1.2 TSI manual - acceleration query

[Halford]

Hi, I've been driving a 2016 manual 1.2 TSI for 2 weeks and was well impressed with it's throttle response,

you could feel it push you into your seat as you put your foot down.

 

I'm now driving a different 2016 manual 1.2 TSI and it feels totally different, there isn't the slightest hint of pushing you into the seat, yet it still goes and makes steady progress. I've even had it on diagnostics in case there was an issue with the turbo, but everything works fine and it's been test driven and feedback is that it works as it should.

 

Now starting to wonder as whether the first 1.2 had been chipped hence, resulting in its far superior performance.

 

Anyway now hoping to get some third of fourth party input as to how your 1.2's feel - do they push you into your seat or are they just steady solid accelerators. ?

 

many thanks for helping clear this up.

[pee81]

I've got a 1.2tsi but the dsg version and it does give a slight shove under hard acceleration (hardly noticeable compared to my old 1.4 vrs though)

[bigjohn]

5 hours ago, Halford said:

Hi, I've been driving a 2016 manual 1.2 TSI for 2 weeks and was well impressed with it's throttle response,

you could feel it push you into your seat as you put your foot down.

 

I'm now driving a different 2016 manual 1.2 TSI and it feels totally different, there isn't the slightest hint of pushing you into the seat, yet it still goes and makes steady progress. I've even had it on diagnostics in case there was an issue with the turbo, but everything works fine and it's been test driven and feedback is that it works as it should.

 

Now starting to wonder as whether the first 1.2 had been chipped hence, resulting in its far superior performance.

 

Anyway now hoping to get some third of fourth party input as to how your 1.2's feel - do they push you into your seat or are they just steady solid accelerators. ?

 

many thanks for helping clear this up.

 

How an engine is run in has always made a difference as to how an engine feels for me.

I remember the days when I had to swap between other peoples company cars (owned from new)  and the performance was related to the driving style of the keeper. When I got my own first new company car (Astra II 1.3) I didn't baby it when running in (varied driving stye) and it turned into a suprisingly nippy little Astra. I did the same with my new privately owned 2001 Octavia 1.4 16v(not tsi!) and it was (er still is) also suprisingly nippy for what is supposed to be only 75bhp and doesn't burn any oil even it's advanced years/mileage (I still own it - keeping it back for my son when he finishes uni - he loves driving it)

 

I think there is a pinned thread somewhere about the running of a tsi.

 

[EDIT] Found it - https://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/408713-running-in-tsi-engines/

 

 

Edited 12 July, 2017 by bigjohn

[djfish]

Various things affect the performance such as:

Weight of passengers

Quality of fuel

Ambient conditions/air temp.

The smaller the engine the more noticeable (in theory) the effects should be.

 

[enor]

An un-chipped 1.2TSI is never going to "push you into the seat", though. I have a manual 1.4TSI and though it has some more horsepower (not many more, granted) it's still very sluggish. 

[muddyjim]

Possibly the 'sluggish' one had the earlier 105PS engine? I know the 110PS engine came out in 2015 but maybe it was an 'old stock' Yeti?

 

Have a look at this thread:

https://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/405660-12tsi-105-vs-110-opinion/

 

Jim

 

Edited 13 July, 2017 by muddyjim

[notyeti]

I have a 1.2 DSG. It's take off is always harsh, to the extent that if the front wheels are not straight ahead it is quite likely to engage traction control if the start is a turn up a hill accompanied by much buck and judder. This makes me wonder if the "push into seat" isn't more a matter of the driving style rather than the throttle response. I would engage the clutch on a manual more gently, to get a smoother drive.   

[enor]

It takes a superhumanly sensitive butt to notice a 5hp difference..

[muddyjim]

8 minutes ago, enor said:

It takes a superhumanly sensitive butt to notice a 5hp difference..

But if you read the link I posted, you will see that the two (totally) different engines have different characteristics; the later one has more 'low down' grunt....

 

Quote

So quite happy with the 110 and it seems a bit more of an upgrade than just 5PS.

 

Edited 13 July, 2017 by muddyjim

[Robjon]

50 minutes ago, muddyjim said:

Possibly the 'sluggish' one had the earlier 105PS engine? I know the 110PS engine came out in 2015 but maybe it was an 'old stock' Yeti?

 

Possibly...

 

My Yeti DSG has the 110 engine, whereas my Roomster DSG had the 105 engine. 

