle, hard starting, "lazy" response to accelerator pedal, shaking/discomfort at idle... anything else?

Might be interesting for all of you:
http://vwforum.vwforum.ro/topic/72916-camshaft-timing-torsion-valuela-motoare-pd-tdi/
http://vwts.ru/forum/index.php?showtopic=87924&st=40

(Use google translate for both)

http://www.vwaudiforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?103208-Do-You-have-VCDS

2 Henrick: To be honest I did not read your links yet, cause Im a bit drunk now, but Ill try -3.9 tomorrow. My car worked 35000 miles with -3,9 without any problems. Than I starded to play a bit. First step was chip to 151Hp and now im playing with a cam timing. Ill keep you informed about any news, but I guess -3.9 its just best for my type of engine

Hi all

i've just checked my torsion value on vagcom, and its at -0.5KW, i do have a slightly lumpy idle, but its not tooo bad, economy could be a bit better, is it worth my adjusting my timing a little? what range should i aim for?

apples12, it seems that BKC engines love retarded timing. Personally I have my timing at +0.5 KW. Fuel economy is really poor. Looks like going retarded, might dramatically increase it. Look at VCDS fuel consumption value before the adjustment, at idle (Block 015 if I remember correctly). Mine is 0.9 l/h with all accessories off. Someone reported having only 0.2 l/h (!!!) with timing set at -3.9. If I were you, I'd try to retard the timing down to -2.5, -2.9 or -3.9. Watch if your lumpy idle is the same as it was with -0.5, is it worse or better. Oh, and don't forget to check your both, momentary fuel consumption at idle (before and after adjustment) and overall fuel economy after driving a tank or two. You can always experiment with these values.

I had a -1,5 torsion value and changed to +0,5 . The most noticeable effect was that fuel consumption changed from 0,6 lt/h to 0.8 lt/hr at idle. Rest of the behavior is difficult to say, but fuel mileage seems to diminish, in the same course of 1 km flat.

I am going to move it back to the original.

Obviously, we cannot stablish a "best" or even "good" value for torsion, as it depends in how old is the timing belt and time from last timing adjustment.

Sincerely, I thought it would improve, however, it didn´t. At least, it didn´t turn too worse.

Oldbeaver
Skoda Octavia II 2009
1.9 TDI PD 70.000 km

HI.
I have a AUY engine on which I changed the MAF some months ago (this was the 2nd one I had to do). Since the MAF changes it has unmasked another problem - I had a slight judder at 1500rpm.

After reading this thread I reset my torsion from -0.7 to 0.6
Since doing this the judder has not gone and I now get a rough idle when the engine is cold. The engine also seems 'rougher' throughout the range (hard to describe, just not smooth?).

I live in the UK and after reading these last pages am wondering if I should set the torsion value back to -0.7 or even a bit further back? Would this help?

Steve, it's such an easy adjustment to make, you would be the best person to tell us. Change it back, see what happens and let us know.

Read through the vwforum.ro threads (I'm Romanian) and I think I'm understanding something better now with regards to this adjustment.

The range of -3 to +3 is just that, a range. The cam torsion values can/should be adjusted within that range BUT.... the big tell is the Idle Smooth Characteristics values. The closer those are to each other (and to zero) the better the adjustment made. So a torsion value of 0.0 and idle injection values all over the place is not as good as a -1 or +1 with a idle injection values very close to each other and to zero.

In other words, adjust your torsion value such that the Idle Smooth values for each cylinder are as close to each other and to zero as possible. We don't want big differences in those values.

I would like to confirm this myself but I don't have VCDS anymore. Also, the threads there said this adjustment should be done on a WARM engine. Any takers want to try and see?

Andre, do you mean to watch block 14, watching to see if the values get closer to zero?

3 Torsion values experimented in a BXE engine

Hello to all,

Well, I have been following this subject for a while, and decided to experiment with it. I bought a torque key, a special tools for turning camshafts, and read a lot. Rented VCDS software and inteface also, of course.

Here are my outcomes:

Torsion value fuel consumption km/lt (flat, cruise control)

-1,5 0.6 lt/h 36.3 km/lt in 6th, at 70 km/h

+0.5 0.8 lt/h 34.1 km/lt same conditions

0.0 0.4 lt/h 45.1 km/lt same conditions


Conditions of the test were:

Engine at 85 degrees centigrades (hot)
Pave tract is the same for all the measures, a flat and streight 2 km long.
Speed of 70km/h is attained before the test begins, activate cruise control and initialize mean speed display the car has built in.

Medition is MEAN fuel yield on the test tract of road.

