err... Suspension and brakes to compliment the beaut under the bonnet maybe.

I think as most are finding out that over the counter bolt on parts transform the chassis to be better in all areas so it is possible to have a hot hatch with good handling and retain or possibly even improved ride quality, ashame that there is no recognised bolt on brake package (please correct if I'm wrong) Imo vag should offer an rs/cup type option, with 5/10 extra BHP, propper brakes, suspension and an esp off button, the engine deserves it!

I got my car from the factory with a 20mm drop all round with Eighbach springs fitted as a factory option i have also been looking at a RARB and 6pot Torox brakes . Also looking at bilstien dampers

You were very quick Dave, but I think there was far more going on than a comparison between our engines.

Little unfair to judge on my first 15 minutes of track time in the car on road tyres and brand new not bedded in brake pads, first half of which I spent in S mode with traction control on

I was done by a stock CAVE car too remember

But no shame in that, by the end of the open sessions I know that I was a lot quicker than when I started.

Lots of fun had, hope we see more Mk2's on track next track meet

Absolutely, going on how you were driving later on, I get the horrible feeling you will monster me next time !! especially going on James comments after his passenger ride! Seems you were getting used to your brakes! James is a hard man to frighten! Lol

But seriously, in context with this thread, if my car was 178 bhp, you would have been able to walk away on the straights, and that wasn't the case, I had a little in reserve, just not enough to fly past without the mistakes!

So I would say this graph is right , just going on our experience in a straight line alone

Edit:) traction control would only have hurt you on the immediate exit if slow corners, not on the fast one onto the pit straight

redtop170,

Dealer fitted option, not at the factory.

(did they give you the springs they removed at the Dealership?)

Absolutely, going on how you were driving later on, I get the horrible feeling you will monster me next time !! especially going on James comments after his passenger ride! Seems you were getting used to your brakes! James is a hard man to frighten! Lol

But seriously, in context with this thread, if my car was 178 bhp, you would have been able to walk away on the straights, and that wasn't the case, I had a little in reserve, just not enough to fly past without the mistakes!

So I would say this graph is right , just going on our experience in a straight line alone

Edit:) traction control would only have hurt you on the immediate exit if slow corners, not on the fast one onto the pit straight

100% agree Dave, but more than anything it was intended as a complement, your skill on track was easily worth more than the approx 20bhp deficit you had. The added speed you took through corners plus not having as big a gap in power as a stock CAVE meant you comfortably did me. In hindsight, taking pole on my first track day on an unknown track was also foolish, as your video will show I clearly got lost a couple of times

My brakes just got better and better with each session and were really on song for the open session with James. I was quite proud to have him going for the grab handle a few times

If I could change one thing about yesterday it would have been to come with some good track rubber, mismatched front and back road tyres didn't offer the grip the car deserved, at the end my brakes stopping power totally outstripped the grip of my tyres. Although hats off to the Vredesteins they didn't suffer at all with the heat and looked just as good after four sessions as the start of the day. Unlike some other tyres I saw.

Gone a bit OT there.

CTHE for my money is now RR and track proven to put out more than 180ps.

Oh and Fabia vRS ARE fast cars (fact) don't let people tell you otherwise

I got my car from the factory with a 20mm drop all round with Eighbach springs fitted as a factory option i have also been looking at a RARB and 6pot Torox brakes . Also looking at bilstien dampers

I took delivery of mine 100% standard intentionally so I had time to feel the standard car and way up the options, also I like to fit the stuff myself. I'm wanting to go tad lower with H&R 40mm, B8's, and powerflex black series bush kit, then way up the rarb and currently undecided what to do with the brakes.

Anyway i must apologize for derailing this thread, back on topic, i feel like Tesco momentum does have the edge over the other fuels available, the bark from the engine between 5000rpm to 6500 on the momentum does feel that bit more racy!

That's true, in the company of other fast teach vRS s including pretty awesome octys, they may seem mediocre, but watching sparkly in the mixed session, they all seem loud and fast, the little fabia was faster than most. Of the other makes

redtop170,

Dealer fitted option, not at the factory.

