New car problems

milhous

Hi,

I bought a new car in march and it has given me a few niggly problems. keys not working, infortainment system crashing and I also put two litres of oil in it since I got it, I've put up 30k km tbf.

I left it in for a service last Thursday and still haven't gotten it back, they said they are trying to re-code the keys but are awaiting instructions from VW (who they have not heard anything back from since last Friday) in Germany. Because they wiped the keys I cannot take the car back at all.

Is it just a waiting game for me that I should go along with? They gave me a petrol trendline golf for my troubles as they said they don't keep any bigger/higher spec courtesy cars.

Thanks for any help.

jimgoose

A litre in less than 10,000 miles is by no means excessive. I keep hearing these fancy-dan in-car entertainment systems are too bloody clever by half for their own good these days as well. And the key, well - shít happens I suppose. I'd give them a chance, at least they didn't see you immobile.

milhous

That would make sense re oil. Although I wanted an oil change at 15k km, and when I rang them they said it would be 30k km due to long life service/ or oil or some such.

It wasn't an option to leave me immobile as VW assist covers rental cars. How long do I leave them with the car though before kicking up a fuss?

If I wanted to drive a trendline golf I would've saved myself 15k.

Alanstrainor

milhous wrote: »

That would make sense re oil. Although I wanted an oil change at 15k km, and when I rang them they said it would be 30k km due to long life service/ or oil or some such.

It wasn't an option to leave me immobile as VW assist covers rental cars. How long do I leave them with the car though before kicking up a fuss?

If I wanted to drive a trendline golf I would've saved myself 15k.

I'd get the oil changed every 15k km despite what the service interval is. If you're doing high miles your car deserves it.

9935452

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I'd get the oil changed every 15k km despite what the service interval is. If you're doing high miles your car deserves it.

I completely agree here , i hate the thought of long life oil , id prefer to change at 5 to 10 k milesregardless.

R.O.R

I'm pretty sure the highly qualified engineers who set the oil change schedules on vehicles know what they are doing, but I might point VW to this thread so they can see the error of their ways. Them internet people must know better.

From experience of diesels, on long life intervals, running without issues to over 250,000km, I can say it isn't a problem if you are doing decent mileage. If you aren't hitting the 30,000km within the 2 years, then it may be best to swap to the 15k intervals, but at 30k since March, there's no need to do it any sooner unless you like p1ssing money down the drain.

9935452

R.O.R wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the highly qualified engineers who set the oil change schedules on vehicles know what they are doing, but I might point VW to this thread so they can see the error of their ways. Them internet people must know better.

From experience of diesels, on long life intervals, running without issues to over 250,000km, I can say it isn't a problem if you are doing decent mileage. If you aren't hitting the 30,000km within the 2 years, then it may be best to swap to the 15k intervals, but at 30k since March, there's no need to do it any sooner unless you like p1ssing money down the drain.

What about 520 bmws which have the timing chain issues which a lot of lads attribute to long life servicing.
And there are cars with dpf issues which can end up filling the sump with diesel.
Mazdas are known for this.
For reasons like this, this highly qualified engineer prefers to change his oil more often.
30 quid for oil 10 for filter.

Ive a couple of buddies working servicing cars for hertz and they say long life servicing only creates problems .

166man

R.O.R wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the highly qualified engineers who set the oil change schedules on vehicles know what they are doing, but I might point VW to this thread so they can see the error of their ways. Them internet people must know better.

From experience of diesels, on long life intervals, running without issues to over 250,000km, I can say it isn't a problem if you are doing decent mileage. If you aren't hitting the 30,000km within the 2 years, then it may be best to swap to the 15k intervals, but at 30k since March, there's no need to do it any sooner unless you like p1ssing money down the drain.

What about the marketing and accounting department who had an input into the mileage interval?

I don't buy into this long life oil lark. It's simply meeting the midpoint between what the service engineers believe and what the accountants and marketers want.

power pants

and you know this,how?

R.O.R

9935452 wrote: »

What about 520 bmws which have the timing chain issues which a lot of lads attribute to long life servicing.

My personal car is an N47 engine 520d, which is extending it's own service intervals past 30,000km, then I'm going further than that due to one thing or another. 208,000km on it now and pulls like a train. Expect servicing, tyres and bulbs there has been no other work done in the 120,000km I've put on.

9935452 wrote: »

And there are cars with dpf issues which can end up filling the sump with diesel.
Mazdas are known for this.

That's just poor design. Opel have the same issues expect they have an oil quality warning. That means we generally end up doing an oil change on those before the 30k service interval.

