Volkswagen Passenger Cars Malaysia (VPCM) has introduced a new after-sales service, and this one involves engine decarbonisation – the Walnut Blasting Decarboniser service, as it is called, is a preventive maintenance package introduced as part of the Volkswagen Cares initiative.
All cars with a direct-injection engine running on gasoline will produce carbon deposits as a by-product of the combustion process, and this is aggravated by stop-and-go city driving. Over a prolonged period, a build-up of black soot that hardens around the intake valves occurs, leading to restrictions in the engine, resulting in loss of power, overheating and higher fuel consumption.
Other symptoms that can manifest as a result of blocked intake valves are rough idling, poor acceleration, engine misfire and engine knocking. That’s where engine decarbonisation can help restore performance.
Recognised and approved by Volkswagen AG, the Walnut Blasting Decarboniser involves blasting metal surfaces to remove carbon build-up in the engine for a cleaner and smoother drive, but instead of highly abrasive material utilises fragmented walnut shells to gently clean the surface without damaging the metal. The method is efficient and non-corrosive, since it doesn’t use harmful chemicals.
The company says that the service is available at all authorised dealerships and costs from as low as RM515, depending on application. It adds that engine decarbonising is recommended as a preventive measure and should be carried out every 45,000 km.
Looking to sell your car? Sell it with Carro.
Looks good. The Germans are always innovative and always seeking to improve on their best.
Thats not innovative. You dont even need this kind of carbon cleaning if the engine is built correctly. Its true that all direct injection engines will have carbon build up at intake valve area. However the solution to this problem is not to ask the customer to do walnut blasting. That is just a workaround for a failed design. A correct design is to use both direct and port injection in the engine which alternate between the injectors. Then you will never need to do this kind of maintenance
So should offer engine replacement to a dual injection engine?
Port injection is still the most economical n reliable design as DPI is only available for harrier n Lexus
Alternate both direct and port injectors? Bro, do u know how many times I take and exhaust valve in 1 min during engine idle? A very simple question. It is not as easy as ABC as u think. Secondly , direct injection if not just about better fuel burnt, it is also for environment friendly purpose.
Anywhere , if u are mechanical engineer u will not give this not that smart comment regarding a combustion engine .
Actually combining port and DI are becoming more commonplace to eliminate carbon build up on the valves. This tech exists buddy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66C4YIiwRbM
Yes, environmental friend in the initial stage (new car)…but when the intake valves start to build up carbon, then it is different story
Your query on how many times the valves open and closes isn’t any wiser. Followed by suggesting DI isn’t just about fuel efficiency but also being environmentally friendly is a textbook remark. Because a environmentally friendly engine is a result of a highly efficient engine.
IF you are of any area in engineering you wouldn’t make the above two remarks, instead share why DI and PI isn’t a good combination. Apparently you’re not correcting any error at all.
Tom – i disagree with you . The engine is built correctly with its benefits . This is a maintenance issue, not a design fault. Its like air filter, it needs to be cleaned or changed at certain intervals
Perhaps it’s not a flaw per se, but manufacturer’s have definitely acknowledged that it is a problem hence the increasingly common inclusion of port injection on DI engines. I do agree that DI itself is better than port in most other aspects and combining them mitigates the DI only issue once and for all
Then why old design PI doesn’t this extra cost maintenance? The DI is designed to fulfill the FC n emissions regulations which end up higher FC…LPPL. Ford USA already admitted that they rushed to design the DI which creates more problems, and now they are going for PDI engines stage by stage
actually, it still required maintenance on built up carbons, just the built up doesn’t happen as quick as they get flushed out during normal cycle.
well you’d be amazed, Toyota & Subaru does that on the FT86.
If we bring our own nuts can get cheaper price???
You bring your nuts can get u free one bapok free service u
They will blast your nuts for free
A faulty direct injection design and customers are paying for it ?
There is no faulty in the design okay ..have you driven a VW car before?If not please drive first then you will know :)
Bro, the drive is fine. The flaw isn’t. Non DI engines had injectors spraying fuel over the valves thus cleaning them of carbon build up in the process. This generation of engines had DI with fuel injected directly to the cylinder bypassing the valves, thus there is no detergent to clean the carbon now. Later iterations of these engines later featured fuel injection at both points to counter this. So yeah VW is right, that it is a design flaw and now customers have to pay for this additional maintenance.
I’m driving CC, nothing so special except more breakdown than my japs car.
Running for 8 years now and it feels so old and so lag even done de-carbon already.
An engine that requires you to blast walnuts, peanuts and pecans into it’s intake every 50km is not faulty in design ? A fool is born everyday
Maybe you should drive their sister company Audi that now comes with dual injectors. Audi realised the magnitude of this problem and not in denial like uuuuuuu
I don’t drive VW … Only their other sister company , a Macan that’s sounds like pecan
New parts Vs used parts….
DI engines are indeed a bad design for this long type of build up on valves compared to Port infection which basically, clean valves as you are spraying them all the time.
One radical way to reduce drastically this build up, is:
– an Oil catch can
It cost only 200 – 400 myr, and will seriously reduce the build up.
Reason why manufactures can’t put this is because of emissions. You have to clean/empty that catch can every once and awhile, as oil vapors will turn back into liquid there.
Ensure you get a baffled oil catch can with a measure dip stick.
Imho, its not due to emission unless the OCT is vent-to-atmosphere type.
If u are using OCT which still vent the recirculated gas back to the intake, emission is still the same but with the plus point of collecting the oil vapor thus reducing build up on the intake valve.
OCT also help to keep the throttle body cleaner for longer period.
My uncle’s good old Proton Saga engine works fine. Running as daily grind, family trips, etc for decades already. Never done any walnut-blasting.
Maintenance is easy-peasy, cheap too. Replacement parts aplenty.
Because it is Port Injection
One way to make money, won’t solve compression leak at valve seats.
this means they have to disassemble the engine and remove the ports for blasting right? so walnut blasting is just a gimmick. you just need a piece of cloth and cleaning agent does it the same.
Wahhhh potato….
Joke of the century la, show us quick!
Have you seen a cylinder head before, guess not ahahaha!