RS4 JHM tune teaks

Looks great. Carbon cleans help bring back power after they get far enough along. The thing that can make tracking down just how much carbon effects power difficult to calculate is not every car experiences the same amount of carbon and the carbon build up isn’t consistent across every car. As you said any abstraction of air into the cylinder is going to effect power. Just how much and just how bad seems to be widely different each time. Still the end of it all carbon build up isn’t helping power.

Good to have you make a new thread and show off your car. Welcome.

Would be fascinating to check on a flow bench precisely what the effect of heavy carbon buildup is.

I suppose it’s a testament to how solid these engines are that you rarely see a head coming off. So no-one appears to have ever tested it, even though it’s a widely known and hated issue with FSI.

More fascinating would be to do performance testing.

Flow Bench numbers are going to give you a bunch of numbers. Performance testing tells you what actually happens to your driving experience.

As the thread linked above showed, it’s not that big of a performance killer.

This thread gives more of an insight…to both what I thought about carbon, and to the morons who post on rs246

http://testforum.rs246.com/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=98660&sid=c758537218be38471ccc129f246c0617

Reason why I’d like to see it on a flow bench is to see the individual numbers for each cylinder. This buildup tends to take various shapes and sizes sometimes and I wonder how equal the losses are spread out.

Aside from that there’s no argument. Any small gains you get from de-coking seem to disappear again quickly enough afterwards.

On some cars though, the build-up can be of such proportions that it starts to interfere and cause faults. Clearly that is an issue, but it doesn’t seem to happen thàt often.

Yes, but you’re the one I was referring to in the RS246 thread. Go read the 2nd and 3rd pages to be reminded why. Try reading the original post in that thread this time…since you didn’t the first time.

Good times.

I’m interested in the physics, and I’d like to see precisely what is going on in terms of flow.

That it has varying amounts of influence on the car’s actual performance I’m not debating. Seems like we largely agree on that anyway.

There are certainly many variables that factor into if a single improved area/part will work correctly with the concert of other parts to provide any actual, measurable difference. I can generalize though, based on what I’ve learned as a gearhead for 25 years. Cylinder head design is important to performance. Runner shape and volume play a huge roll in the performance potential of an engine. Cylinder head porting done properly increases the performance potential of an engine - it just makes sense that carbon buildup (at least to the degree that I experienced) is a sort of “anti” porting and will decrease port volume, increase restriction/obstruction/turbulence…reducing overall power.

Thanks Justin - I’m just hanging out. Just got my RS4 a couple months ago and I’ve been working to bring it to perfection :slight_smile: I’ll make a new post introducing myself.

Have you seen any performance data to support that, in this car? Post it up.

I’ve seen lots of dynos , been told about lots of butt dynos, etc… But I’ve not really seen any data that shows much delta in performance pre/post cleaning.

Would be interesting to see someone add to the acceleration testing that has been done (which showed very little diff)

Most of the big delta gains are fixed vacuum leaks. Funny.

Hi Saki -

Nope. I wasn’t as interested in proving things one way or another because I was hoping mine wasn’t that bad. I already understood that people experienced carbon buildup at different extremes. If I had known how bad mine was going to be…I probably WOULD have made sure to get it tested. In a way, I was so happy to see the extreme blockage because the potential was there to gain back some real power.

You can convince me that minor buildup might not show in a significant decrease at the track but at this level of buildup, anyone who knows anything about NA performance is going to tell you it’s a power-stealer.

I might have said this before…but my butt-dyno is very skeptical. Through the years, I’ve been for many “do you feel it?” rides after mod x or y. I’m always the one to say nope…or if there’s a difference, it’s not enough to feel. The power difference I feel after the carbon clean (or I’ll call it head porting!) is more like the difference I’d feel if I swapped a set of aftermarket ported heads on a domestic V8 years ago. It’s night and day.

I fixed 0 vacuum issues. In fact, I had the 5500 kick already before but it was not nearly as pronounced. Now, it hits at 5500 and REALLY tugs all the way to 8k. Last week (prior to clean), I took a friend for a ride and as I went WOT in 2nd…it seemed like it took FOREVER to get to 8k…to the point where we both looked at each other with a “WTH” look! lol.

So I’d tell people - a little blockage, might not know the difference. With a lot of blockage (which these engines are clearly capable of achieving in 60k miles) the performance hit is huge.

we seem to be talking about different things. ‘Power’ (generally dyno measured peak hps) vs. ‘Performance’.

I agree you will lose power at the top end, with a bunch of carbon in there. Perhaps even with a small amount of carbon…just less ‘power’ lost.

However it is my contention that this is not signficant enough to cause a noticeable performance change. Having actually tested it on a couple of different RS4s with 40,000 and 55,000 miles of carbon (before after testing on these cars which had previously never been cleaned).

You’re also referring to ‘a little’ blockage and ‘a lot’ of blockage…kind of vague terms. What qualifies?

Then you’re saying ‘the performance hit is huge’ which is a pretty definitive statement considering literally nobody on earth has ever shown this to be true. Just All of the performance testing has shown the performance hit to be either 0 or nominal, and not something you would notice in most acceleration tests. Of course lots of butt dynos which may or may not be the psychological self-reward for the money spent on the job, or the hard work done.