Although the Yeti is a heavier car, acceleration seems sharper throughout the rev range than it was in my Roomster.

 

 

[Halford]

thanks everyone for all your input.

 

1st point - both cars have the same 110PS engine.

 

news - the current slower car has improved, the dealer had put in £10 co-op fuel, I then put in £20 from a Jet garage and this morning put in £47 Sainsbury (which I think is BP) and it's now more responsive - so fuel does appear to make a big difference with this particular engine. 

 

However, it's still not as rapid as the original which I do think may have been chipped, additionally, the first one chirped on using the alarm whilst the new one doesn't (nor do standard ones I believe), so confirming that maybe it had been tinkered with.

[Halford]

22 hours ago, Halford said:

the first one chirped on using the alarm whilst the new one doesn't (nor do standard ones I believe)

 

edit: have found the way to activate this - in the maxdot display you need to checkbox " ATA Confirm " option in settings

 

it's not a very loud chirp (enough for me), so maybe there's a louder one that can be set in VCDs ?

 

[Ootohere]

You might as well put in some 97 ron Super Unleaded even Sainsburys, or 99 ron minimum Tesco Momentum / Shell V-Power Nitro +

and see what that does compared to any 95 ron unleaded if that was what was from the Co-op, Jet & Sainsburys.

[Expatman]

Yes, the 1.2 does seem to run better on higher quality fuel, also gives approx 2 MPG better consumption on mine which balances for the extra cost. Pundits claim better engine life with higher grade fuels as well. Wouldn't say the difference was dramatic so you pays your money and takes your choice.

[Ootohere]

Not even that much more money if Sainsburys Super 97 or Tesco Momentum 99 ron is 5 pence a litre more than the cheapest 95 ron they and others sell.

So not much more than £2.50 extra for a tank fill.

There are no 95 Unleaded that is any better than any other is there, after all detergents if there any are not octane boosters.

[Halford]

thanks, never used Super Unleaded in any vehicle before,

will give it a go

and report back

 

 

[lawnmowerman]

Many years ago (this will date me!) as After-sales Manager for the (then) largest VW/Audi dealer group in Europe, we had significant problems with the Bosch K-Jetronic systems in Audi's (mainly) & VW's.

 

We eventually got some tech. folk over from Germany and their conclusions were that there is nothing wrong with their cars it was the fuel sold in the U.K.

 

They insisted that none of the 91 octane fuel sold in the U.K. actually reached 91 octane. I asked them how long they had been aware of this and the said for quite some time.

 

My retort was that they should make their cars fit to operate in the markets they are sold. Not their notional standards for fuel that they know is not available to most customers.

 

Sadly, the arrogance of the VAG group has not changed - but this attitude may yet cost them dear long term.

 

Some time later I worked for Japanese franchises and was very pleasantly surprised at the superior quality and reliability of their products.

 

P.S. I never use supermarket fuels.

 

Bill 

[VAGCF]

Gotta ask though Bill, why didn't the fuel meet 91 RON if it was supposed to and why aren't you driving a Japanese car!

 

 

 

[Ootohere]

When was 91 ron petrol last sold at pumps in the UK and why did Customs & Excise allow the UK buying public and commerce to be derauded by wholesale and retail and by Uk Customs & Excise (HMRC) paying duty on something not meeting the required energy it has to produce?

http://volvoclub.org.uk/fuels.shtml 

 

 

UK fuels like 95 ron, 98 ron and 99 ron state 'Minimum' because they have to meet the minimum.

As for Supermarkets  / Supermarket filling stations, they are not Refiners, they purchase in from Suppliers, now Tesco are part owners of Greenergy who supply Tesco and others.

http://greenergy.com/uk/independent 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating 

 

No retailers sell 98 ron on Mainland UK. So it will be 97 Super or 99 ron minimum. 

http://volkswagen.co.uk/need-help/owners/Fuel 

 

Edited 16 July, 2017 by Awayoffski

[lawnmowerman]

52 minutes ago, VAGCF said:

Gotta ask though Bill, why didn't the fuel meet 91 RON if it was supposed to and why aren't you driving a Japanese car!

 

 

 

 

No idea why it didn't - this was after many months of issues with (mainly) Audi's - as they had more vehicles fitted with K-Jetronic injection. It was a real B*ll-ache at the time though.

 

Not driving Japanese? - hate the Qashqai. What else would come close in terms of design and practicality to the Yeti from any Japanese firm?

