If you pull the tensioner stud it gives you room to get it out with the stud. Eliminates the need to pull the engine mount and speeds up the job. Also there is a set of two tools to keep the timing relationship for 17.00 that you pretty much must use. I doubt if pulling the stud as well has made it into common knowledge yet. The room is not bad after you get all the junk out of the way. I must admit the old 1.6 liter diesels were easy by comparison.

Volkswagon wants about 500.00 for the belt, Water pump, tensioner and small roller I am told now. You can get decent quality aftermarket kits for 112.00 American. Some a little higher and some a little lower depending on the engine type.

Do not pay the dealer the 44.00 for the diesel fuel filter cartridge. Twenty K changes are recommended and they all come out of China anyways. Can be had for six dollars. The white box parts are coming from the oem companies that supplied the original volkswagons production parts. Hans auto parts on the net looks like someone you can talk to when it comes to common especially general maintenance parts.

After some thought I have reached some possible conclusions. When I mentally compare the newer engines to our 2000 tdi we had. This is a substantial advantage.

I suspect the cam grind is different. Enough so perhaps the newer engine needed variable cam timing perhaps. This is based simply on the change in the torque curve primarily I observe. The 2000 tdi had a much broader torque base. I find I cannot drive this car the same. I am using the peak torque area that is semi isolated certainly above 1300 rpm. I could pull tree stumps with the 2000 in comparison there.

Then when you also throw in the first gear ratio seems taller now in comparison in my memory. The dual mass flywheel with its very long internal springs should help but may have no effect either way. It absorbs and releases a little energy. Not enough to make any signifigant difference though on superficial examination. Same effect if you had very long springs in a clutch plate that there is no room for somewhat.

It could be the cumulative result of a few things. I have little doubt but of course no certainty that a milder cam might help. At the same time it would reduce or penalize in other ways.


I even wonder if the overall situation is further compounded by the poor fuel in north America. The engine changes were tested during development in Europe probably on their fuel. Just some thoughts that may be totally wrong.

Could be a bigger turbo too.

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

As I was posting late last night before returning to bed. In the back of my mind I though I might be missing something. The same displacement engine that was well behaved in 2000.

Was not so much anymore but apparent power was increased substantially. Then it occurred to me that I had experimented with really advancing the fuel timing at one time on their 1.6 diesel engines.

I could detect no pre ignition problems in the short term tests. Power was really substantially increased as well. Two engines indicated they were not strong enough to stand it by periodically loosening the front dampers. I also thought the German engineers had visited this area and remained very conservative at the time. Those pulses had to be moderated to use the advanced timing. So the double mass flywheel might have came to be.

Technically it would cope better I suspect in a situation like I had.. Unfortunatly in many cases in practice it also fails. Here on the newer engine starting in 2006 we have a sizable apparent power increase reflected in much better acceleration. Yet the engines horsepower ratings and torque ratings are not changed much I suspect. It surprised me when I found the 2006 only claims 100 horsepower reciently. The torque is decent but they do not describe it well enough by showing a new torque curve.

If the timing curve of the injection can be bent favoring more retarded timing at lower rpms. Torque effect might be restored. I did not notice a large torque effect drop off with the single mass flywheel at idle speeds on the 2000. There is an aftermarket single mass flywheel kit available for the newer engines but a warning it affects things. Never described how though and I have never really looked into it.

Also the failures of the double mass flywheels could mean they are being worked to death. If they are working heavily in effect they are reducing the effect of a heavy flywheel perhaps. Or attempting to duplicate it with much less mass. One test for them when examining them used. Is how much stiffness remains in those very long springs. By hand you should only be able to move them a few flywheel teeth in relation to each other. This indicates they are almost always working at their function to me perhaps. The springs are beat otherwise.That would be from attempting to dampen out the pulses that I experienced on the 1.6 engines that seemed problematic to me. Being a simple guy I would need a description of just how this newer engine does with the single mass aftermarket flywheel. It is a also much cheaper substitute.

The pulse vibration is very strong and quick on the 1.6 I found. It will loosen up the damper with advanced timing. Not right away but it does it and it does it on more than one engine. The performance of the engine was almost as good as this current engine when I experimented. Well at least compared to the normal timing setup on that engine.

The 123s have a habit of also loosening the front damper so I never went along with increasing their fuel timing. Nor did I want to experiment with that engine because of this. I think perhaps far better minds than mine came up with the dual mass flywheel instead for the issue.

When volkswagon eliminated the function of the egr system might even have allowed them to push the timing ahead even further. So volkswagon may have the same thoughts I have. If the pollution gear is restored to operation. How much else will have to be changed and if it is the power will have to drop. Otherwise it will have serious maintenance problems at least. Perhaps not right away but probable.

\I discontinued the testing simply because I could see no way I could deal easily enough with the damper problem and was getting some other concerns. Of course even the 1.6 would seem to be tempermental or low torque near idle. If it did not have the heavy mass single flywheel as well. In my mind maybe the german engineers thought the compensation the dual mass flywheel presents would take care of the problem I experienced. Maybe it does but only at a price. Or the total package of slight design changes interact with each other and produce a less than desired effect. My 2006 has almost no usable torque at idle rpm in comparison to the 2000 engine.

I think I have mastered the clutch engine relationship on my car. Not enough yet to totally trust myself. Since I still find myself paying real attention to it at times. I am not a better driver than Tom either. I just think my engine may have just a smigen more torque at idle speeds perhaps than his.

At the same time with all my conjecture. Tom could be absolutely right that some control function just drops off a cliff and the car quits. What should be a little troubling is volkswagon seems to have had this issue for some time. While not really addressing it to my knowledge. In my mind I think they have to know the reasons.

To pacify the consumer in the year of my cars production. They specifically blamed the oil as a scapegoat or decoy. Even today it is still harder to find the oil with the rating it needs. Far easier to find the oils for the later diesel engines as well as the earlier ones.

Yet pulled my cars engine and the total car from distribution for 2007 in north America. They claimed it was for pollution reasons. Strapped a new fuel control system on. Requiring a different head casting and back into the market place for 2008.