We're running Mazda's on 15k intervals (rather than the 20k Mazda say) to try and stop problems arising, but it doesn't seem to be making a blind bit of difference.

9935452 wrote: »

For reasons like this, this highly qualified engineer prefers to change his oil more often.
30 quid for oil 10 for filter.

If it's that cheap and you have time to do it yourself then you may as well, but I still reckon you are wasting money.

9935452 wrote: »

Ive a couple of buddies working servicing cars for hertz and they say long life servicing only creates problems .

Hertz rental cars? Think that's more about the end user and type of driving they get, than the servicing schedules.

166man wrote: »

What about the marketing and accounting department who had an input into the mileage interval?

I don't buy into this long life oil lark. It's simply meeting the midpoint between what the service engineers believe and what the accountants and marketers want.

I can't see why long service intervals would appeal to accountants, but definitely to marketing, but they obviously don't have the final say otherwise Toyota would have gone to longer intervals years ago, rather than persisting with their 15k intervals.

power pants wrote: »

and you know this,how?

Not sure who that's directed at, but if it's me, I've over a dozen years experience in Irish fleet companies, so I'm not talking about a few vehicles, it's tens of thousands of vehicles.

jimgoose

I'm not convinced about this long service-interval caper with modern turbodiesels. Far from it. However, while the jury is out I will say that two big problems these days are oil consumption, even from new, and people not dipping and topping up properly as required, and also taking off and booting Jaysis out of engines from stone-cold.

Toyotafanboi

Reminds me of our 500 at home.

Bought it at 6 months old with around 16k kms on it ex hire drive or courtesy car. Several months later with just 18k kms on the clock it's pouring blue smoke on start-up, dipped it for oil and the dipstick is bone dry.

Went back to Fiat a bit cross, a less than 1 year old car burnt through a sump of oil and belching blue smoke just 3k kms after a service. Oh, that car has never been serviced, they are on30k intervals :rolleyes:... why would you give a car a service interval that would basically destroy it? The car was completely incapable of making the 30k or anything close to it. All the car had had done before we bought it was a wash and hoover, bulbs and tyres checked.

Anyway, changed the oil with Fiat at 18k, there's just around 21k on it now and the dipstick was nearly dry again. I reckon we done damage letting it get so low and old initially. Good professional practise would have been to do an oil change or at a bare minimum to make the owner aware of the suicidal service interval.

It's a bit to do with built in obsolescence imo, to make the car wear out quicker to make you buy another one. I mean there is no difference between the 1.2 fire engine in our 141 500 with a 30k interval and a 1.2 fire engine in a 95 punto with a 15k interval (mechanically at least) that should allow the interval to be doubled. I mean even15k is optomistic really with that particular engine.

bucketybuck

166man wrote: »

What about the marketing and accounting department who had an input into the mileage interval?

I don't buy into this long life oil lark. It's simply meeting the midpoint between what the service engineers believe and what the accountants and marketers want.

Your logic is completely faulty. Do you really think the accountants want people servicing their cars at longer intervals?

The aftersales market is huge and every manufacturer has vested interest in it, it's a godsend to the manufacturer that there is an accepted wisdom that people should be changing their oil more frequently. Shorter intervals mean more money for dealers and best of all they don't need to sell that fact, people want to believe it already.

The manufacturer will not claim a longer service interval lightly, not only because of revenue but also because they will want that vehicle serviced and checked when it is still in the warranty period to prevent any major issues from developing. (better to catch things early if they have to pay for them). But the fact is that the oils can easily run for far far longer than is commonly accepted and the designers of the vehicles know this.

You guys are talking about changing oils every 10 or 15k, actually the oils in our range are designed to run for over 80000km depending on usage, and they are not some super oil but a common 10/30 and 5/30. Believe, there is a lot more room for error in those oil change intervals than you might think.

swarlb

166man wrote: »

What about the marketing and accounting department who had an input into the mileage interval?

I don't buy into this long life oil lark. It's simply meeting the midpoint between what the service engineers believe and what the accountants and marketers want.

If I was running the 'accounting or marketing' dept, I'd insist on oil changes every 1000km or 5 days, whichever came first, using the most expensive oil available, and only from the main dealership (any other outlet voids the warranty) Same with any other service items....
Any 'service engineers' disagreeing with this would be sacked forthwith........

bucketybuck

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

Reminds me of our 500 at home.

Bought it at 6 months old with around 16k kms on it ex hire drive or courtesy car. Several months later with just 18k kms on the clock it's pouring blue smoke on start-up, dipped it for oil and the dipstick is bone dry.

