So who knows what in the Skoda range is going to be getting the new VW engine for 2007 ?

I had a mailshot of the new Golf GT with this engine fitted. 1.4l 168bhp 0-62mph in 7.9 seconds.

Supercharged and turbocharged, low emissions and hence lower tax bracket.

I went on the VW website and had a closer look, and the huge thing called a Touran mini mpv thing gets the same engine in the sport guise.

It also lists the Golf as doing 38.2 mpg combined figure.

All from a 1400 engine, woooh !

Should be nice if it gets dropped into the next Fabia, with it being lighter than a Golf, can't see many current vRS's keeping up with that one :eek:

I've driven it in a Golf and don't rate it.

There are one or two negative comments about it on UK-MKIV's as well.

the touran isn't big :confused: its about as big as a golf.

and just because VW are using the engine it doesn't mean that skoda will but if they do it will go into the fabia i think.

I'd pretty much guarantee that it will be in the next generation fabia VRS.

I know they do a couple of different output versions , so probably a 140bhp version next to the 140bhp 2.0tdi

I had a good go in a Golf Sport with the 140bhp TSI the other weekend. A mate's Mrs was having difficulty choosing between the TSI and the 140TDI.

It's an interesting little engine. Power delivery is very linear and it almost feels like an NA engine. There's some nice venting noises when you come of the throttle too. It all just felt a little unexciting coming from a vRS with it's turbo lag and the torque spike at 1900rpm. The TSI is likely a better engine that the 2.0 FSI.

Said mate's Mrs went back and had a proper go on in it on the motorway, but was only getting 36mpg (which I didn't think was bad for a petrol engine with just over 1000miles on the clock). Anyway she veto'd it on fuel comsumption and went for the TDI @ £1200 more.

The Golf TSI was nice to chuck around - you could tell it didn't have a heavy diesel engine up front. I can see the 170bhp version in the Fabia being fun

can imagine the 140 tsi being used in the next fabia vrs and the 170 tsi being used in the next seat ibiza cupra.

Should be the 170BHP version for the next Fabia vRS with the 140BHP version being the range topping petrol (other than the VRS)

I think I will hold out for this Engine

http://www.fastcar.co.uk/VW_testing_200_bhp_1_4_engines.YdA2R2Zoa2rmWw.html

http://paultan.org/archives/2006/07/10/volkswagen-cranks-up-twincharged-14-to-200hp/

http://www.whatcar.co.uk/news-article.aspx?NA=220889

just use the same principle on the 2.0FSi engine

Id like to see that engine in some of the smaller cars but I'm not holding my breath. It took them long enough to put an incarnation of 1.8T engine into the polo

Reading one of the recent Times articles, I'm not sure if the motor would be that great as a replacement for the 1.9. Seems a little finiky to me, I would question long term reliability being a doubly pumped petrol motor. Turbo petrol motors don't hold up long term as well as diesels and require lots of maintenance. It also won't have the torque that VRS drivers love. Imagine modding as well? There is nothing left to do to it. You've basically got a motor that has had all that current (reasonable) technology can do to it.

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12929-2308669,00.html

Reading one of the recent Times articles' date=' I'm not sure if the motor would be that great as a replacement for the 1.9. Seems a little finiky to me, I would question long term reliability being a doubly pumped petrol motor. Turbo petrol motors don't hold up long term as well as diesels and require lots of maintenance. It also won't have the torque that VRS drivers love. Imagine modding as well? There is nothing left to do to it. You've basically got a motor that has had all that current (reasonable) technology can do to it.

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12929-2308669,00.html

I disagree. Change the pully, bigger turbo and associated mods such as TIP, air intakes etc, remapping. Maybe other forms of tuning like Nos etc too. I bet its a VERY tunable engine.

The result, it says, provides the best of both worlds. At low revs the supercharger gives it the get up and go of an engine twice its size, but by 3500rpm (or 2400rpm on part throttle) its work is done, it is effectively bypassed and the turbo takes over.

Surely something could be done about that too!

Surely modding the turbo or supercharger without upgrading the other is just going to cause havock?

im with glacierNr would like to see one when they get to 100k!