(did they give you the springs they removed at the Dealership?)

Yes you are right Dealer fitted option No they did not give me the springs they removed.  The car was ready when i picked it up also it was confirmed that i have a 3year warrenty on them as they were fitted before the car was  driven on the road

Edited 27 April, 201412 yr by redtop170

Yes because at the PDI (pre delivery inspection) the Springs were changed, that was in the UK.

It would be pretty unusual if it was done at the Factory.

 

The Standard Springs fitted at the Factory are yours, you paid for both sets.

Maybe worth asking for them.

(Unless the Dealer gave a special discount on the Option you had fitted)

 

How much were the Springs?

Yes because at the PDI (pre delivery inspection) the Springs were changed, that was in the UK.

It would be pretty unusual if it was done at the Factory.

 

The Standard Springs fitted at the Factory are yours, you paid for both sets.

Maybe worth asking for them.

(Unless the Dealer gave a special discount on the Option you had fitted)

 

How much were the Springs?

I think it was about £300 fitted car looks realy good would not want to lower more I will ask Mitchell skoda for them if they still have them  Thanks

As much as i would love to believe my Fabia had close to 200bhp... i just can swallow it.

Having owned a Mk6 golf gti 2011 model which was also DSG, that car had way more mid-range and top end.

In a car making 210bhp and weighing a lot more that the fabia.

 

Unless of course VW were lying about the Mk6 having 210bhp 

Anyways i found the GTI much nicer to launch in with little wheel slip and no 'bang bang bang' wheel hop or any torque steer.

 

Ok not turning this into a fabia vs golf post, just my opinions 

Can's mark 6 golf GTI did 235bhp on the same rollers my old car did 200bhp with the TMC on.....

'Bang bang bang wheel hop'  is because the TC is still on,

& that can mean power cut at the engine.

and that will continue just as much if you have the Tuning Box on.

 

The 'bang bang bang wheel hop' and 'torque steer' suggest not great tyres for traction and TC Still on.

 

MK6 Golf GTI's are a whole different class of car, and that is why they cost 50% more or so.

They were pretty much a bargain compared to a Polo GTI or Audi A1 185ps

http://evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/234660/volkswagen_mk6_golf_gti.html

 

george

They do not say the same engine, they say a 1.4 TSI etc, but they can be without Superchargers.

It could be Turbo & ACT.

"Compared to the current car, the revamped Polo GTI will also benefit from the power upgrade

that takes its 1.4 litre four cylinder engine from 177bhp to 189 bhp."

Autocar says.

 

It will more than likely have to be a Euro 6 Emission Engine.

& it was Euro 5 being introduced in 2009 that failed,

& new engine management in 2012 to reduce the problems with the CAVE,

& it also reduced Emissions and improved efficiency.

 

 

george

 

 

Is there any need to supercharge when the new twin scroll turbos are now so good?

 

BMW's 1.5 is available with 230bhp and 220lbft@ 3000rpm but 200lbft is available from 1650rpm to 5250rpm.

 

Most twin scroll turbo petrols are already on maximum torque well before 2000rpm but can still produce serious power.

 

Can't see VAG going down the twincharger route if the current unit can't make the next emissions.

 

Cheers

Lee

http://volkswagen.co.uk/technology/petrol/active-cylinder-technology-act

 

The 1.4 TSI/TFSI ACT/COD Engines now are 140 ps -150 ps,  and Euro 6 Emission.  109 Co2 G/km 

 

Twin Scroll is a BMW thing,  Ecoboost Ford,

Volvo going Twincharger , but then its CEO was the VW USA CEO.

 

Audi Hybrid will be the way ahead hopefully, just as BMW are trying to go Hybrid & Electric.

 

VW/Audi are spending huge amounts on the Engine Factories.

http://volkswagen.co.uk/technology/petrol/active-cylinder-technology-act

 

The 1.4 TSI/TFSI ACT/COD Engines now are 140 ps -150 ps,  and Euro 6 Emission.  109 Co2 G/km 

 

Twin Scroll is a BMW thing,  Ecoboost Ford,

Volvo going Twincharger , but then its CEO was the VW USA CEO.

