True power of TSI engines?

[Squierrel]

Surfing around the net I have several times read someone mentioning that VAG has a habit of understating the power of their TSI engines and maybe other engines , too.

Does anyone have any solid information on this? Any measurements for the 1.2 TSI for instance?

Why would they publish lower than real power ratings? Wouldn't it be wiser to announce true horsepowers and torque or even exaggerate a little? The CO2 emissions are accurately monitored by authorities, but aren't they interested in measuring power, too?

[Bodge]

Surfing around the net I have several times read someone mentioning that VAG has a habit of understating the power of their TSI engines and maybe other engines , too.

Does anyone have any solid information on this? Any measurements for the 1.2 TSI for instance?

Why would they publish lower than real power ratings? Wouldn't it be wiser to announce true horsepowers and torque or even exaggerate a little? The CO2 emissions are accurately monitored by authorities, but aren't they interested in measuring power, too?

I believe that in some countries their tax is based upon power output, which may explain under-estimated figures, or why the same engine is available in a range of power outputs.

[loadswine]

This was posted on the Yeti forum from a guy without any mods to his car.

(km means horse power in Polish according to one of the guys)

Edited 30 November, 2010 by loadswine

[Yeti_Man]

This was posted on the Yeti forum from a guy without any mods to his car.

(km means horse power in Polish according to one of the guys)

And the standard torque figures should be what for that engine?

The 1.8TSi usually sees around 180bhp on most dynos (should be 160bhp) and the 170tdi's Ive seen got 182bhp and 178bhp on a Dyno Dynamics rolling road. :yes:

[greek 5vrs]

The TSI 1.8 has been consistantly putting out between 175-180 hp on the MAHA dyno ,depending on the temperature. :thumbup:

[Squierrel]

I believe that in some countries their tax is based upon power output, which may explain under-estimated figures, or why the same engine is available in a range of power outputs.

In Finland the tax is based on CO2 emissions and they are checked by the authorities. It would make no sense advertising lower ratings, because the truth would come up anyway.

Maybe the power output is not checked by authorities in those countries where the tax is based on power. But then it would make sense for all manufacturers to show lower power ratings, why would only VAG do so.

Anyway the Polish figures seem nice: 199 Nm and 125 hp are more than I had in my 2.0i Vectra.

Edited 1 December, 2010 by Squierrel

[robmawer]

Wouldn't it be wiser to announce true horsepowers and torque or even exaggerate a little? The CO2 emissions are accurately monitored by authorities, but aren't they interested in measuring power, too?

Depends what you mean by "true" horsepower - there are a few different standards which can be used by manufacturers to calculate the power output.

Also, dyno readings may not be as accurate as manufacturer figures as they usually work out power at the wheels and then apply some maths to it to derive the bhp, rather than measuring power output directly from the engine.

[haithamali]

Also It's been known of VAG (not specifically for the TSI engines) that Skoda and Seat cars power output is understated to make the VW's and Audi's look better.

The 2010 Skoda Octavia VRS (TSI) is stated to make 200hp, but the Mk6 GTI with the same engine, turbo, everything is rated at 210..

Same with the Leon Cupra - I can't remember the exact figure but the Leon Cupra is quoted to have less power than the Audi TT with the same engine/turbo combo.

Previously the mapping and turbos used to be different, but in the examples above the boost is the same, the turbos and engines are the same...

[Squierrel]

And the standard torque figures should be what for that engine?

For the 1.2 TSI Skoda says 175 Nm and 107 hp. The Poles got 13% more torque and 17% more horsepower.

A Spanish magazine got similar results:

http://motor.terra.es/pruebas-coches/articulo/skoda-yeti-suv-55682-datos.htm

[wja96]

There is certainly some underestimation going on as Revo have recently been taking a hammering because their TDI 170 remap only gets you an extra 20bhp. The problem they have is that the stock car was making 190bhp and they only get 210 out of it after the remap. And you'd have to feel sorry for ABT as their car only does 190bhp after the remap!

And this practise goes back quite a long way as the BLT PD130 engines routinely make 140-150bhp vs. their quoted 130bhp.

[prolfe]

Also It's been known of VAG (not specifically for the TSI engines) that Skoda and Seat cars power output is understated to make the VW's and Audi's look better.

The 2010 Skoda Octavia VRS (TSI) is stated to make 200hp, but the Mk6 GTI with the same engine, turbo, everything is rated at 210..

Same with the Leon Cupra - I can't remember the exact figure but the Leon Cupra is quoted to have less power than the Audi TT with the same engine/turbo combo.