Can I ask, did you check the oil level when you bought it? Or are you saying it burnt 6/7L of oil in 2 months?

Toyotafanboi

bucketybuck wrote: »

Can I ask, did you check the oil level when you bought it? Or are you saying it burnt 6/7L of oil in 2 months?

My point is that it wasn't serviced when we bought it. I foolishly assumed that it was, given it's mileage and the fact that any car we've ever bought at a dealer ever, has had at an absolute minimum an oil change before we picked it up. The first time I checked the oil was at 18k, 2k after we bought it.

The dealer didn't even check the oil condition or level before we bought it, because "Fiat say they are on 30k service intervals". It hadn't seen a drop of oil since it left the factory.

A car with a 2.6 liter sump on 30k intervals?
A dealer not checking levels pre sale?
A dealer making no mention of the service plan attached to the car to a buyer?
i'm not a mechanic, but i'm not a fool, it's all asking for trouble. We must have been verging on seizing of the engine territory the first time.

bucketybuck

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

My point is that it wasn't serviced when we bought it. I foolishly assumed that it was, given it's mileage and the fact that any car we've ever bought at a dealer ever, has had at an absolute minimum an oil change before we picked it up. The first time I checked the oil was at 18k, 2k after we bought it.

The dealer didn't even check the oil condition or level before we bought it, because "Fiat say they are on 30k service intervals". It hadn't seen a drop of oil since it left the factory.

A car with a 2.6 liter sump on 30k intervals?
A dealer not checking levels pre sale?
A dealer making no mention of the service plan attached to the car to a buyer?
i'm not a mechanic, but i'm not a fool, it's all asking for trouble. We must have been verging on seizing of the engine territory the first time.

I'm not getting into a pissing match between you and your dealer, I just find it noteworthy that as you berate the dealer for not changing the oil as standard, you also don't check your own fluid levels on a regular basis.

Dealers always used to carry out a service on used cars, but then drivers always used to do regular checks before driving. The world has changed on both sides it would appear.

Me, I check my oil and water, but I'm old school to be honest.

Special Circumstances

bucketybuck wrote: »

Your logic is completely faulty. Do you really think the accountants want people servicing their cars at longer intervals?

The aftersales market is huge and every manufacturer has vested interest in it, it's a godsend to the manufacturer that there is an accepted wisdom that people should be changing their oil more frequently. Shorter intervals mean more money for dealers and best of all they don't need to sell that fact, people want to believe it already.

The manufacturer will not claim a longer service interval lightly, not only because of revenue but also because they will want that vehicle serviced and checked when it is still in the warranty period to prevent any major issues from developing. (better to catch things early if they have to pay for them). But the fact is that the oils can easily run for far far longer than is commonly accepted and the designers of the vehicles know this.

You guys are talking about changing oils every 10 or 15k, actually the oils in our range are designed to run for over 80000km depending on usage, and they are not some super oil but a common 10/30 and 5/30. Believe, there is a lot more room for error in those oil change intervals than you might think.

swarlb wrote: »

If I was running the 'accounting or marketing' dept, I'd insist on oil changes every 1000km or 5 days, whichever came first, using the most expensive oil available, and only from the main dealership (any other outlet voids the warranty) Same with any other service items....
Any 'service engineers' disagreeing with this would be sacked forthwith........

Fleet sales are huge.
Fleets are selected on the total estimated cost, which includes servicing.

drumroll please.... if the manufacturer can convince the fleet guys that this model will make it past the expected ownership period with less cost than a rivals car, then they win those sales.

The accountant calculating what cars to supply to the company will absolutely not want an oil change every 5 days.

It makes sense that the servicing hopes and expectations of accountants in charge of fleets would be taken into account in the recommended service intervals. What does the manufacturer care as long as it scrapes out the end of the warranty period?








Also @ R.O.R - surely the qualified engineer that made a mess of the dpf design, (or the oil pump, or the timing chain) is just as qualified and prone to mistakes as the guy setting service intervals? What I mean to say is, you can't really dismiss this fault or that bad design but say that service intervals are engineering gospel. Just pointing out a discrepancy in your argument rather than looking for an argument:) e.g. Jimgoose posted a TSB from Jag there with a revised dipstick and oil capacity.

Toyotafanboi

bucketybuck wrote: »

I'm not getting into a pissing match between you and your dealer, I just find it noteworthy that as you berate the dealer for not changing the oil as standard, you also don't check your own fluid levels on a regular basis.