Here’s your carbon

http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah29/jeff_foster3/F1398B4D-954D-474B-8526-1EE569624467_zps7s9k0wqz.png

Here’s mistro’s carbon (nominal performance change aka less than a tenth of a second and less than 0.5 mph of trap speed…aka about 5 hp)

http://i.imgur.com/IjcaC.jpg

Here’s my carbon clean (nominal performance change)

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/sakimano/DSC02179_zps12cb386e.jpg

I’m not one to argue endlessly on the internet. I have engine building experience and these engines aren’t any different from most othrr performance V8s out there. Ive been turning performance wrenchs for a while and I know what I know. this made a huge difference - wish I knew exactly how much.

it looks like my buildup is quite a bit worse than the other pics you posted. ill agree that with lesser buildup might not be noticeable but to tell people as a rule that carbon cleaning isn’t a problem or is not worth doing is going to be wrong in some cases.

Im going to have my friend give a second opinion tonight.

http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah29/jeff_foster3/Mobile%20Uploads/2015-02/EF9400A5-7C75-49BA-91C3-3E6512201236_zpswugmkjia.jpg

I don’t think anyone on this site will tell you that it “isn’t a problem or worth doing” the discussion was focused on performance loss, which has shown to be less than what some people in the past believed (40-50hp loss, some even thought the loss was greater)

Carbon is a problem for many reasons other than purely performace:
-the possibility of carbon breaking off and scoring a cylinder wall
-carbon build up affecting proper valve closure
-carbon buildup on plug, affecting proper spark or becoming super heated and possibly an auto ignition event within the cylinder
-carbon build up on the injector

Those are all very important issues and related to performance but doing a cleaning for those reason trumps the “carbon affecting head flow discussion” IMHO.

Nobody is asking you to argue endlessly. I would just like to see someone in an RS4 show a signficant performance delta from carbon. If you read the post I made 3 years ago, you will see I used to agree with you. My own logical way of thinking is also that this must hurt performance (not just dyno power…but looking at the pics, it MUST hurt performance in a noticeable fashion). However my actual testing and that of others has shown that it doesn’t.

Your carbon is not that bad to be honest. Its just ‘normal’. All three of those cars are just normal carbon buildup. I have way more gunk on my valves than you. You may have a bit more buildup on the port edges. Mistro is similar to both.

There were 2 guys on RS246 who each had 100,000 miles on their cars, and they did a high speed race (only 1 gear change I believe, and they’re both equal in that department). The race was equal. Then one of the cars got carbon cleaned , and the other did not. They repeated the race, and there was no difference to the before race. This is very similar to what mistro and I did. We did before and after races of all sorts. 3k-8k in 3rd…3rd-4th gear pulls…data logs…dragstrip pulls. NONE of them showed delta before/after he carbon cleaned.

So it’s great to say ‘my experience is that this must hurt performance, so let’s assume it does’. I’d rather see it tested is all I’m saying…and that your experience guided opinion might be wrong (as was my own original opinion), because those who have tested found little to no difference.

The week I bought my S4 (B7) I went on audizine and looked around, and saw the RS4 and thought WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT THING!! I was in love with it, and instantly wanted one. Over the next 2 years, I decided there’s no way I want one. They’re not much faster (if at all) than a JHM tune/piggies/catback B67. They’re awesome to look at, but it’s just not worth it. When they have carbon, they’re slow as fuck. They lose 40-50 hp from carbon, and you have to clean it every 10,000-15,000 miles or else the car is dog slow. What’s the point?

I eventually bought one anyway, after JHM started working on the car and found the internals to be so strong and virtually every aspect of the car to be improved. I was prepared to clean the carbon every few months, but a trip to the dragstrip shocked me and a few forum members. I went 12.9 @ 107.8. Basically matched every periodical and online road test out there. But…but…I have carbon…shouldn’t I be running 13.4 @ 104? Nope. Because it’s just not that bad. With better (summer) tires the following April I went 12.75 @ 108.36…faster than any stock Rs4 ever. 35,000 miles of carbon. Didn’t matter.

Have you done a carbon cleaning yourself? Looking at the pictures you posted, mine was definitely worse. In addition to deposits on the valves, the cross-section of the port was severely constricted. The “short side radius” had caked up carbon deforming it’s shape and shrinking the valve pocket. It’s not rocket science - go to any engine builder forum, especially when referring to NA builds, and people will tell you the same thing.

I wish I had a before and after to show you but I don’t. It’s too late for that. What I can tell you…and I’ll tell anyone that asks with certainty…is that the severe buildup on mine absolutely caused a noticeable performance decrease. I’ve never been able to feel a 10hp increase in any bolt-on that anyone has asked me about. This was a dramatic transformation.

I think we might be saying pretty much the same thing but I think your diagnosis of the type of buildup that I experienced as normal and the same as the other pictures is a bit off. I don’t doubt at all that some deposits on the valves/stems and some minor deposits on the walls of the runner will minimally impact performance. When the buildup increases to the point where the port shape and volume is altered (and the carbon bridges the blade…or whatever it’s called…to the roof of the runner) there’s no one in their right mind that’s going to say it’s not going to hurt performance…horsepower…whatever you want to call it - the performance potential of the engine is decreased.

and as Forrest Gump says, “That’s all I’ve got to say about thAaat”.