The age of engine downsizing is over, says Volkswagen

[oilhammer]

the EA113's has the same ignition coil problems, that precedes the ea888 ignition coil problems.

.

I have never once seen an EA113 ignition coil stick to the valve cover so bad it required the coil to be broken apart into pieces for removal. And I have R&R'd probably tens of thousands of coils from those cars. Both for failures as well as routine spark plug replacements. And the same goes for all that style coild in all the V6 and V8 VAG engines. They are a completely different coil than these new ones.

The original, old style, original coil-on-plug setup that used the bolt in coils rarely ever had an issue. Not really sure what went wrong with something so seemingly simple as coil on plug ignition, but clearly VAG lost this ability.

Of course, this sort of thing is hardly limited to VAG. There are examples from Toyota, Nissan, Subaru, GM, Ford, and whatever version of ChryCo is currently in operation, that I could spout off. Much of it is regulatory burdens coupled with consumer expectation and cost control.

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

During the EA113 timeframe, VW did go through several revisions of the coils for it prematurely failing. The "R8" (and BAR) coils seem to be more reliable.

I've had a spark plug cable failure on my old Camry 2.5L V6. Worst part was it was the rear cylinder bank, under the intake manifold.

BPY's and some ea888's had the DV diaphragm failures, more common in remapped ECU's.

With manufacturers forcing their suppliers to do annual cost reductions on parts, some issues don't show themselves until later.

 

[LRTDI]

i rented a SEAT version of the jetta. The hatchback was a tad confusing. The 1.0 turbo 6mt was fine but had to be rowed when loaded to get up to motorway speed

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

The new buzzword is "Right-sizing"

Now they call it "right-sizing", with starting with the introduction of the A4 Ultra, with the ea888-3B engine. 3B, as in 3rd gen, Budack cycle, which is a modified miller cycle, which on the A4 (FWD only) gets 27/37 mpg, compared to the equivalent 2.0T FWD automatic, getting 25/33.

A transverse 2.0L version will be on the new 7-passenger Tiguan and Passat (which the 1.8TSI gets 23/34)

 

[oilhammer]

Yes, I read about that engine. I am curious about how much it differs from the higher output EA888 engines like some of the Audis use that have the little solenoids on the exhaust side of the head, whereas this new engine appears to have them on the intake side (and maybe also the exhaust side?).

Not sure I like the "thinner timing chain" as that is already a weak spot for VAG engines that employ them.

I will still stick with my diesels.

 

[atc98002]

I'm waiting for the new Tiguan. Not at all impressed with the Q5 I'm driving now. I can't seem to get a tank of gas to average higher than 22. Audi electronic controls are not all that impressive either. I much prefer VW controls. At least the miserable RNS-315 and outdated RNS-510 have been replaced.

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

Yes, I read about that engine. I am curious about how much it differs from the higher output EA888 engines like some of the Audis use that have the little solenoids on the exhaust side of the head, whereas this new engine appears to have them on the intake side (and maybe also the exhaust side?).

Not sure I like the "thinner timing chain" as that is already a weak spot for VAG engines that employ them.

I will still stick with my diesels.

VTEC came in the 2nd generation EA888 engines.

 

[oilhammer]

VTEC came in the 2nd generation EA888 engines.

Define "second generation", because I would consider this 2014 Audi A5 to be the older design save for the row of intake valve solenoids. Still has the old coils, still has the steel can screw on oil filter, still has the steel oil pan, etc.

It DOES have the newer style HPFP and crankcase breather though. So I think the EA888 is more of an evolution, yes?

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

ea888's are evolutionary improvements.

Audi Valvelift aka VTEC was a defining feature for the 2nd gen ea888 engine.

3rd gen ea888, initially had more thermal efficiency improvements over the 2nd gen ea8888, and also featured the Twin-injection system (similar to Toyota's D4-S system), adding port injection to the direct injection system. We don't get it on VW's, but supposedly I heard some Audi engines have the twin-injection USA. This is different from the ea888-3B.