 

Audi Hybrid will be the way ahead hopefully, just as BMW are trying to go Hybrid & Electric.

 

VW/Audi are spending huge amounts on the Engine Factories.

 

 

Quite a few aftermarket twin scroll kits for VW. I think BMW, Merc, Ford, Vauxhall, Peugeot/Citroen, Fiat, Toyota/Lexus, Subaru and more are using twin scroll turbos.

 

The 1.4ACT is turbo only though not twincharger, will the twincharger make Euro 6?

 

Lots of different technologies coming through, BMW have championed variable valve timing and lift to eliminate the throttle but no one else has really run with it. 

 

We'll just have to wait until the F1 technology filters down, reclaim all the wasted thermal energy from the turbo and have full boost available from tickover.

 

Lee

Edited 27 April, 201412 yr by logiclee

The question is, are VW continuing with Twinchargers (Superchargers) on the small engines,

Is it necessary.?

 

*in the UK they only sold 1,200 Polo GTI in over 3 years, is a Manual Option going to make sales pick up,?

the reputation is now bad,  and hopefully as VW have to admit how many were Lemons,

and thought of continuing with a FC Polo GTI will be sunk.*

 

They have made a horlicks with them from 2009-2014 with the CAVE/CTHE 1.4 TSI Dualcharger.

 

The confusion is lots in using the 1.4 TSI/TFSI name in 1390 cc engines with Turbo or Turbo & Supercharger in all sorts of output.

 

They have had Cylinder Deactivation for 4 years in 4 Cylinder Engines,  1 Cylinder failing much to Owners annoyance.

...................

Why do any other manufacturers bother building cars or engines,

why do they not all use a BMW engine and why do we not all drive them?

 

Well in some other Manufacturers cars it is the Same Engine as in a Mini,

Funnily BMW have not the perfect solution for everyones needs.

 

VFM in a choice of reasonably priced cars.

Not even 100% reliability.

The 'bang bang bang wheel hop' and 'torque steer' suggest not great tyres for traction and TC Still on.

 

 

george

 

Nope Traction control off and i switched the quite frankly awful stock dunlops and put on the latest uniroyal rainsport 3... no change.

 

...................

Why do any other manufacturers bother building cars or engines,

why do they not all use a BMW engine and why do we not all drive them?

 

 

BMW engines are no better than many others, our TSi is a great unit, I've driven Ford's ecoboost in 1.0, 1.6 and 2.0 forms and they are also great.

As for diesel I'd take VAG's 2.0TDi over BMW's every day. BMW's 2.0 has a questionable reputation for reliability and it's less refined. But for a total package and handling the longitudinal engine layout and rwd I do like how BMW's and the likes of the MX5, RX8, GT86 etc drive and feel.

 

But the low down torque figures available on many small turbo engines now really make you question the need for the complexity of a twin charger setup. If it can't do Euro 6 what will the Polo GTI get? The much rumored 1.6 hasn't showed up yet.

 

Lee

I had no trouble with traction here (federal RSR track day tyres) incase anyone is interested, the vid of some action at castle combe today the green one is remapped at over 200bhp

 

Logic Lee,  

the 1.4 TSI Dualcharge (Twincharger) 180-185 PS (132-136 kW) does not make Maximum output (power) because of a Supercharger.

That was supposed to be to give a small petrol engine Diesel Like Torque.

 

There is no Supercharger acting after 3,500 rpm.

The max Torque is from 2,000-4,500 rpm.  

Max Power was given on the 125 kW as being @ 6,200 rpm,

 

Then the CAVE 132 kw was given as @ 6,200 rpm.

 

the 1.4 TSI 140-150 ps ACT engines, no supercharger are being given the Official 0-62 by VW

almost the same, that they gave to the 180 ps CAVE & lower Emissions with better economy.

