dv52

John: As I said, the resolution of risk management issues is like the answer to the question: how long is a piece of string? Everyone's different answer is correct and no-one bothers to revisit their decision unless the car is actually stolen! Yes, the module can be "ripped out" - but then what happens to the car? It can be driven, but the vehicle will complain and I can't imagine that the car could be sold as a working vehicle. I guess that the car could be stripped apart - but again, Component Protection would limit the sale value of components on the black market! Also, I didn't include the point about the Telematics module in my reply - but it's probably worth saying now that you referred to this module in your response. The protections that the Telematics module provide as anti-theft are very-much after the car has been stolen. If the focus of the decision maker is about mitigating the theft of the car in the first place - I doubt that the Telematics protections will be given any consideration! Don

@Dr Mike Oxgreen: Hi. To add to the previous reply and as I'm sure you already know - the entire question of what level of theft protection to add to a new car is fundamentally a risk-management issue. This means that it is an individual choice based on a series of personal value judgements. And perhaps more importantly, it also means that there will be a wide range of correct answers. I'm not sure if you are aware - but VW already add a number of anti-theft facilities in MQB-evo platform cars! These features include: Component Protection (CP): This prevents the trade of stolen modules on the black-market (CP modules are uniquely tied to the car's VIN, so a stolen module won't work if installed in another car without specific autorization by the deities on the VW mother-ship) Immobilizer - version 6: This is an enhanced of the V5 immobilizer used in the older MQB build cars. V6 has stronger cryptography and better integration with CP and the Telematics function (see next dot-point) Telematics: The telematics systems allow police-assisted recovery by transmitting the vehicle’s location. Thieves can remove or power‑cut GPS/telematics hardware, or use illegal GPS jammers - but these methods require skill Cybersecurity Protection: MQB-evo introduced a new protection protocol called SFD2 specifically to combat unauthorized access to the car by unauthorized agents. I've criticized some of the consequences of SFD2 - but it fundamentally works as an anti-theft protection facility Of course, the facilities above won't guarantee that a Golf mk8/mk8.5 will not be stolen- but they do provide a degree of anti-theft protection. Your risk management question asks how much protection is prudent on your new car? Don't get me wrong - I reckon that it's a good question. However and IMO, the answer should be informed by an understanding of the stuff above - maybe read THIS which is from a local UK locksmith? Don

@AHG: Yes- I've absolutely no doubt that you DO know what you are talking about! As I said, I've not familiar with the race-track situation that you describe! My dogged pursuit of your words was most definitely NOT about questioning your knowledge. Rather, it was about our difference in understanding about this matter creating a learning opportunity - for me! I'm always delighted when I read forum posts and I agree with what's said because it reinforces my understanding of the topic discussed ( which is always a good thing!!). However, it's when I disagree that I get really interested because invariably that's when I learn new stuff (which is always a far better thing!) I'm perfectly happy to accept your position as a working assumption for further research. If I make any new discoveries, you will be the second to know!! 😉 Finally, lest there be any residual confusion about your humorous aside, I NEVER "fat shame" - either on-line, or off-line. NO ONE (meaning not a single individual, and most definitely neither of us) has a monopoly on knowledge!! Don

@Richter: Yes indeed - I have long held the view that the "Y" chromosome for the part of the carbon-based life unit species is an unfortunate mutant that has many disadvantages. So, I totally agree with your gender observation! Again, with the usual caveat about believing anything from AI- if the advice is true and accepting that this car DOES have the reversible electric seat‑belt tensioner, then the car must also have the Proactive Occupant Protection package The PR code for Proactive Occupant Protection on MQB‑evo Volkswagens (including the Golf Mk8) is 7W2. I'm not sure where VW put the vehicle sticker (see example below) on cars in your country - but it's worth a look on your mk8! And if you can't find the sticker - your dealer should be able to confirm via the VIN how this car was built Don

@AHG; Hmm.......... of course I'm guessing because I don't do any track driving (tried it once - scared the beJesus out of me!). However, I would think that the severe deceleration of the car as it approached a hair-pun bend would cause your torso to push hard against the seat-belt. This would almost certainly result in the effect that you describe - but the inertia reel wouldn't actually tighten - it's just the increased pressure of your body against the seat-belt from the "G-forces" that creates the feeling (IMO)!! And yes, you are correct to identify the "passenger protection package" matter. My new best friend has just confirmed that the reversible electric seat‑belt tensioner is not standard on a Golf mk8. In the words of AI "The seat-belt motor is option‑dependent and only fitted when the vehicle has the Proactive Occupant Protection package (VW) or Audi PreSense Basic (Audi). NOT sure if @Richter car has this option? Don

