If its mapped and something breaks that is related to it then they`ll get out of it. So thats the whole engine. If the wheel fell off or something they`d have a bit more work to get out of it tho

Matt

I believe the 170 CR is the CBBB engine, this uses a Borgwarner turbo. I have a feeling the 140 CR is CFFB, if so, this uses a different Borgwarner turbo, according to ETKA anyway... If someone can confirm the engine codes, I'll try and check again.

I believe the 170 CR is the CBBB engine, this uses a Borgwarner turbo. I have a feeling the 140 CR is CFFB, if so, this uses a different Borgwarner turbo, according to ETKA anyway... If someone can confirm the engine codes, I'll try and check again.

Hi,

for Yeti engine codes see;

My link

Regards,

TP

I believe the 170 CR is the CBBB engine... If someone can confirm the engine codes, I'll try and check again.

The CR170 fitted in my MY11 (BW 26 2010) Superb is a CFG, not sure if it's the same as in the Yeti?

EDIT: looks like it is different according to TP's post ^^^

Edited 16 February, 201115 yr by Gizmo68

Indeed, I don't actually work for SkodaUK/Skoda-Auto directly. But I think the way SkodaUK would look at it is that any modifacation would invalidate your warranty. However, I've seen many Skodas with different wheels, aftermarket window tints, vRS spoilers, extra aerials, different exhausts, etc and I don't think it has been a problem thus far.

I think what would be a problem is that, your remapped car developed a rough running and it took the techs 6 hours to figure out it has been caused by the remap who would pay for that 6 hours labor? I don't Skoda warranty would want to pay it.

But as some of you appreciate it is a difficult subject for me to talk about on here as some Skoda retailers might have a rule where they won't work on a remapped car, I doubt it but it could be possible.

It seems a bit of a double standard to me. The feeling is that you must declare it to the insurance company as you don't want your insurance invalidated, but it's fine to try and blag some free work from Skoda, (as how would they know about the remap) for a fault which they are potentially not responsible for.

Am I just a boring old f**t, but for the life of me what is the point of all this remap business? Why pay to have a car made slightly more fuel efficient (if it does) - why not buy a more fuel efficient car in the first place? And why pay to have an increase in power/speed that is hardly likely to be used legally or sensibly? And why potentially invalidate a warranty? I'm at one with the comment re double standards above on that; presumably a remap puts up the insurance (10%! Someone said 'That's not bad' - I think it is, and for what?) because the car (and the profile of the driver who would have this done) now represents a greater risk; and for all SUK's failings (which I for one have not been slow to share on this site), I agree that they should not potentially be picking up the tab for faults caused by someone else mucking around with one of their products.

Bemused rant over. Now I'll run for cover!

Am I just a boring old f**t, but for the life of me what is the point of all this remap business? Why pay to have a car made slightly more fuel efficient (if it does) - why not buy a more fuel efficient car in the first place? And why pay to have an increase in power/speed that is hardly likely to be used legally or sensibly? And why potentially invalidate a warranty? I'm at one with the comment re double standards above on that; presumably a remap puts up the insurance (10%! Someone said 'That's not bad' - I think it is, and for what?) because the car (and the profile of the driver who would have this done) now represents a greater risk; and for all SUK's failings (which I for one have not been slow to share on this site), I agree that they should not potentially be picking up the tab for faults caused by someone else mucking around with one of their products.

Bemused rant over. Now I'll run for cover!

For me; I have had my last four cars 'chipped' or 'remapped' for the sole purpose of making them go faster. It is a potential side effect that they may finish up being more economical.

My Omega 2.5TD finished up giving me 2mpg better than standard but my Octavia vRS TDI gave me the same fuel consumption as standard, except that I frequently used the available extra performance.

In general terms to my belief; there is more available power/torque from a remapped engine that will give you better economy or more performance - not both.

I remapped a Volvo S80 T6 I used to have, standard it produced 280bhp and with a remap it was circa 320-330bhp which made it extremely rapid at motorway speeds which was useful for me when I was going backwards and forwards every other weekend to a small corner of Germany. It did render it difficult to drive at low speeds though and my MPG was not affected either way.

I have driven a number of remapped Skodas and it does in some cases transform the drive. I once had a Fabia vRS MKI that had been remapped and maybe a couple of other bits as it came with a dyno print out at 183bhp and that was absolutely brilliant, a truly fantastic car.

I totally get remapping, in the same way as I get fitting larger braking systems. I don't however understand fitting an enormous exhaust and a M3 badge to a BMW 318i.

Many moons ago, Shifty had a well modified Octavia vRS and a member of Briskoda, who worked for SUK fed the info back to Skoda, Dave got a lovely interview with his dealer where he was informed that the WHOLE of the vehicle warranty was now null and void.