Surely modding the turbo or supercharger without upgrading the other is just going to cause havock?

they have a series of valves and bypass valves so that they operate independantly of each other. basically the roots type supercharger used only acts as anti-lag device for the more effiecient turbocharger.

to put this really simply a roots supercharger which is belt driven from the crankshaft pumps a good amount of pressure at low speeds but runs out of puff at higher speeds due to 'leakage' in the rotors.

and a turbo is the exact oposite because it's driven by exhaust gases, at low speed there's nothing, then at higher speeds there's more exhaust gas to drive it faster.

the problem with modiying these engines will be in turbocharging because of the lower compression ratios required, because it uses fsi injection system (fuel stratified injection) it requires the crown of the piston to be a certain shape to stratify the fuel charge, which obviously makes it difficult to to have a deep bowl in the crown of the piston. so

i remember seeing an experimental v4 twin turbocharged vw engine at a motor show 2 years ago. now this is what my money would go on!!!!

apart from some trick mapping it would be no harder to tune than a turbo engine i don't think other than it would cost more as you would really need to modify both chargers at the same time.

and off they go with the torqu thing again, get over it its not that simple. we have proved(and on video too) that although the diesels have more torque it isn't for long enough as an octavia with about 95lbft less was faster as although its peak figure was lower it pulled for longer so was actually faster even though its heavier.

I should have qualified my statement when I said "nothing left to be done"... My apologies. I meant within the "reasonable" range. IE: spending as much on mods as you did on the car originally isn't practical or reasonable with a Skoda.

Whn I was younger I enjoyed modding very much but have calmed down in the past few years with family, etc... I know that reasonable doesn't have anything to do with modding (lol). However, I think that people (even modders) buy Skoda because it offers good bang for the buck and in the case of the VRS we know that with a couple grand and you have a fire spitting machine - and a reliable one. In the case of the FSI motors you will have to spend ALOT more to get similar performance increases that will degrade long term reliability. This, in my opinion, defeats the purpose of buying a Skoda in the first place as the value to performance equation with Skoda slopes in favour of a high economy lower cost upgrade path. We Skoda owners seem to fall in love with our cars and keep them for awhile.

I've have had myself or in my family several turbo petrol cars: Volvo's, Audi's... After awhile they become very expensive to maintain - especially if you drive them in a spirited manner - and simply don't last as long as naturally aspirated and/or diesel (na and turbo/sc) motors. Also modding a FSI would most likely be prohibitively expensive as a bigger turbo (which mostly make sense when you have a bigger intercooler... as well $$$) runs you into the 3+ grand range, at least - more likely 5 to 6k to start a good project.

Reading this site I understand that the VRS is appreciated mainly because of its value, performance, economy and reliility.

The supercharger on the TFSI 1.4 can produce over 1 bar boost at idle! and go onto 2.5 bar should it be told to

Its controlled by a magnetic coupling now so changing pulleys may be tricky, but not really needed anyhow.

so the standard charger is fine just bigger turbo and up boosting all round

yes but unfortunately a supercharger requires an awefull lot to turn it over horsepower wise, so that's where the effiency of a turbo is superior.

lummox?? is it a screw type charger used then?? rather than a roots type, i've never been able to get more than 12psi out ofa roots charger

and off they go with the torqu thing again, get over it its not that simple. we have proved(and on video too) that although the diesels have more torque it isn't for long enough as an octavia with about 95lbft less[/b'] was faster as although its peak figure was lower it pulled for longer so was actually faster even though its heavier.

As well as just being a peak torque figure, it is also a torque figure at the fly wheel and not the amount of torque at the wheels (after magnification by the gearbox). So, it's perfectly possible that the Octy has more torque at the wheels

Chris

lummox?? is it a screw type charger used then?? rather than a roots type' date=' i've never been able to get more than 12psi out ofa roots charger[/quote']

Aspiration

mechanical belt driven Roots compressor operated by a magnetic clutch integrated in a module inside the water pump' date=' internal step-down ratio on the input end of the synchronisation gear pair and exhaust turbocharger connected in series, administrated by a control flap, intercooler, 2.5 bar pressure at 1500 rpm.[/quote']

That cover it

That cover it

yes, that's brilliant cheers.

they must have improved the deisgn of the rotors vastly in these superchargers to be able to achieve that sort of boost pressure. possibly they closed down the clearances between the rotors?? or it may be a dual stage unit like on the rolls royce diesel engines.

i've never really had much success with root s chargers before, namely the eaton m-series ones on mercedez etc. i'm glad to see they have decided to develop them more. driving a supercharged car is far niceer than a turbo'd one in my opinion.

i'd like to be able to get my hands on one of those new ones to have a gander inside it!! i wonder if that would fit on a 1.6 16v polo gti engine?? that's giving me more ideas!!!

thanks for that picture... it looks to me like the shape of the ports and bolt positioning of the supercharger assembly/intake manifold is different to to the polo gti lump.... shame.

but on a brighter note, the exhaustmanifold/turbocharger in the top right corner looks spookyly similar to the polo gti exhaust manifold. i wonder if that would retrofit on to there????? i'll definately be buying one of thoe engines from a breakers yard when the become available

i see they are still going with the roller tip rockers as well and a chain driven oil pump too(wise move compared to the old 16v 1.4s). do you know what the dimensions of the exhaust valves are in that engine please?? could be a cheaper alternative to the stainless ones i buy in from sorg motorsport..