@Richter: I'm reminded of the first part of the adage "great minds think alike" - let's not entertain the second part of the saying (i.e "fools seldom differ") !! 😉 Don

@AHG: Hmm......... no offense, but are you absolutely sure about your S3? If this was the "2018 Daytona Audi S3 Sedan" in your signature - then it most likely had a MQB platform build. I'm not sure what extra "goodies" were factory included in the Daytona option - but AFAIK, the MQB platform (Audi A3 8V, Golf Mk7, Leon 5F, Octavia 5E, etc.) did not use an electric motorized seat‑belt tensioner. MQB platform cars only used pyrotechnic pretensioners + mechanical inertia reels. As I said in my earlier reply, the reversible electric belt tensioner was introduced later on MQB‑evo (Audi A3 8Y, Golf Mk8, etc.). The Audi A3 8V DID have "Pre-sense" - but it was more of a brand-name and it most definitely was NOT the same as the Pre-sense function on the A3 8Y (which is fundamentally a technology descriptor on this later model). Don PS: How many "G's" were you pulling around the hairpin bends on the track? Maybe the mechanical inertia reels were providing the effect that you describe?

@Rita Dias: Hmm................. I suspect that you know much more about this nanny system than me (again, my recollections ain't good! My understanding is that Front Assist is just one of multiple parts of the overarching Proactive Occupant Protection (POC) on a Golf mk8. So, now that you have raised the question and forced me to think deeper - yes, I tend to agree that the reversing motor probably is still active with Front Assist turned-OFF. I was wrong to write in my reply that it wouldn't work in this state because the substantive POC function is still active. However, pure logic would suggest that with Front Assist-OFF, the total range of inputs that would trigger the motor to tighten the seat-belt would be reduced. I suspect that turning-OFF Front Assist disables the radar/camera collision‑prediction path. I would think that this has an effect on "hard braking" as a trigger to drive the motor - but I'm simply not sure about this, or how impactful this effect would be. Your excellent questions have piqued my interest and I'm more than delighted to be proven wrong and to learn the truth! So, to satiate my intellectual curiosity - please provide feedback when you get the car back from the dealer. Don

@Richter: Hi. With @AHG indulgence for butting-in on your dialogue - I suspect that your driving behavior IS implicated in your observation regarding the seat belt! I can't find where I first read about it now - but AFAIK, on some MQB-evo platform cars (including the Golf mk8-I think), VAG introduced a version of motorized reversible seat-belt tensioners. Again from memory - I believe that this is a new form of active seat-belt tensioning that works via a small electric motor that is built into the seat-belt reel to pre‑tighten the belt before a crash and then release it if no impact occurs. My hunch is that this is what you are referring-to - maybe? If I'm correct (and if my memory serves me well) - the reversible tensioner is controlled by an enhanced form of the Front Assist nanny function that was introduced in the earlier Golf mk7/mk7.5. On a Golf mk8, this is called "Proactive Occupant Protection" and the predictive process is meant to pre-arm the air-bag logic and prepare the braking system for an assessed imminent collision. Again, if the predicted crash does not occur- the seat-belt motor releases the tension. This equipment/function is entirely separate to the classic reel lock which is just a mechanical inertia lock that simply stops the belt from extending So, once more if my failing memory is correct - if you drive with "Front Assist turned off", I suspect that the predictive nanny function will be disabled and the seat-belt motor won't work! Maybe test my assumption using an A/B test - meaning try your hard braking experiment with Front Assist both switched-ON and OFF (does the seat-belt motor work?) Don