Therefore, most of the variables are kept about the same, only wind speed wasn´t controlled, as well as traffic, but I always tested when no traffic.

The medition was made in both directions, forth and back, and I calculated the mean.

Conclusion:

Well, the torsion value is just an index of the timing camshaft advance.
I used three positions (three torsion values) being the first the factory one.
Speaking frankly, I was dissapointed when I advanced to +0.5 W and consumption increased. Then I moved back to original position. As it does change, I tried a point in between and I got a significant decrease in the fuel spent, from 0.6 lt/h to 0.41 lt/h. Then I went to the road to see if that turned into real yield, and it did.

Now, I will stay with this torsion value, and test a full tank of fuel, as well as longer trips, higher speeds, etc.

Anyway, the car feels good, with strong torque at low speeds, climbing, etc.

Hope this experience may help others.

The ideal should be take about 4 or 5 positions, make a graph and spot the optimum.

Best,

OldBeaver

whitedog said:

Andre, do you mean to watch block 14, watching to see if the values get closer to zero?

Click to expand...

Correct sir, make the adjustment on torsion then go to block 14 and see how close the 4 values get to each other and to zero. A finely tuned injector balance should, in theory, provide best power to consumption ratio.

andreigbs said:

Correct sir, make the adjustment on torsion then go to block 14 and see how close the 4 values get to each other and to zero. A finely tuned injector balance should, in theory, provide best power to consumption ratio.

Click to expand...

SIR? I'm too young to be a sir.

And if it wasn't for my back and arthritis, I'd kick your butt.

Andre, I want to play with this some more to see what I come up with. I'm thinking about those numbers as an aggregate will come out close to zero, regardless of how far off one is from zero. I can see if it gets the numbers all closer to zero, then the idle may be smoother, but I don't see how it can effect fuel consumption.

So if it's slow at work tomorrow, I may play with it a bit more and see what else I come up with.

I played with it yesterday and it definitely changes the IQ at idle.

Oldbeaver said:

Hello to all,
Well, I have been following this subject for a while, and decided to experiment with it. I bought a torque key, a special tools for turning camshafts, and read a lot. Rented VCDS software and inteface also, of course.
Here are my outcomes:
Torsion value fuel consumption km/lt (flat, cruise control)
-1,5 0.6 lt/h 36.3 km/lt in 6th, at 70 km/h
+0.5 0.8 lt/h 34.1 km/lt same conditions
0.0 0.4 lt/h 45.1 km/lt same conditions

Click to expand...

Great information! Please keep us informed about further finding on this.

Also, are you sure the 0.0 torsion value was actually 0.0 and not "out of range" reading?

Torsion value in range, & injection deviation tiny.

Henrick said:

Great information! Please keep us informed about further finding on this.
Also, are you sure the 0.0 torsion value was actually 0.0 and not "out of range" reading?

Click to expand...

Let see if that is possible: First, let us define what would be an out of range value? I have read some people get over abs(4) for torsion value. I just moved it to the opposite direction I did before, and I was at +0.5 . I made my marks when the first test, and I use them as a reference now. I am just a little out of the original (factory, initial) mark, but to the opposite direction.
My impression is that it is on 0.0 The instrument says that, also.
Besides, if it was out of range, wouldn´t it be a very bad fuel yield and even pistons beating valves?

Here is a copy of VCDS log at idle, after the test trip (the test was long, involved other tests):

19:39:33
819 /min Engine Speed (G28)
4.1 mg/str Injection Quantity
7.1°KW Injection Duration (specified)
85.5°C Coolant Temperature (G69)
0.0°KW Torsion Value
14.3 mg/str Start Injection Quantity
48.0 Start Synchronisation
30.6°C Intake Air Temperature (G72)
0.07 mg/str Injection Quantity Deviation Cyl. 1
-0.14 mg/str Injection Quantity Deviation Cyl. 2
-0.02 mg/str Injection Quantity Deviation Cyl. 3
0.12 mg/str Injection Quantity Deviation Cyl. 4

Best.
Oldbeaver

whitedog said:

Steve, it's such an easy adjustment to make, you would be the best person to tell us. Change it back, see what happens and let us know.

Click to expand...

Originally my torsion was -0.7 when I had some juddering. Set it to +1.1 which didn't help and gave it uneven idle.

So today played around and set it to -1.1 - was so slow I thought the MAF had blown again! Tinkered around and got it 0.0 Going to work in a while and see how it performs.