Dealers always used to carry out a service on used cars, but then drivers always used to do regular checks before driving. The world has changed on both sides it would appear.

Me, I check my oil and water, but I'm old school to be honest.

Thankfully I didn't ask you to intervien between myself and the dealer.

I just think the concept is gas.

Lets face it;

The average consumer doesn't check their oil level regularly, not least of all the day they purchase the car.

The average person (and I know ignorance is no defence) would assume that a used car with 16k km on the clock would get a pre delivery oil change.

Not having a mechanic check thr car over before delivery and not making the customer aware of this fact and also not versing them on the service plan was unprofessional at best.

Burning a liter every 1k kms isn't really acceptable in a new, modern car.

It is foolish as an idea. I thought it would be safe to assume my mother buying a less than 1 year old car from a main dealer that I could let it go at least 1000 miles without opening the bonnet. Obviously not. Most people wouldn't have to open the bonnet from one service to another.

Lets come up with an insanely long service interval on a car with a tiny sump, lets stick rigidly and blindly to that plan.

It's a poor idea. My thirteen year old celica has a FSH of 15k km service intervals and it has 250k kms on the clock. I change the oil every 7k kms and it doesn't usually need a top up in between changes, but this 30k service interval Fiats with a mere 20k kms in the clocks has its engine already ****ed 10k before it's even due it's first service.

*Me, I check my oil and water, but I'm a car enthusiast to be honest.

The real question is, how often does your elderly mum check her oil and water? Or would she place a lot more faith in her dealer and their servicing.

bucketybuck

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Fleet sales are huge.

Fleet sales are huge.

But before your drumroll please tell us what percentage of total vehicle sales are to fleet hire companies?

bucketybuck

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

The real question is, how often does your elderly mum check her oil and water? Or would she place a lot more faith in her dealer and their servicing.

My mum? She would check it before any long drive, or very couple of weeks if there had been no long journeys. Thats my mum though, she is old school as well, and very big on personal responsibility.

Special Circumstances

bucketybuck wrote: »

Fleet sales are huge.

But before your drumroll please tell us what percentage of total vehicle sales are to fleet hire companies?

The UK market sees approximately 2 million new cars registered every year, with around 50-55 percent classified as fleet or small- and medium-sized enterprise business vehicles depending upon definition.

http://www.automotive-fleet.com/article/story/2014/05/united-kingdom-fleet-market-conditions.aspx

jimgoose

bucketybuck wrote: »

Your logic is completely faulty. Do you really think the accountants want people servicing their cars at longer intervals?

Accountants don't give a fiddler's when or if cars are serviced as long as there's money in it. They love the notion of Total Cost of Ownership, meaning, among other thing, keeping servicing costs down by punting out service intervals and shaving oil capacities to the bone, thus allowing Sorcha from Morkeshing to trumpet this over the competition.

Toyotafanboi

bucketybuck wrote: »

My mum? She would check it before any long drive, or very couple of weeks if there had been no long journeys. Thats my mum though, she is old school as well, and very big on personal responsibility.

I'm sure she's never made a mistake in her life, don't worry.

My mum is more real world. She raised our family right, she fed and clothed us, got us all through school and college and has a very respectable family. Nice house, no mortgage and no loans, no wants or enemies in life. She can change a light bulb and i'd say she could wire a plug. She's big on personal responsibilities...

She knows **** all about cars. For her decades long driving career, she buys her tax, her insurance and her annual service and she's never had a minutes bother. But she's always had Toyotas. In fairness maybe lesser cars do need their bonnet lifted on a daily basis, maybe that's the real lesson here.

This has gone a bit off topic.

jimgoose

Special Circumstances wrote: »

...Jimgoose posted a TSB from Jag there with a revised dipstick and oil capacity.

Indeed he did. Actually the only physical change to the equipment was the mark on the dipstick. Oh and, a loop-style handle instead of the T-bar deployed hitherto!

jimgoose

bucketybuck wrote: »

My mum? She would check it before any long drive, or very couple of weeks if there had been no long journeys. Thats my mum though, she is old school as well, and very big on personal responsibility.

Mammy Goose gets me to do it, the feckless free-living hippy!

bucketybuck

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

I'm sure she's never made a mistake in her life, don't worry.

Oh I can think of one.

She knows **** all about cars. For her decades long driving career, she buys her tax, her insurance and her annual service and she's never had a minutes bother. But she's always had Toyotas. In fairness maybe lesser cars do need their bonnet lifted on a daily basis, maybe that's the real lesson here.