@Petebcy Pete- Hi. First, I might have misunderstood your words (my apology if so)- but I have to start by dispelling an apparent untruth in your post; NO version MQB platform car (like your Golf mk7) has two pumps for the front/rear window washers - there is only ONE pump and ONE water reservoir for these functions in these vehicles. I suspect this outcome is driven by the almighty overwhelming prerogative of the deities on the VW mother-ship to reduce manufacturing costs on the Golf mk7 production-line! OK - with the caveat above - let's continue this reply with a description regarding how your Golf mk7 decides where to send the washer water when you select either the front/rear window. The process can be divided into two general mechanisms: an input signal and an output command that work as follows: Input signal: When you select the window via the stalk on the steering wheel - a "destination signal" is generated in the steering wheel module (it's called J527). This signal is sent to the Body Control Module (BCM) as a CAN message over the car's central communications spine. Output command: The BCM controls the actual washer pump operation. When the "destination signal" is received, the BCM decodes the information, and it decides what polarity to apply to the power supply pins on the washer pump. This polarity determines whether the pump runs in either the forward, or reverse direction. The washer pump uses the DC voltage from the battery. It's easy to change the running direction on a DC motor - all that's needed is to swap the +ve/-ve voltage terminals. So, there are mechanical valves inside the pump that open/close depending on the pump running direction. A forward running pump causes water flow to the windshield and a reverse running pump results in water straying the rear window. The second pump for the headlight washer is also controlled by the BCM and this module also uses the "destination signal" to determine when to run the headlight washer function Hopefully my description above makes sense. Both washer pumps use a very simple circuit - each pump has two pins and the power supply wires on both pumps terminate directly to the BCM. This means, no fuse - electrical protection for the pumps happen inside the BCM and importantly for this problem, the health of the motors are constantly monitored by the BCM So, whilst accepting that anything is possible in diagnostics - if there are no error messages on this car related to faulty washer pumps, it's unlikely that the problem is caused at the Output command part of the washer circuit. No error message means that its more likely for the fault to be at the Input signal part of the circuit - IMO, of course. If my hunch is correct, the likely reason why the pumps are NOT operational is because the BCM never receives the "destination signal" from J527 (likely because the faulty switch-ON contacts at the base of the washer stalk never make) The fact that you don't own a diagnostic tool is problematic because the device can tell you what happens when you switch ON/OFF the washer stalk on the steering wheel module. Don

@W4ff13 Matt: Yes, use the VAG version OBD11 App. To confirm what plan your OBD11 account is using - select the Profile tab on the Home screen (no need to connect to the dongle). You should see something like the first line in my picture below. Don

@banana_man: Kieran: Yes - I had assumed that you had an active PRO license. If you only have the Basic OBD11 Plan - it ain't going to work! As OBD11 say HERE - This function can be used only for PRO/Ultimate users and only on VAG cars. Don

@W4ff13: Hmm.........................I have assumed that you have either a current PRO, or Ultimate subscription - maybe instead you have only the Basic plan? If so, you can't access Freeze-frame As OBD11 say HERE - This function can be used only for PRO/Ultimate users and only on VAG cars. Don

@Ads26 Adonit: Hi. OK, the error code P085000 is indeed a fault related to the Engine Control Unit (ECU) - but it IS also related to your gearbox problem because the fault descriptor is Park/Neutral Switch Input Circuit - Open or Short to positive. On a Golf mk7/mk7.5- this error code refers to the Gearbox neutral position sender (it's called G701 in the wiring diagram).. G701 is a 3 x pin device that electrically connects directly to the ECU - but it physically senses when the transmission-lever is in the neutral position. So, it's obviously possible for a malfunctioning G701 to result in the type of odd gear-selection behavior that you describe in your post. As for a possible fix - of course replacing G701 is an option. However, according to the UK post HERE, there is a known software problem related with this part. I can't find a copy of the "vw bulletin" (i.e. TSB - Technical Service Bulletin) mentioned in the post. So. before you start throwing more of your hard-earned money at this problem - I suggest that a conversation with your local dealer about the software patch might be prudent! Don

@Dr Mike Oxgreen Ian: Hi. With absolutely no offense intended - I respectfully suggest a change in mind-set. Life becomes infinitely more accommodating if you deliberately take this (good-looking) car for a spirited long-drive on a very-rough gravel road. I do this as a mandatory ritual for ALL my new cars! The advantage of my self imposed protocol is that my new-car gets it's inevitable road scratches early in its life and I don't have to worry about avoiding the second-best spots in car parks (the best parking-spots are invariably already allocated to our disabled colleagues 😉). Again, no offense - it's just a suggestion - but I ask that you consider it because the benefits will be long-lived. Don