 

[kjclow]

I'm waiting for the new Tiguan. Not at all impressed with the Q5 I'm driving now. I can't seem to get a tank of gas to average higher than 22. Audi electronic controls are not all that impressive either. I much prefer VW controls. At least the miserable RNS-315 and outdated RNS-510 have been replaced.

While I've really liked the ride of the Q5s I've had for rental cars, I've wanted to throw those media centers out of each and everyone. I found it strange that the plugs for the Q3, Q5, and Q7 are all different and in different places. I also never found a scan function for the radio. Had to try to find a channel through scrolling while driving.

 

[atc98002]

There's a scan function, but it, like virtually all other functions, are buried within the MMI menu structure. They've added physical buttons (on the touchpad) to finally allow selecting radio presets, but everything else is still buried. I looked at a new Q5 last weekend, and was really confused on how to use the interface. And this is from someone who a) owns an older Audi and b) is a techie gearhead. It shouldn't be so difficult to use. My wife can't stand the way it works in our current Audi.

 

[oilhammer]

This trend seems to be spilling over to all brands, I assume because it makes a car seem much more upscale than it really is, and is super dirt cheap tech to implement.

But, as is easily seen, it becomes needlessly confusing and distracting. I want to DRIVE the car, not play a video game.

BMW's early I-drive was the gold standard for a convoluted albatross of over the top nonsense. I cannot stand those.

 

[truman]

This trend seems to be spilling over to all brands, I assume because it makes a car seem much more upscale than it really is, and is super dirt cheap tech to implement.
But, as is easily seen, it becomes needlessly confusing and distracting. I want to DRIVE the car, not play a video game.
BMW's early I-drive was the gold standard for a convoluted albatross of over the top nonsense. I cannot stand those.

I like that analogy- driving vs video game.
If I was in the market for another vehicle, the arcade theme would not be considered.

 

[PlaneCrazy]

I like that analogy- driving vs video game.
If I was in the market for another vehicle, the arcade theme would not be considered.

A late fellow pilot friend of mine, who flew a basic taildragger, once remarked to another pilot showing off his IFR radio and GPS stack "oh, so you like to go for radio rides; I prefer plane rides"...

That said I really like Apple CarPlay in my Golf. With all the road works around here having a GPS with real-time traffic info is very handy. Plus map updates are free, unlike a VW in-dash GPS. Apple Maps is wicked far ahead of the crappy RNS-315 nav unit that was in my previous Mk VI Golf and required $200 map updates. Plus Siri... hands-free texting... some technology is worth it.

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

A late fellow pilot friend of mine, who flew a basic taildragger, once remarked to another pilot showing off his IFR radio and GPS stack "oh, so you like to go for radio rides; I prefer plane rides"...

That said I really like Apple CarPlay in my Golf. With all the road works around here having a GPS with real-time traffic info is very handy. Plus map updates are free, unlike a VW in-dash GPS. Apple Maps is wicked far ahead of the crappy RNS-315 nav unit that was in my previous Mk VI Golf and required $200 map updates. Plus Siri... hands-free texting... some technology is worth it.

Map updates isn't free. It's built into your phone data plan and your home internet plan.

If you cross into the USA, and use Carplay for GPS and other data streaming, international data rates will add up real quick.

 

[bhtooefr]

Not necessarily - you could use a disconnected device, and download offline maps on Google Maps (not sure if Apple Maps supports that) on free public wifi.

But, not many people don't have internet access, and neither Apple nor Google gets paid by your ISP/cell carrier for your usage of the maps - you're paying for internet access, you're not paying for maps.

 

[kjclow]

Map updates isn't free. It's built into your phone data plan and your home internet plan.

If you cross into the USA, and use Carplay for GPS and other data streaming, international data rates will add up real quick.

