CTHE Observations

[pearce_jj]

Hi All

 

Just some observations on the CTHE engine. It really seems to come alive over 5k, suggesting (to me anyway) that the map is more like the A1 than the CAVE engine, at least looking at the dyno charts that have posted. Does anyone know for sure if the A1 map is any different?

 

Sometimes I find the 'box shifts a bit hard from 1st to 2nd and seems to cause it to back-off a lot, but without the traction light showing. Maybe this is the gearbox torque limiter? I once read there was a torque limit applied in 1st as well. With a good change 60 in 6.something is easily possible, I find it more consistent in sport than manual for some reason.

 

I had a 1.2TSi (same gearbox) that could be harsh into 2nd as well, fixed via some lengthy reprogramming in the end, but in that it just spun the wheels and kept pulling. Obviously that is putting out a lot less torque though.

 

Economy wise, high 40's on a long run seems possible. Actually barely any difference to the 1.2TSi if you're careful (a big if, of course) - I've seen 49mpg over a 180 mile round-trip.

[sharkrider]

there is a kick above 5k for sure, something I never noticed in my cave either

[balbazaar]

I did read about this somewhere that at 5,200 rpm mark it picks up again to about the 6-6500 rpm at which I guess

Maximum hp is achieved.

Unfortunately for me I have the probably the last cave engine before the cthe (engine build date 07-2012).

But I noticed my car especially in 3rd would come to life again in the specified rev range.

So maybe they changed the map just before they changed the engine?

[Ootohere]

The difference between the 1.4 TSI Twincharger CAVE Minimum 180 ps ** 177.7 BHP** (132 kw)

2009-2012 Ibiza, Fabia, Polo

& 

 1.4 TFSI Twincharger minimum 185 ps **182.5 bhp** (136 kw)

in the 'Audi A1 185' was the Map, Spark Plugs and Ignition Coils.

(The Base Engine is the Same on all 1.4 TSI / TFSI CAVE,

just as all CTHE 1.4 TSI / TFSI Engines with Revised Engine Internals are,

be that just with 'Turbo' or 'Dual Charger' 105, 122, 140, 180, 185 ps)

 

Some CAVE Engines produced just as much power/torque and showed the same output with the minimum 132 kw engine as a minimum 136kw one.

 

The Engine Management from 2012 on the CTHE from Late 2012 & 2013 on the CTHE is not the same as the MAP 

on the 136 kw Engine 2009-2013

 

The 1.4 TSI Twincharger Minimum 132 kw CTHE Engine can produce 136 kw as standard though on 95 ron fuel.

More on 98, 99, 100, 102 ron

 

As the 2013 Ibiza Cupra with 1.4 TSI CTHE Minimum 180 ps was released , Seat gave Revised Figures for Performance and Emissions,

Skoda just never Bothered to. the C02/ stayed as showing 148 g/km,  the Polo & A1 were already 139 g/km

If they had actually done the change officially of Fabia vRS late 2012 from CAVE to CTHE as the SEAT was a Relaunch

they could have had shown the correct new Performance, Economy & Lower Emission Figures and lower VED.

 

But the engine was changed in the Fabia, Polo & A1 including Engine Management and then the Seat was

Launched in 2013 with the CTHE & the Press Release Packs for the Media gave the new Figures.

139 g/km, improved top speed & Economy, but they still have them as Minimum 180 ps on 95 RON at any Altitude above Sea Level..

(But then they do have a Minimum 180 ps,  but nobody says that they do not have more than 185 ps.

which they can actually have on 95 ron, and even better on higher octane fuel.)

 

http://autocar.co.uk/car-review/seat/ibiza-cupra/first-drives/seat-ibiza-cupra-first-drive-review

Ibiza Cupra Kerb Weight is given as 1259 kg, more than a 2013 Fabia vRS 1423 kg

(Skoda has 25 KG Ballast & 20 KG Spare Wheel kit)

The Seat is on 215/40 R 17,  the Skoda on 205/40 R17

 

http://honestjohn.co.uk/road-tests/seat/seat-ibiza-cupra-2013-road-test

[sharkrider]

interesting to read the "new rear axle " business....