@banana_man Kieran: Hi. I keep saying when folk post-up copies of their SCAN reports on this forum that they are doing themselves a gross injustice if Freeze-frame is NOT activated against their OBD11 account. I have absolutely no idea why the deities on the OBD11 mother-ship do not activate Freeze-frame as default - but they don't! I suggest that you read HERE and amend your inaugural post with a better SCAN so we see the proper fault information on this car. OK, with the caveat above about the information deficiency- it's reasonably clear that there IS a problem with both the front-left and rear right speed sensors in the SCAN report. However, because of the missing Freeze-frame data - it's not possible to say when these faults occurred (the faults have NO date/time stamps). So the open question which is unanswered in your SCAN report is: when did these faults occur? If the historic faults on this car were never cleared after the new speed-sensors were retro-fitted- these faults could be a relic of the original problem that happened last year. Or, the faults could be current- I just don't know which scenario is correct! Again for clarity, there is simply not sufficient fault information in your SCAN to reach an informed diagnostic conclusion about this problem. Don

@anglingnut: On all MQB‑evo engines (like your car), VAG always numbers the engine cylinders from the timing‑belt/chain end toward the gearbox, This convention does not change for LHD vs RHD. So, these engines are mounted transversely, with the timing belt/chain end toward the right side of the car (passenger side on LHD; driver side on RHD). Cylinder numbering is always: 1 → Timing belt/chain end 2 → Next cylinder 3 → Next 4 → Gearbox end This is true regardless of whether the car is LHD or RHD because the engine orientation does not change between markets. AFAIK, VAG has used the SAME cylinder numbering protocol for ALL their cars that are built with transverse mounted engines I'm not sure as a certain fact, but I suspect that VAG's cylinder numbering protocol may be used universally by ALL car makers Don

@anglingnut Martin: Hi. Not sure if it helps - but maybe THIS is useful? Don

"Posh Australians"? -what a thoroughly novel concept In the famous words of Australia's overweight, middle-aged, full-time alcoholic and finest diplomat "Australia has more culture than a penicillin factory" Sir Les Patterson is a personal role model of mine. It's only in old age that I have come close to aping my social icon - albeit I still haven't mastered the art of the double entendre. But I'm more than happy with my dribbling, stained clothes and fondness for the demon-drink! Don PS: I doubt that such an appalling faux-pas can ever be forgiven 😉!!

@W4ff13: OK - I'm not sure if you are aware that there are two versions of the OBD11 software in the App store; the original "VAG" version and the new "general" version that allows connection to VAG and non-VAG cars. Both version Apps can be run separately on the same mobile/tablet without issues. I suspect from your screenshots that you are using the latter version App which still has some software glitches. Try loading and run the "VAG" version OBD11 App - you will need to log-in to your OBD11 account the first time. After connecting to the dongle - you should see something like my picture below as the Home screen (ignore the highlighted bits in my screenshot - the picture was developed for another purpose). From the Home screen, select the Other tab (on the lower right-side)- then select Settings and enable the slider on Scan with Freeze frame option. Go back to the Home screen and click-on the big Tap to scan button Yes, the fault in your screenshot is "generic" and it's difficult to make any diagnostic conclusion based purely on this single error-code. That said and whilst accepting that anything is possible in diagnostics - I'm not sure how this normally software related fault in the front radar module can be related to a problem with the camshaft actuator (which is normally more of a drivetrain issue in the Engine Control Module). As I said in my previous reply - for a car of this age, regularly poll the vehicle with your new SCAN tool! Don

@Dollyman Len- Hi. I've taken a a much less expensive route to satiate my mid-life crisis needs - purchased one of those dress-models from a clothing store together with new clothes and a long blonde wig. She sits in the front passenger seat wherever I drive my car. I do get lots of stares from passers-by and the occasional interesting comment - but we are friends now (I think)!! 😀 Don

@Aquanaute: Hi. Purely from an intellectual interest, I'm desperately trying to understand your device - but I need your help! Of course stuff changes with the engine - but below is an example of the OEM wiring for the exhaust-flap modules on a typical Golf mk7.5 (my picture is greatly simplified for the purpose of this response). Are you saying that your device works by splicing the single-throw, double pole contacts (meaning NO, C, NC contacts) of the new relays into each of the two (signal) wires from the ECU to the exhaust-flap modules? If so, what is the electrical impact of the relay contacts on the OEM circuit - meaning does your device either earth, or apply FULL battery rail volts to module pin #2? Don