Oldbeaver said:

Let see if that is possible: First, let us define what would be an out of range value? I have read some people get over abs(4) for torsion value. I just moved it to the opposite direction I did before, and I was at +0.5 . I made my marks when the first test, and I use them as a reference now. I am just a little out of the original (factory, initial) mark, but to the opposite direction.
My impression is that it is on 0.0 The instrument says that, also.
Besides, if it was out of range, wouldn´t it be a very bad fuel yield and even pistons beating valves?
Here is a copy of VCDS log at idle, after the test trip (the test was long, involved other tests):
19:39:33
819 /min Engine Speed (G28)
4.1 mg/str Injection Quantity
7.1°KW Injection Duration (specified)
85.5°C Coolant Temperature (G69)
0.0°KW Torsion Value
14.3 mg/str Start Injection Quantity
48.0 Start Synchronisation
30.6°C Intake Air Temperature (G72)
0.07 mg/str Injection Quantity Deviation Cyl. 1
-0.14 mg/str Injection Quantity Deviation Cyl. 2
-0.02 mg/str Injection Quantity Deviation Cyl. 3
0.12 mg/str Injection Quantity Deviation Cyl. 4
Best.
Oldbeaver

Click to expand...

Thanks for posting this!! One more question; could you please do this test: engine warm and idling (like above test). Check your Block 004 field 4 (the Torsion value). It should be 0, right? Then rev the engine in neutral to 2500-3500 RPM. Does the torsion value change? If yes, then how much? Thanks!!

Steve E said:

Originally my torsion was -0.7 when I had some juddering. Set it to +1.1 which didn't help and gave it uneven idle.

So today played around and set it to -1.1 - was so slow I thought the MAF had blown again! Tinkered around and got it 0.0 Going to work in a while and see how it performs.

Click to expand...

The juddering (misfire) is still there but substantially 'softened', nearly un-noticeable. The uneven idle when it's cold is still there. Clearly I must do further research and look, or start, another thread.

The timing adjustment helped but didn't cure.

whitedog said:

Andre, I want to play with this some more to see what I come up with. I'm thinking about those numbers as an aggregate will come out close to zero, regardless of how far off one is from zero. I can see if it gets the numbers all closer to zero, then the idle may be smoother, but I don't see how it can effect fuel consumption.

So if it's slow at work tomorrow, I may play with it a bit more and see what else I come up with.

I played with it yesterday and it definitely changes the IQ at idle.

Click to expand...

From my reading I gathered that the closer the idle values are to zero (and consequently to each other) the less the ECU has to adjust injection quantity in each cylinder to keep a smooth, quiet idle. This fine tuning translates into better atomization at idle and, to my mind, across the whole rpm range.

It should run smoother and better overall, with a fuel economy improvement as the proof in the pudding.

I would love to test this myself, if only I hadn't sold my VCDS... It seems for many folks 0.0 torsion is "about right", but some report better running with slightly negative values while others report the opposite, which is why I think this issue deserves more testing. At least for us PD owners.

I am trying to be as respectful as possible on the Intarwebs, no age-related jokes I assure you.

Oldbeaver said:

Torsion value fuel consumption km/lt (flat, cruise control)

-1,5 0.6 lt/h 36.3 km/lt in 6th, at 70 km/h

+0.5 0.8 lt/h 34.1 km/lt same conditions

0.0 0.4 lt/h 45.1 km/lt same conditions

Click to expand...

So I got much bravery and decided to do the adjustment. I warmed up the car and took a try. These are values I got while trying: -2.4, -0.5, -3.4, 1.0, 0.5, 2.4, 0.0. What is strange that momentary fuel consumption was 0.6 L/h for all but -3.4 ant 2.4 values. While it had -3.4, it started with 0.6 L/h and after ~1,5 minutes of idle I saw 0.4 L/h. With 2.4 I saw 0.8 L/h consumpion. Finally I decided to leave Torsion alone at 0.0.

All measurements were done on warm engine (65*C-75*C) with all accessories off, cabin blower off too. The engine code is BKC.

Anyone else with same/similar engine code could share their values? I guess 0.4 L/h consumption is our goal, but how can that be reached?

Torsion Value vs RPM

Henrick said:

Thanks for posting this!! One more question; could you please do this test: engine warm and idling (like above test). Check your Block 004 field 4 (the Torsion value). It should be 0, right? Then rev the engine in neutral to 2500-3500 RPM. Does the torsion value change? If yes, then how much? Thanks!!

Click to expand...

The data is too long. I can send it to you if you tell me how. In summary:
In the log data I produced and saved, rpm went from 819 1/seg (iddle) up to
3192 1/seg, at about 150 km/h. Torsion value kept flat on 0.0.
It was a test trip, however, I have to stop many times.

Any comments?

Oldbeaver

Check you Private Messages.