 

The 1.4 TSI CTHE Engine management had them up date the Figures and improved Emissions 

when talking about the 2013 SEAT Ibiza Cupra, and reducing the VED Class.

They never bothered doing anything to change what they give for the vRS 2013 with the Same Engine/Box and Engine management.

As much as i would love to believe my Fabia had close to 200bhp... i just can swallow it.

Having owned a Mk6 golf gti 2011 model which was also DSG, that car had way more mid-range and top end.

In a car making 210bhp and weighing a lot more that the fabia.

 

Unless of course VW were lying about the Mk6 having 210bhp 

Anyways i found the GTI much nicer to launch in with little wheel slip and no 'bang bang bang' wheel hop or any torque steer.

 

Ok not turning this into a fabia vs golf post, just my opinions 

I had a golf Mk5 edition 30 should of made 227BHP turned out to make 256 bhp same engine as in the audi s3 and leon cupra i then brought a 2011 seat leon cupra should make 237bhp that made 261 bhp vw are very conservative when it comes to BHP

Of course, the supercharger allows you to have your cake and eat it - on boost just above tickover, until the larger-than-normal turbo starts to wake up around 2000rpm (although doesn't provide enough boost until a few more rpm are on the dial).  That big turbo being needed for approaching 150bhp/litre.

 

The initial remit for the twincharger engine was the feel, response and performance of a larger capacity normally aspirated engine.  With all the twin scroll trickery about, you still won't get full boost at 1000rpm the instant you put your foot down.  An auto can mask that though to a degree by ensuring the engine doesn't bog down - probably why  the older 1.4 TSI 122PS with DSG still feels quicker than it should IMHO - the DSG keeping the revs up away from the off-boost zone.

Logic Lee,  

the 1.4 TSI Dualcharge (Twincharger) 180-185 PS (132-136 kW) does not make Maximum output (power) because of a Supercharger.

That was supposed to be to give a small petrol engine Diesel Like Torque.

 

There is no Supercharger acting after 3,500 rpm.

The max Torque is from 2,000-4,500 rpm.  

Max Power was given on the 125 kW as being @ 6,200 rpm,

 

Then the CAVE 132 kw was given as @ 6,200 rpm.

 

 

Yes I know the theory (I'm a fully qualified Engineer by trade) and when then engine was developed it was a good solution but now turbo technology has moved on.

 

The days of turbos not coming on boost until 3000rpm+ if they need to provide high bhp are being confined to history.

 

Now most small turbo engines produce maximum torque from well below 2000rpm to above 4000rpm as well as producing high bhp. Some have maximum torque from below 1500rpm to over 4000rpm

 

As an example the EP6CDXT 1.6T available in several vehicles has 275NM from 1700rpm to 5000rpm with a 200bhp available.

 

Indeed many 1.6T's have more torque from lower rpm than the twincharger and can meet or exceed it's power. They also beat the twincharger for economy and emissions and are less complex and less expensive. There's no reason a 1.6T can't be fitted in VAG small cars, they do that in the diesels and the 2.0T is in the A1.

 

Just can't see VAG developing the twincharger technology if it doesn't meet Euro 6. VAG did hint at a 1.6T petrol a couple of years ago. From an engineering point of view I just see this as a much simpler solution.

 

But hey we are seeing 150+bhp/litre single turbo engines hitting the Market with big low end torque  so who's to say the power output of the 1.4ACT can't get up to current twin charger levels.

 

Will have to wait and see.

 

Lee

Go drive the Clio RS 200 1.6 T maybe.  I have, i went to buy one so tried some, the demo and 2 privates for sale.  

With the Gearbox they use it is flawed and the 197 bhp is giving no better performance than the 1.4 TSI Twincharger.

The engine is fine and the auto on it in the MINI was a treat compared to the Renault.

The same BHP as the Renault and yet still not any better performance than the Skoda tidler.

Same Emissions almost. 144 to 148.   but the other 3 1.4 TSI are 139 co2/km.

 

I fail to see why people think the (1390cc) 1.4TSI 132-136 kw engine is not rather good,

if VW just sorted the Design a bit more and the Quality control.