I detest this attitude in general, that you need to know about cars to know that they need oil and water to run properly, I suspect your mum is a very intelligent woman well capable of lifting the bonnet and checking a simple oil level. This isn't directed at you, but at the culture that allows so much ignorance about such a ubiquitous part of our society. :mad:

Toyotafanboi

bucketybuck wrote: »

Oh I can think of one.


I detest this attitude in general, that you need to know about cars to know that they need oil and water to run properly, I suspect your mum is a very intelligent woman well capable of lifting the bonnet and checking a simple oil level. This isn't directed at you, but at the culture that allows so much ignorance about such a ubiquitous part of our society. :mad:

To an extent I agree with you.

On the other hand though, some people just dont care. Actually most people dont care, about anything.

It's literally part of Irish culture at this stage to not give a **** about anything except getting your few auld pints on the weekend. If you are seen to "care" about anything, or forward think for the bigger picture it's early an oddity, not the norm. I don't agree with it, personally I like to be as resourceful and clued in as a i can, for the sake of ease in my own day to day life.

I could write a whole rant on that, but i'l stop myself.

But that doesn't take away from the fact that the 500 is an inferior product and the service interval is farcically too long.

galwaytt

R.O.R wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the highly qualified engineers who set the oil change schedules on vehicles know what they are doing, but I might point VW to this thread so they can see the error of their ways. Them internet people must know better.

...really ?

...so how do you explain the BMW engines and all their issues, even following the official schedules, if all their "highly qualified engineer's" design & testing is so thorough ?

Ditto for a lot of other cars. Audi Multitronic. Saab 2.2 Bosch injection pumps. Mazda 2.0 RF diesels. VW BXE engines. Porsche M96 engines. B6 Passat injector wiring looms. Dacia Duster paintwork (esp white). Merc Servotronic braking systems. BMW Nikasil issues (old, I know). And it's not confined to cars bth. Motorcycles, machine & plant - you name it.

There's s.f.a. evidence of thorough engineering there - actually, what there is is a rush to production on the assumption that engineering is sound. And when it isn't, there's a bean-counter exercise that rules that it's cheaper to keep making stuff that doesn't work, and wear it, than to actually re-engineer it to make it properly in the first place.

bucketybuck

galwaytt wrote: »

...really ?

...so how do you explain the BMW engines and all their issues, even following the official schedules, if all their "highly qualified engineer's" design & testing is so thorough ?

Ditto for a lot of other cars. Audi Multitronic. Saab 2.2 Bosch injection pumps. Mazda 2.0 RF diesels. VW BXE engines. Porsche M96 engines. B6 Passat injector wiring looms. Dacia Duster paintwork (esp white). Merc Servotronic braking systems. BMW Nikasil issues (old, I know). And it's not confined to cars bth. Motorcycles, machine & plant - you name it.

There's s.f.a. evidence of thorough engineering there - actually, what there is is a rush to production on the assumption that engineering is sound. And when it isn't, there's a bean-counter exercise that rules that it's cheaper to keep making stuff that doesn't work, and wear it, than to actually re-engineer it to make it properly in the first place.

All this shows is an ignorance of engineering. Any vehicle is a wonder of engineering with thousands upon thousands of individual parts, that we are so blase about cars doesn't mean they aren't complicated as ****.

Every single brand of vehicle has technological issues, its simply a fact of life in an industry that is based on continually innovating and pushing the boundries of technology. Maybe you think all those cars were thrown together with lego and sellotape, but the fact is that a hell of a lot of time and thought went into each and every one.

We released a new range a few years ago, the first vehicles went through literally millions of kilometres of testing before release and yet we still have new service actions today. Its a simple fact of life and the same for any model you can think of.

The assumption that the engineering is sound? This isn't computer games with patches and beta testing, recalls and warranty issues cost manufacturers billions so you can be damn sure they do their best to try and ensure the engineering is sound.

Tea 1000

bucketybuck wrote: »

All this shows is an ignorance of engineering. Any vehicle is a wonder of engineering with thousands upon thousands of individual parts, that we are so blase about cars doesn't mean they aren't complicated as ****.

Every single brand of vehicle has technological issues, its simply a fact of life in an industry that is based on continually innovating and pushing the boundries of technology. Maybe you think all those cars were thrown together with lego and sellotape, but the fact is that a hell of a lot of time and thought went into each and every one.

We released a new range a few years ago, the first vehicles went through literally millions of kilometres of testing before release and yet we still have new service actions today. Its a simple fact of life and the same for any model you can think of.