I was in Ontario last week and got the text from ATT that my data usage had passed $300 and I hadn't even used the phone. I called and they put me on a $10/24 hour rate that initiates when my phone detects that I'm now in international roaming. Not sure how the plans work coming south.

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

I was in Ontario last week and got the text from ATT that my data usage had passed $300 and I hadn't even used the phone. I called and they put me on a $10/24 hour rate that initiates when my phone detects that I'm now in international roaming. Not sure how the plans work coming south.

I got hit with that bill when I was in Montreal, Quebec & Toronto last year, because my dad was playing with his phone with Google Maps on.

My phone was on airplane mode, and I switched from Android Auto to the MIB-II Navigtion in the car.

It's good to have a back up GPS, either it's the one built into the car or a portable GPS when you cross international borders

 

[tadawson]

I guess I'm the exception . . . . I can't stand phone based nav! Either a Garmin for vehicles with no built-in, or my RNS . . . cost to keep up to date is pretty trivial, and when travelling with others, I always seem to get better routes than the phones as well . . . Integration into the car/MFD is a plus as well . . . displays, ducking radio sound when thr nav speaks, etc. I view cell phones as a halfass solution for a lot of things, and the best solution for none . . . and were it not for work, I would not waste money on one. Oh, and the on-board works where there is no coverage as well . . .

 

[atc98002]

I also don't like using phone navigation while I'm driving. However, since Apple Car Play or Android Auto places the display on the dash, it becomes a far better deal. No cost map updates, traffic, etc.

I was OK with the RHS-510 in both my Tiguan and Passat. Don't care for the RNS-315 in the GTI, and the nav in my Audi really shows its age. Looking forward to the new Tiguan with the digital dash.

 

[tadawson]

Actually, massive charges for maps and traffic - it's called your phone bill . . . .

 

[PlaneCrazy]

Actually, massive charges for maps and traffic - it's called your phone bill . . . .

It depends. I've never exceeded my phone's data plan even with liberal use of Apple Maps. My plan is good across Canada, so no extra charges traveling coast-to-coast and we certainly do at least 90% in Canada. Out of the 20k km I put on my car with Apple Maps so far, zero have been outside Canada, and we had one car rental in the UK last year. My biggest use for Apple Maps is navigating around Montreal's notorious construction zones. Real-time traffic data is really helpful.

In the US and overseas, yes there are data charges, but I have a roaming plan where for $10 a day my Canadian data plan and rates apply, and if I don't use data on a given day, I don't pay the $10. It just requires careful configuration of the apps on the phone before you leave. I turn off cell data for all apps except Apple Maps, and I use the phone to get me to destination, which usually has wi-fi, then I switch off the cell data for Apple Maps. Moreover, if i need to return home or go anywhere, I set up my route on the phone via wi-fi wherever I'm staying, so the maps and route are cached, and then off I go. "Massive charges" is only if you don't avail yourself of these tricks.

My wife and I made one trip out of Canada to the US last year, it cost us a whopping $20 in extra charges to use Maps.

 

[PlaneCrazy]

I guess I'm the exception . . . . I can't stand phone based nav! Either a Garmin for vehicles with no built-in, or my RNS . . . cost to keep up to date is pretty trivial, and when travelling with others, I always seem to get better routes than the phones as well . . . Integration into the car/MFD is a plus as well . . . displays, ducking radio sound when thr nav speaks, etc. I view cell phones as a halfass solution for a lot of things, and the best solution for none . . . and were it not for work, I would not waste money on one. Oh, and the on-board works where there is no coverage as well . . .

None of the above with Apple CarPlay. Your car's infotainment centre becomes your iPhone's (or Android's) home screen. Apple Maps displays just like an in-dash GPS, the radio stops talking when nav instructions come through... it pretty much makes spending extra for an in-dash factory unit redundant and a waste of money.

 

[tadawson]

*Still* no interest! I prefer task dedicated devices, not 'one item fits nothing best' compromises. And there is no amount of money on the planet that would get me interested in an iTurd . . . closed platform, dumbed down too far . . . *I* tell the technology how I want to interact with it, not some zit-popper on the west coast . . .