There was a lengthy thread about it a few years ago. I have always had my cars mapped, but accept the potential consequences if the manufacturer finds out. James is a dealer and it is unfair to ask for comment on a public forum and should be discussed via PM

Am I just a boring old f**t, but for the life of me what is the point of all this remap business? Why pay to have a car made slightly more fuel efficient (if it does) - why not buy a more fuel efficient car in the first place? And why pay to have an increase in power/speed that is hardly likely to be used legally or sensibly? And why potentially invalidate a warranty? I'm at one with the comment re double standards above on that; presumably a remap puts up the insurance (10%! Someone said 'That's not bad' - I think it is, and for what?) because the car (and the profile of the driver who would have this done) now represents a greater risk; and for all SUK's failings (which I for one have not been slow to share on this site), I agree that they should not potentially be picking up the tab for faults caused by someone else mucking around with one of their products.

Bemused rant over. Now I'll run for cover!

If Skoda did a CR170DSG I would have bought that......................or even a 1.8TSI DSG....

Why do automatic drivers have to put up with less performance? One supercar manufacturer made the auto more powerful to match the performance of the manual....

Mike

If Skoda did a CR170DSG I would have bought that......................or even a 1.8TSI DSG....

Why do automatic drivers have to put up with less performance? One supercar manufacturer made the auto more powerful to match the performance of the manual....

Mike

+ 1 Same for me too.

Am I just a boring old f**t, but for the life of me what is the point of all this remap business? Why pay to have a car made slightly more fuel efficient (if it does) - why not buy a more fuel efficient car in the first place? And why pay to have an increase in power/speed that is hardly likely to be used legally or sensibly? And why potentially invalidate a warranty? I'm at one with the comment re double standards above on that; presumably a remap puts up the insurance (10%! Someone said 'That's not bad' - I think it is, and for what?) because the car (and the profile of the driver who would have this done) now represents a greater risk; and for all SUK's failings (which I for one have not been slow to share on this site), I agree that they should not potentially be picking up the tab for faults caused by someone else mucking around with one of their products.

Bemused rant over. Now I'll run for cover!

I would have siad, because you can. When I had Performance Torque remap my PD105 Roomster Scout, it was then just shy of 160bhp with a massive increase in torque, I also uprated the brakes and suspension, and the car was a bit of a sleeper in so many ways. All declared to the insurance and it made a flexible, robust family car into one of the best handling cars I have ever owned (statement backed up by Mark and Sarah of Awesome GTi , when they where there)

I don't get the Yeti forum I am 40 something and still love tinkering, have you all reached for the pipe and slippers :)

Am I just a boring old f**t, but for the life of me what is the point of all this remap business? Why pay to have a car made slightly more fuel efficient (if it does) - why not buy a more fuel efficient car in the first place?

That package may not already exist.

And why pay to have an increase in power/speed that is hardly likely to be used legally or sensibly?

To the contrary, remapped cars tend to have mid-range shove which is usable both legally and sensibly on every single journey - every time I put my foot down to pull away from a bottle-neck, accelerate away from a bend, want to tool around in 5th at 40 rather than having to drop it to 4th

And why potentially invalidate a warranty? I'm at one with the comment re double standards above on that;

That's a risk you take, but in truth unless a turbo makes a bid to reach the stratosphere or the camshaft digs a hole in the ground there is little that can be put against a 'remap' as causing the damage

presumably a remap puts up the insurance (10%! Someone said 'That's not bad' - I think it is, and for what?) because the car (and the profile of the driver who would have this done) now represents a greater risk;

Mine costs no more, but I insure through Adrian Flux as my previous insurer wouldn't permit the remap.

and for all SUK's failings (which I for one have not been slow to share on this site), I agree that they should not potentially be picking up the tab for faults caused by someone else mucking around with one of their products.

Indeed, if the fiddling was responsible...

I don't get the Yeti forum I am 40 something and still love tinkering, have you all reached for the pipe and slippers :)

Have a look at this thread;- http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/187898-is-yeti-mania-common-among-older-males/ and you will see that the average Yeti owner (on this forum) is in the older bracket, including me.

Nevertheless there are quite a few of us who enjoy tinkering!

Indeed, I don't actually work for SkodaUK/Skoda-Auto directly. But I think the way SkodaUK would look at it is that any modifacation would invalidate your warranty. However, I've seen many Skodas with different wheels, aftermarket window tints, vRS spoilers, extra aerials, different exhausts, etc and I don't think it has been a problem thus far.

I think what would be a problem is that, your remapped car developed a rough running and it took the techs 6 hours to figure out it has been caused by the remap who would pay for that 6 hours labor? I don't Skoda warranty would want to pay it.

But as some of you appreciate it is a difficult subject for me to talk about on here as some Skoda retailers might have a rule where they won't work on a remapped car, I doubt it but it could be possible.

James,thank you.

that is all i needed and it has made up my mind.

cheers chap

Have a look at this thread;- http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/187898-is-yeti-mania-common-among-older-males/ and you will see that the average Yeti owner (on this forum) is in the older bracket, including me.

Nevertheless there are quite a few of us who enjoy tinkering!

Well said...I'm an inveterate tinkerer/fiddler There was nothing like getting that extra couple of horsepower out of an old mini by advancing the ignition a few degrees and balancing the carbs with a piece of tube and your ear hole.Surely remapping is just the modern day equivalent :yes: