The Baby - long

[Perry, Christoper (EDS)]

What it _MAY_ do is build up deposits around the oil seals which will help
stop the leaking.  I don't necessarily think this is a good thing.

Synth oil has a high detergent content and this can break down deposits left
by dino oils.  This is a reason not to switch to synthetic oils on high
mileage cars that have been run on dino oils since new.

I also think that how the car was treated when new will have a great effect
on its oil consumption later in life.  I've had six audis since 1975, a 75
Fox S/W (bought new by my parents), 78 Fox (used, pampered), 83 4k (well
maintained), 85 4KS (well maintained), 86 4KS (switched to synth at 32k
miles), and my current 89 90q.  All but my current 90 used negligible
amounts of oil between changes (5K to 7.5K miles).  My 90 uses about 1qt per
1200 miles, which to me is excessive.

I purchased the 90 5 years ago with 111,000 miles and only recently found
out that it was originally a rental car from Florida.  You can guess how it
was treated early in its life.

That said, I would not consider worn valve guides at 109K miles unusual.
Worn rings I would consider unusual at that mileage.

Honestly, I've only got experience with the 4-cyl and 5-cyl engines, which
are pretty Bullitt-proof.  Since I've never owned an Audi V6, I cannot
comment authoritatively.  With that in mind here is my two cents. If you've
owned your Baby since new then, with the treatment you've given it, IMO/E it
would be unusual to have such high consumption.  If you purchased used,
possibly the previous owner did not have as high a regard for their "baby".

.02
Chris Perry
89 90q  170K and counting.


-----Original Message-----
From: DOUBLDz at aol.com [mailto:DOUBLDz at aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 6:31 PM
To: quattro at audifans.com
Subject: The Baby - long


<snip>
The owner of the shop himself called me to tell me the results. He's been
building engines for 30 years (Porsches, I believe...that's what he races
these days anyway). He worked on Audis for 20 years and claims to know those
engines top to bottom too. Anyway, knowing the service record on the car and
assuming I drive it like a lady ;-) he seems to feel that the Mobil 1 is the
cause of the damage to the engine. I was floored. How can you do something
which you think is a good thing (and spend more money while you're at it)
and
have it end up screwing up your engine?  I must have some sort of really bad
karma going.

Where to go from here: His suggestion to me was to check the oil at every
other fill up and when it appears to be down a quart, to bring it in and let
them top it off so they can get an accurate accounting of exactly what's
going on. Once we do that, at the next oil change he's going to use regular
oil and then repeat the process, to see if there is an improvement. The
existing damage will remain but his hope is that we can slow things down by
changing the oil.

<snip>

Dee
95 A6q Pearl