And tell me how not having a phone bill and using dedicated nav isn't cheaper again? I see no mandatory reason for cellphones whatsoever . . . it's a toy and a luxury, nothing more . . .

 

[PlaneCrazy]

*Still* no interest! I prefer task dedicated devices, not 'one item fits nothing best' compromises. And there is no amount of money on the planet that would get me interested in an iTurd . . . closed platform, dumbed down too far . . . *I* tell the technology how I want to interact with it, not some zit-popper on the west coast . . .

And tell me how not having a phone bill and using dedicated nav isn't cheaper again? I see no mandatory reason for cellphones whatsoever . . . it's a toy and a luxury, nothing more . . .

Well App-Connect accommodates Android as well

I personally find them useful. For example in Montreal I can pay for my parking spot on line, and go to the restaurant/appointment/whatever and if I go over my planned time I can top up the meter from wherever I am even if the car is a couple of blocks away.

Maybe a dedicated GPS is *better*, but I find my phone GPS when displayed on the dash *adequate*. I certainly wouldn't pay for a higher trim level just to get an in-dash GPS, and I feel stand-alone units will go the way of the dodo. When I sold my plane recently I couldn't even give the new owner my Garmin GPS. Everyone now uses Foreflight on their iPads or something similar.

To each their own I guess.

 

[atc98002]

Actually, massive charges for maps and traffic - it's called your phone bill . . . .

Not really. My phone bill doesn't change if I use the maps or other online functions. I stream Pandora almost 8 hours a day at work, and I never come close to my data limit. If I needed the nav function on the phone (don't need it on a daily basis), it would impact my bill by $0. As far as the phone bill, I pay it regardless of app use. Occasional app use doesn't impact me at all.

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

Well App-Connect accommodates Android as well

I personally find them useful. For example in Montreal I can pay for my parking spot on line, and go to the restaurant/appointment/whatever and if I go over my planned time I can top up the meter from wherever I am even if the car is a couple of blocks away.

Maybe a dedicated GPS is *better*, but I find my phone GPS when displayed on the dash *adequate*. I certainly wouldn't pay for a higher trim level just to get an in-dash GPS, and I feel stand-alone units will go the way of the dodo. When I sold my plane recently I couldn't even give the new owner my Garmin GPS. Everyone now uses Foreflight on their iPads or something similar.

To each their own I guess.

If you go into an area with no cell service, then you lose the GPS tracking on CarPlay and Android auto.

I hope Google doesn't kill the Waze user interaction, since Google prefers to use more voice activation than screen interaction.

Stand-alone units are still useful if you're a business traveler. And you can get stand-alone units with free traffic and map updates.

 

[PlaneCrazy]

If you go into an area with no cell service, then you lose the GPS tracking on CarPlay and Android auto.

I hope Google doesn't kill the Waze user interaction, since Google prefers to use more voice activation than screen interaction.

Stand-alone units are still useful if you're a business traveler. And you can get stand-alone units with free traffic and map updates.

Not necessarily. Maps caches large areas, and GPS position is based on the GPS receiver in the phone, not on whether or not there is cell service.

 

[20IndigoBlue02]

Not necessarily. Maps caches large areas, and GPS position is based on the GPS receiver in the phone, not on whether or not there is cell service.

ive had that happen with carplay, driving from an area with decent 4G-LTE signal to no signal, and then the map no longer displays, it just shows a grid system.

 

[tadawson]

Yeah . . . GPS coordinates with no map info may be present, but is pretty much without value. Between business travel, and travel to a few places regularly with minimal coverage (cell phones don't market wellto deer and bears, so very poor coverage outside the occasional town . . . a cohple of spots where I callyou within a couple hundred feet where signal will die . . .) coupled with the piss poor tiny screens/interface on most phones . . . . the list of reasons for dedicated devices keeps climbing for me . . .