The assumption that the engineering is sound? This isn't computer games with patches and beta testing, recalls and warranty issues cost manufacturers billions so you can be damn sure they do their best to try and ensure the engineering is sound.

You're right regarding the latest technology etc, but most of it is built by the lowest bidder. Hence reliability problems. Accountants and EU/Global emissions are ruling the roost here. The days of engineers having the final say is gone.

JJJJNR

long life $ervicing = new turbo$$$

R.O.R

JJJJNR wrote: »

long life $ervicing = new turbo$$$

We haven't replaced a single turbo from memory.

9935452

R.O.R wrote: »

My personal car is an N47 engine 520d, which is extending it's own service intervals past 30,000km, then I'm going further than that due to one thing or another. 208,000km on it now and pulls like a train. Expect servicing, tyres and bulbs there has been no other work done in the 120,000km I've put on.

good luck with the car if you are doing that . I wouldnt do it myself. it does nothing for the resale value of that car eithre. If i was buying a 520 with extended service intervals i would walk away, especially when they are known for timing chain problems

R.O.R wrote: »

That's just poor design. Opel have the same issues expect they have an oil quality warning. That means we generally end up doing an oil change on those before the 30k service interval.

We're running Mazda's on 15k intervals (rather than the 20k Mazda say) to try and stop problems arising, but it doesn't seem to be making a blind bit of difference.

Is that not exactly what im saying. By your argument there should be no problem running the full service interval and you are cutting them short .
The reason for cutting it short here is you are lubricating your engine with diesel.
would it not be the same well educated engineers that design these engines badly that set the service intervals

R.O.R wrote: »

If it's that cheap and you have time to do it yourself then you may as well, but I still reckon you are wasting money.

A gallon of long fuchs long life low sulphur oil costs just under 30 euros .
20 minutes and the oil and filter are changed.
There is a saying that oil and grease are the cheapest parts you will buy.

milhous

Look what I started..oops. On the oil issue they said the long life oil is good for 30k km again and that's what my next oil change is programmed at.
I still don't see how this is, because it doesn't last for 30k km, It's empty within 15k km.
Will book in every 15k km going forward.

On another note, needed a software update for the infotainment system, got that and car was given back to me yesterday (6 days later). at least they didn't charge for the courtesy car.

166man

Sitec wrote: »

Would it not effect the marketing and accounting department more if the car was constantly breaking down?

30k intervals on long life oil is perfectly safe, we used to run Iveco trucks on 100,000 km intervals and there was never any trouble.

bucketybuck wrote: »

Your logic is completely faulty. Do you really think the accountants want people servicing their cars at longer intervals?

The aftersales market is huge and every manufacturer has vested interest in it, it's a godsend to the manufacturer that there is an accepted wisdom that people should be changing their oil more frequently. Shorter intervals mean more money for dealers and best of all they don't need to sell that fact, people want to believe it already.

The manufacturer will not claim a longer service interval lightly, not only because of revenue but also because they will want that vehicle serviced and checked when it is still in the warranty period to prevent any major issues from developing. (better to catch things early if they have to pay for them). But the fact is that the oils can easily run for far far longer than is commonly accepted and the designers of the vehicles know this.

You guys are talking about changing oils every 10 or 15k, actually the oils in our range are designed to run for over 80000km depending on usage, and they are not some super oil but a common 10/30 and 5/30. Believe, there is a lot more room for error in those oil change intervals than you might think.

swarlb wrote: »

If I was running the 'accounting or marketing' dept, I'd insist on oil changes every 1000km or 5 days, whichever came first, using the most expensive oil available, and only from the main dealership (any other outlet voids the warranty) Same with any other service items....
Any 'service engineers' disagreeing with this would be sacked forthwith........

As above, I mentioned it with regards to total cost ownership from a fleet point of view. A car doing 150k km over three years needs 5 services @ 30k km. it needs 10 services @ 15k km. That saving multiplied by x amount of cars sold to a fleet amount up to quite a substantial saving, as SC mentioned.

bucketybuck wrote: »

I'm not getting into a pissing match between you and your dealer, I just find it noteworthy that as you berate the dealer for not changing the oil as standard, you also don't check your own fluid levels on a regular basis.

Dealers always used to carry out a service on used cars, but then drivers always used to do regular checks before driving. The world has changed on both sides it would appear.

Me, I check my oil and water, but I'm old school to be honest.

Are you also old school in how you keep having sly nasty digs at posters in this thread? If I bought a new car I'd expect it to need nothing more than servicing and tyres etc. if my mum was elderly I'd not expect her to have to check them.