 

skodanever spoke of this either, but its a FACT that if you want tbuy the polybush kit, its a different kit for CTHE engines cars compaired to CAVE cars, so i think we can assume, skoda changed everything seat did.

[Ootohere]

Not many 'UK Roadtesters' or Motoring Journalists even bothered to mention any change between vRS 2012 or Later

because none got Press Releases from Skoda.

 

Magazines did go on to start talking about the change in Seats, & last year Polo GTI's again.

That is because VW were trying to raise attention to an upcoming Polo GTI with 189 bhp and Manual Option in 2015.

So they were lending out current Polo GTI's

http://caradvice.com.au/videos/2014-volkswagen-polo-gti-video-review

**I LIke the Space in the Engine Compartment available due to VW having put the Battery in the boot 

for better weight distribution. room there for better Air Induction if you want.**

 

Here he is at least in a CTHE Engined vRS

(Taking the Michael Alert,

the only similarity between a vRS and a Skoda Rally car is the Body Shape used.)

[vxh26]

<snip>

Economy wise, high 40's on a long run seems possible. <snip> I've seen 49mpg over a 180 mile round-trip.

Are you talking about a 1.4 litre twincharged vRS?  Your post doesn't give the impression that you habitually drive in a particularly sedate fashion.  The high 40s on a long run sounds pretty amazing, 49 mpg is quite incredible. These figures don't seem to be reported on the "Fuelly" web-site.

[Ootohere]

This is the Briskoda Forum Website,  

Owners & Drivers of Fabia vRS know what they can get in Fuel Economy from their driving,

does it matter what other people get or what they have on 'Fuelly'. .?

 

If you try a vRS for your self for any time you might find the 49 mpg is not that Incredible.

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/319150-2days-to-goand-its-gone

 

Location, location location.

[vxh26]

<snip>

does it matter what other people get or what they have on 'Fuelly'. .?

<snip>

It would be a whole lot more meaningful / helpful if Fuelly distinguished between the various flavours (engine & bodystyle) of the Fabia

[philhoward]

This is the Briskoda Forum Website,  

Owners & Drivers of Fabia vRS know what they can get in Fuel Economy from their driving,

does it matter what other people get or what they have on 'Fuelly'. .?

 

If you try a vRS for your self for any time you might find the 49 mpg is not that Incredible.

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/319150-2days-to-goand-its-gone

 

Location, location location.

When I got the car, I got 38mpg (from new).  This has gradually improved over the last 60k to the reported 46mpg this morning.

 

Long term mpg is reported at almost 43mpg (last 3000 miles or so) including some short town trips.

 

Not quite sure I'll hit your records, George, but 90% of my commute is motorway.

[Ootohere]

I am now on pretty much 37 mpg as the average from all the fuel used ever in Twinchargers over 36,000 miles..

 

40-45 mpg often, 22-32 mpg often,

 works out as through the seasons, around 35 - 40 MPG and IMO a decent regular figure for a 180-205 ps Petrol Automatic.

70 miles through average speed cameras of 50 & 60 mpg gives me over 50 mpg.

 

9 gallons (41 litres) of 99 ron giving regularly between 300 - 420 miles.

[Jabozuma]

Damm, depressing reading, I cannot get 300 miles from full tank on vRS...

Well, daily redlining doesn't help  . Before I hit the loud pedal I am getting mid 40's mpg following rush our traffic through B roads and villages over 20 mile trip back home from the office.

My overall average over 20k miles is currently at 32mpg - mind you, it includes track days .

[pearce_jj]

Lots of good info here - thanks for all the replies. So the A1 is not using the same map then.

[Jabozuma]

Skoda CTHE motors "might" be using the same maps as A1 twinchargers - ask Goerge (goneoffSKI), he was testing/researching them extensively.