 

Not everything comes down to reliability and quality. Sometimes we are seduced with style or some other intangible. More so the older we get and we exercise our less practical and sometimes frivolous side.

 

Recent purchase history (wife included) (excluding company cars) 2 x Yeti, Citigo, Vitara, Audi TT, MX5, 2 x Corsa Diesel (needed the 60+mpg at the time), Honda Accord V-Tech and a gorgeous V6 Rover 75 auto (really miss that one).

 

Going way back cars that I loved included our Volvo 245 with self-levelling suspension (for towing) and all the Saab's I owned from 99 Turbo to 900's of different specs. Loved the later Turbo's with the APC engine.

 

Cars that I would have loved but didn't quite get? Audi A2 and MiniMoke.

 

Bill 

[lawnmowerman]

1 hour ago, Awayoffski said:

When was 91 ron petrol last sold at pumps in the UK and why did Customs & Excise allow the UK buying public and commerce to be derauded by wholesale and retail and by Uk Customs & Excise (HMRC) paying duty on something not meeting the required energy it has to produce?

http://volvoclub.org.uk/fuels.shtml 

 

 

UK fuels like 95 ron, 98 ron and 99 ron state 'Minimum' because they have to meet the minimum.

As for Supermarkets  / Supermarket filling stations, they are not Refiners, they purchase in from Suppliers, now Tesco are part owners of Greenergy who supply Tesco and others.

http://greenergy.com/uk/independent 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating 

 

No retailers sell 98 ron on Mainland UK. So it will be 97 Super or 99 ron minimum. 

http://volkswagen.co.uk/need-help/owners/Fuel 

 

 

This is a history lesson Awayoffski. 

 

I thought the K-Jetronic would date it for you - the '80's.

 

How did they get away with it? You tell me. History is littered with frauds perpetrated by companies large and small. Usually the larger the company the easier to get away with it.

 

And as to fuel - it is removed from the refineries and taken to huge tanks for distribution. All the supermarkets get the basic raw fuel as do the oil companies. It becomes Shell or Esso or BP when they add their own cocktail of chemicals to it to define it as their own.

 

Simples. 

 

Bill 

Edited 16 July, 2017 by lawnmowerman
Spelling

[Ootohere]

You are teach granny how to suck eggs again.

Just been reading the Audi Clasic posts 1970-s and 80's when i worked in a garage and on the pumps.

 

So was this 91 ron not meeting that in the 70's or 80's or were VW / Audi just as full of crap back then as now.

Mushrooms, keep in the dark and shovel with sharn.

 

Edited 16 July, 2017 by Awayoffski

[lawnmowerman]

4 minutes ago, Awayoffski said:

You are teach granny how to suck eggs again.

Just been reading the Audi Clasic posts 1970-s and 80's when i worked in a garage and on the pumps.

 

So was this 91 ron not meeting that in the 70's or 80's or were VW / Audi just as full of crap back then as now.

Mushrooms, keep in the dark and shovel with sharn.

 

 

Not teaching anyone anything. Just relating how it was and comparing to current practice.

 

Bill  

[Ootohere]

Current practice is to add detergent packages or to increase the octane from the base fuel but the refined fuel meets the BS. 

That is not the minimum Bull **** standard.

 

As to past practices and the refineries when there were more in the UK the fuels were as tested back then as now.

So we had plenty Shell Formula engine failures when they first had a 'simply clever' idea.

 

All fuel issues are well documented as it turns out, but the VW / Audi claim that UK 91 ron never met 91 ron is a new one that no doubt the web / social media will pick up on.

 

Geenergy & Royal Dutch Shell co-own plenty of the storage and importation facilities, and the base fuel entering the UK does come from around the world as the prices suit.

The UK gets Winter fuel into the UK later sometimes than the rest of Europe, bought cheap.

http://greenergy.com/uk/independent 

Edited 16 July, 2017 by Awayoffski

[Halford]

On 7/14/2017 at 17:59, Halford said:

thanks, never used Super Unleaded in any vehicle before,

will give it a go

and report back

 

 

finally got around to filling the tank again (was in reserve only 20m left) filled it all the way to cut-off with Sainsburys Super Unleaded

 

 I can certainly tell the difference - much improved acceleration, and that 2nd lag around 1600 rpm has gone (may even help those DSG owners with thet flat spot ?)

 

I'm a convert ,