Maybe if you drive a sh1t car you have to check it weekly though.

johnny osbourne

milhous wrote: »

Look what I started..oops. On the oil issue they said the long life oil is good for 30k km again and that's what my next oil change is programmed at.
I still don't see how this is, because it doesn't last for 30k km, It's empty within 15k km.
Will book in every 15k km going forward.

On another note, needed a software update for the infotainment system, got that and car was given back to me yesterday (6 days later). at least they didn't charge for the courtesy car.

the last "good" car made by vw was the vento (petrol)

*Kol*

166man wrote: »

If I bought a new car I'd expect it to need nothing more than servicing and tyres etc. if my mum was elderly I'd not expect her to have to check them.

+1 on that. The first time I looked under the bonnet of my car was when the washer fluid ran out!

R.O.R

milhous wrote: »

Look what I started..oops. On the oil issue they said the long life oil is good for 30k km again and that's what my next oil change is programmed at.
I still don't see how this is, because it doesn't last for 30k km, It's empty within 15k km.
Will book in every 15k km going forward.

On another note, needed a software update for the infotainment system, got that and car was given back to me yesterday (6 days later). at least they didn't charge for the courtesy car.

The oil in a VW Diesel is good for 30,000km. It's few and far between these days that they need a top up before getting to 30,000km. I'd be concerned about that.

When you had to top it up, did you use VW Spec oil? If it's not the right stuff, it will burn through it in no time.

bucketybuck

166man wrote: »

If I bought a new car I'd expect it to need nothing more than servicing and tyres etc. if my mum was elderly I'd not expect her to have to check them.

Its a very naive attitude though. Brand new toasters can develop faults, brand new tools made from solid metal can break, so its silly to think that a piece of equipment with miles of wiring and thousands of moving parts is guaranteed to run perfectly for years. This type of attitude here:

*Kol* wrote: »

+1 on that. The first time I looked under the bonnet of my car was when the washer fluid ran out!

is the reason slight oil leaks turn into engine failures, because of people today taking pride in their ignorance. Its a complicated piece of equipment that costs tens of thousands of euro and needs constant maintenance, I would suggest people should consider their expectations and perhaps think about looking after the damn thing.

Toyotafanboi

Not really though. When i pay €14k for something, I want it to work, correctly, for a reasonable timeframe.

If I buy a toaster or a microwave and it breaks, or doesn't perform to a level I am happy with, the shop will replace it or refund me, pretty much no quibble in most places.

But if I buy a new car, that has destroyed itself by means of the manufacturers specified maintenance plan, it's somehow my own fault?

bucketybuck

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

But if I buy a new car, that has destroyed itself by means of the manufacturers specified maintenance plan, it's somehow my own fault?

At risk of getting into another pissing match, if your engine is burning oil or losing oil, you are indeed contributing to the issue by never checking your oil level. Stop placing all the blame on the manufacturer when you yourself didn't carry out the driver daily checks as noted in the driver handbook.

If there is an issue there, you cannot drive a car for thousands of kilometres with that issue occurring and not take some culpability. If the toaster was smoking every time you used it you wouldn't keep using it until it exploded in flame and then bring it back blaming the manufacturer.

That car didn't need to be destroyed. If you had been checking oil and coolant level regularly, something all drivers should be doing, then you could have noted that oil consumption was high and the issue could have been addressed long before any car was destroyed.

Should the dealer have serviced that car at sale? Maybe, I know I would have, but that has little to do with manufacturers service specifications. The oil in those cars can indeed run to 30000kms easily, but that doesn't at all mean that the bonnet doesn't need to be opened for 30000kms. If drivers would educate themselves to do some simple checks they could save themselves a lot of money in the long run.

Toyotafanboi

It's very reasonable to expect a new car to burn less than a liter of oil per thousand miles. I can-not accept responsibilty for anything like what you are saying as checking the oil more often than once every thousand miles is definitely OCD or anxiety related unless you are suspicious of a fault, which we weren't in a virtually new car.

The reason it is burning that much i'd wager is because the engine was gone way beyond what it was capable of doing with 2.6 liters of oil but the retailer played along with the cost saving myth of long life servicing and us, the end consumer are taking the financial hit for it.

We specifically asked at the time of buying, the car has 16k on it, it will be serviced? And he said yes it's fully serviced. Which is a lie, what he meant to say was, it's not due a service, which is entirely different, and what he neglected to say was that they didn't even check the levels before it was sold. So it was't what he said, but the the lies that were told through omission.