Previously the mapping and turbos used to be different, but in the examples above the boost is the same, the turbos and engines are the same...

i was under the impression that the Gti engine and the vRS engine were different. the vRS having the older 2.0 and the GTi the newer variant. The emissions, power, 0-60 and fuel consumption are different.

[Bunuel]

What is your experience with fuel efficiency and economy with 1.8 TSI?

[pigeon142]

i was under the impression that the Gti engine and the vRS engine were different. the vRS having the older 2.0 and the GTi the newer variant. The emissions, power, 0-60 and fuel consumption are different.

The newer VRS uses the same TSI engine as the GTI as opposed to the TFSI that was fitted before.

[Ross Chapman]

Probably the simplest example of "up-rating" the power output of the same engine to make more expensive brands look better that I know of - New Audi A1 1.4T uses the same 1.4 twincharged engine as the Ibiza, Polo and Fabia.

The Audi is listed as 182bhp, but the Polo, Fabia and Ibiza are listed as 180bhp with the same engine (and unless I am mistaken, Skoda are the only ones who actually list the engine as being 178bhp in some literature)

[vRSy]

Why is it people always think theyhave more than the stated outputs. You dont have higher than stated outputs on your cars, what you have are optimistic rolling roads.

Ive got this from the GTI forum, but the website link is there

found this internet site interesting.  http://www.rri.se/index.php?DN=29

656 different vehicles, 1 dyno (hub dyno so accurate),

and comparison graphs of manufacturer stated output Vs actual output.  Quite alot of surprising on the outputs and confirming what people thought about the likes of the focus RS etc

all the below are with reference to the manufacturer claims

Golf edition 30 8 Hp under

Golf GTI 5Hp under

mk6 golf GTI TSI 5hp up

Golf R32 23Hp under

Leon cupra 11hp under

Octavia vRS 2Hp under

Scirroco R  2Hp up

scirroco TSI 8Hp under

Audi S3 2Hp under

Audi TT 3.2 S tronic 30Hp under

so the TFSi engines seem to be pretty much on the money.  the V6 not so much.

now for the other hot hatches

Focus RS is 20hp under

Civic type R is 16hp

Meganne RS250 18hp

Focus ST is 9hp under

08 impreza STI 30Hp under

Astra VXR  11Hp under

Vectra VXR 38Hp under

Mazda 3 MPS is bang on the money,

Mazda 6 MPS is 7Hp above

Nissan 350Z is 34Hp under

can you tell im bored :grin:

found this as well-

Top gear test track times

http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/show/powerlaps.shtml

All on a bench dyno, widely considered the most accurate type due to the elimination of rolling losses/strapping variations etc. The GTI TSI actually reads more, but many actually read lower than quoted.

You say that all the engines are the same including Hp etc and its all just a marketing ploy, but i have been on JKMs rolling road witnessing Mk5/6 GTIs making exactly as factory stated along with cupra's, TDI's, etc etc. you have to allow for a little variation due to the amount of variables with a dyno.

[muckipup]

Good find, Sy - some interesting reading on that site!

[shark_tech]

In Finland the tax is based on CO2 emissions and they are checked by the authorities. It would make no sense advertising lower ratings, because the truth would come up anyway.

Just want to correct this slightly. In Finland taxes are based on type certification CO2 emissions, and they are not tested by the authorities. Testing every car would be impossible, since the CO2 figure is measured on the runtime emissions cycle test. The last time I was involved in such project, there were only two notified bodies capable of measuring those in Finland (VTT and A-Test).

[shark_tech]

All on a bench dyno, widely considered the most accurate type due to the elimination of rolling losses/strapping variations etc. The GTI TSI actually reads more, but many actually read lower than quoted.

Rototest is actually completely useless for standard power runs. I've used Rototest for about 500 measurements, and it does NOT work with modern ECUs as it should.

Most stock ECU's just go to limp mode and/or go completely crazy with the way Rototest does the measurement.

Its very very good for aftermarket ECU tuning, but a normal Bosch ECU goes crazy when you do a 4th gear run in about 2-4 seconds, some Siemens ECU's actually crash during the run.

2.0TFSI 200hp gives about 212-214hp on an engine dyno, which is the only accurate way of measuring power output, depending a bit on the atmospheric conditions.

On any dyno, repeatability is the most important feature.

[loadswine]

I think those dyno figures refer to wheel horsepower, which is always going to be less than any figures quoted at the flywheel, which are the ones quoted by manufacturers.