@W4ff13: Hmm.............. did you notice the first suggestion in my instructions about activating Freeze-frame? Here's an example of what happens if this facility is NOT enabled: From your SCAN report (with Freeze frame NOT enabled): Control Unit: (08) Air Conditioning ODX: EV_ACClimaBHBVW37X_006142 System: Climatronic Protocol: CAN: UDS Serial number: - Faults: B10A911 - A/C compressor activation From a SCAN report for another car with the same error-code but with Freeze frame enabled: 08 Air Conditioning System description: Climatronic Software number: 5G0907044T Software version: 0805 Hardware number: 5G0907044T Hardware version: H02 ODX name: EV_ACClimaBHBVW37X ODX version: 003018 Long coding: 00020014100100011005000000101000 Faults: B10A911 - Activation A/C compressor Short circuit to ground Intermittent Date: 2024-05-20 13:21:48 Mileage: 136091 km Priority: 2 Malfunction frequency counter: 2 Unlearning counter: 184 Dynamic environmental data: 260935F40C0A260010260100260200 Notice how information rich the second SCAN is from a diagnostic perspective? Freeze frame data discloses a much clearer picture about the fault. For example: "Intermittent" tells you the fault status - very important in determining how easy the fault will be to fix! Date/time stamp tells you when the fault was first registered in the module's fault memory - so no guessing! Mileage - self evident (i.e. traveled distance when the fault first happened) Priority tells you how serious the fault is in VW's opinion (Priority 1 = most urgent priority) Malfunction frequency counter tells you how many times the same fault has reappeared in a subsequent drive-cycle ("drive-cycle" is a defined term in VW diagnostics which roughly equates to a short drive in urban traffic) Unlearning counter tells you how many drive-cycles must happen without the fault re-appearing before the fault self clears Dynamic environmental data refers to the set of operating‑condition parameters the module captured at the exact moment the fault is detected and stored. It's difficult for mere mortals like you and me to decode!😀 So, reading a SCAN report without Freeze frame is like reading an abstract of a book, rather than the book itself - It really ain't very useful!! Don

Dean: I stand corrected - thanks for the (very surprising) information! I wasn't aware that this dubious practice was allowed in the land of King Chuck! Why in God's name (I'm a devout agnostic) would UK not ban this practice? At the very least it makes a nonsense of VAG's warranty responsibilities!! As for how these mileage blockers work - according to my new best friend AI, they ONLY impact the value stored in the internal memory of the Dashboard module (it's called J285). The REAL value for the car's actual traveled distance is unaffected in the following modules: ABS/Brake module: this is the most reliable distance counter. Blockers rarely interfere with ABS wheel‑speed → the ABS module sees the real distance. Engine module: distance counter - almost always correct. ECU uses crankshaft load, fuel mass, and torque → blockers cannot fake this without breaking the car. Transmission module: distance counter - most likely correct. Shift‑pattern adaptation depends on real output‑shaft speed. Gateway module: CAN statistics - very likely correct. Gateway logs missing frames and real bus traffic. Telematics module: (if installed): distance counter correct. GPS mileage is independent of CAN. Airbag module: crash‑data mileage is correct. Stored once, not updated continuously. So, regardless of whether a mileage blocker has been used in the past - there are multiple modules in OP's car that can confirm the real distance counter. As I said in my previous reply - expect small differences when comparing module values because they use slightly different input data I suspect that this is how UK VAG determines whether a warranty claim is valid!! Also, don't avoid buying a used car for this reason - just buy a good diagnostic device and look at Live data in the modules above Again, an extraordinary lapse of legal prohibition by your country! Don

@AHG: I totally understand your hopes. However, the basic problem is that even if America's right-to-repair rules were extended to include stuff like secure gateways, module unlock, OTA update pipelines and cryptographic diagnostics - USA is NOT a UNECE cybersecurity jurisdiction! There is no single sentence in UNECE rules (i.e. R155/R156) that says that a SFD2 solution must not apply in America - however there are several clauses in the regulations that prohibits OEMs from providing SFD2 access in non‑UNECE jurisdictions without breaking their compliance obligations. No offense intended to US citizens, but it's a classic case of Team America - world police (f#ck yeah 😉) having absolutely NO dominion over the rules determined by the regional UN economic body. And given the current strained relationship between governments on either side of the pond - I very much doubt that there is political will for EU countries to dilute their rules to accommodate an American-centric problem. But it certainly IS a very interesting issue in the oft vexed (and always complex) SFD2 debate! Don PS: As an example of how another non-EU country has solved the same problem - in contrast, fortuitously Australia is already a UNECE contracting party and is actively adopting UNECE R155 and R156 into its national vehicle regulations (Australia Design Rules). This means Australia is on track to become a full UNECE cybersecurity jurisdiction - unlike the U.S., which has no such adoption.