I would be particularly curious to know BB, would you, as a consumer accept this. As you say."personal redponsibility", money is hard enough earned to just lie down and accept this behaviour so it would be wrong to just lie down and accept it. This is the very reason why the vast majority of people fear bringing their car to a garage here in Ireland. One slip of terminology and we were completely fleeced.

Toyotafanboi

Perhaps other manufacturers have invested more research into their long life servicing intervals and the vehicles requirements. I'm not coming out and saying I think it doesn't work as a concept, just that our own particular experience of it has been negative.

bucketybuck

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

I would be particularly curious to know BB, would you, as a consumer accept this. As you say."personal redponsibility", money is hard enough earned to just lie down and accept this behaviour so it would be wrong to just lie down and accept it. This is the very reason why the vast majority of people fear bringing their car to a garage here in Ireland. One slip of terminology and we were completely fleeced.

Would I accept it? Which part?

If you specifically agreed a service as part of the deal at sale then no, I would not be happy that it wasn't done and I would be using my contacts to raise considerable hell.

But I would still consider the mechanical fault and the loss of oil to be a separate issue to the service. The lack of service pre-sale is certainly a factor in how the car reached the point of running without oil, but it didn't cause the fault and it doesn't mean I wouldn't check my own oil regularly. The dealers poor standards contributed, but that wasn't the only factor.

bucketybuck

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

Perhaps other manufacturers have invested more research into their long life servicing intervals and the vehicles requirements. I'm not coming out and saying I think it doesn't work as a concept, just that our own particular experience of it has been negative.

There is definitely a change in the concept of servicing. As a rough example, in the truck industry oil change intervals can range from 30000kms to 100000kms depending on usage. The oils are absolutely fine to run to those limits.

But the changing of oils is now disassociated from vehicle inspections. A truck will get an oil change when needed, but will get a safety inspection every 6 or 12 weeks, and its DOE test annually. The SI will pick up on all the issues that needed to be picked up, suspension faults, brake faults, oil leaks, levels, lights etc, but the oils and filters are left alone until they are needed.

It could easily be the same with cars. Change the oils at the recommended intervals, but give the thing a once over a lot more frequently than that.

*Kol*

bucketybuck wrote: »

Its a very naive attitude though. Brand new toasters can develop faults, brand new tools made from solid metal can break, so its silly to think that a piece of equipment with miles of wiring and thousands of moving parts is guaranteed to run perfectly for years. This type of attitude here:



is the reason slight oil leaks turn into engine failures, because of people today taking pride in their ignorance. Its a complicated piece of equipment that costs tens of thousands of euro and needs constant maintenance, I would suggest people should consider their expectations and perhaps think about looking after the damn thing.

I have to disagree with you there. I fully expect for a new vehicle not to require constant maintenance. That is my expectation. Even if I did look under the bonnet there is nothing to see. There isn't even a dipstick. With respect my car is as well looked after as anybody else's and is not suffering from neglect in any way.

milhous

R.O.R wrote: »

The oil in a VW Diesel is good for 30,000km. It's few and far between these days that they need a top up before getting to 30,000km. I'd be concerned about that.

When you had to top it up, did you use VW Spec oil? If it's not the right stuff, it will burn through it in no time.

Yeah I used the recommended oil, the first warning light came on around 15k km. It's under warranty for three years, I was planning on paying the lump sum at the end (I'm on a pcp deal) and keeping it but I reckon I'll pay the lump sum at the end and look to trade it in against something else.

mech123

jimgoose wrote: »

A litre in less than 10,000 miles is by no means excessive. I keep hearing these fancy-dan in-car entertainment systems are too bloody clever by half for their own good these days as well. And the key, well - shít happens I suppose. I'd give them a chance, at least they didn't see you immobile.

no good car should burn any oil.

milhous wrote: »

Hi,

I bought a new car in march and it has given me a few niggly problems. keys not working, infortainment system crashing and I also put two litres of oil in it since I got it, I've put up 30k km tbf.

I left it in for a service last Thursday and still haven't gotten it back, they said they are trying to re-code the keys but are awaiting instructions from VW (who they have not heard anything back from since last Friday) in Germany. Because they wiped the keys I cannot take the car back at all.

Is it just a waiting game for me that I should go along with? They gave me a petrol trendline golf for my troubles as they said they don't keep any bigger/higher spec courtesy cars.

Thanks for any help.

what model car is this ? 30k km is way over the service mileage. all cars are different but i would imagine most cars that travelled 30k km should have been serviced twice.

mech123

should have nearly be due a second service would be a better way to put it. altough it seems some cars can do lots of miles before a service but that cant be good for it.