Hi everybody.

don`t know if this will be moved mostly about wifes vrs.

Long time since I`ve been on the site work related.

how easy is it to tune the furby vrs to 150 bhp but keep good driveability and are the 130 and 150 engines chipped from 110 just thinking about reliability as my wife wants to tweak her furby vrs.

can anybody tell me who is the best company to use from other peoples experience.

also is this the same for all vag tdi engines as I own a a6 tdi 130 and is it roughly the same process to tune .

any help will be greatly recieved

cheers

critch

Get a tuning box from Diesel tuning Tdi Hdi Dci Cdi TDCi

Chris

how easy is it to tune the furby vrs to 150 bhp but keep good driveability and are the 130 and 150 engines chipped from 110 just thinking about reliability as my wife wants to tweak her furby vrs.

The 110 TDi was an earlier engine that was later replaced with the PD TDi 105, 115, 130 & 150. The later PD diesels use Pump Duse technology which are better more advanced engines that provide greater performance along with excellent fuel consumption. As for tuning it from 130 to 150, I'm not sure who will do such a small power gain as most companies I've looked into seem to take power to around 170 BHP. HTH

Get a tuning box from Diesel tuning Tdi Hdi Dci Cdi TDCi

Chris

Don't these just fool the ECU into overfuelling by fiddling with sensor readings such as air mass etc? Do they affect boost pressure and do they leave the map fairly untouched at idle etc?

I would've thought the best way ideally is a professional remap, although they do cost more at about

simple answer as no point in being technical here, but each varient of the pd engines generally has something different internally, i.e. different turbo, front mounted intercooler, different injectors etc so it's not just a simple remap of the cars computer.

the golf 1.9 tdi 150 can push around 200 bhp from a remap whereas the fabia vrs 1.9 tdi 130 can push 180 if your lucky with a top tuner and have a few other modifications to go with it, this is due to a different turbo, strengthened internals and intercooler if i remember correctly. you can obviously upgrade the fabia 1.9 tdi 130 to be able to cope with over 200 bhp but that costs ££££ and in my opinion not worth the investment (dont want an arguement here ).

get what "scoobychris" says as it's cheap and cheerful and has resale value as you can take it off the car when your done, power will be about 155 bhp after fitting. they will ship it to you with instructions for fittings which take no more than 10 minutes for even a novice diy person. the downside is it's not that advanced and will basically just alter the fuelling, and doesn't take into account other modifications, however i ran one of these on my old mondeo tdci for about 50,000 miles with no problems. it cost me £150, i sold it 1 1/2 years later for £110, and it gave 30 bhp more, very cost effective - in your case i would recommend this to increase your engine power.

or you can get what is known as a "remap" where the engine computer is changed to allow more fuel/higher boost pressures in the turbo resulting in more power, they also do various other things to optimise the engine. the cost is more at anywhere between 375-500 notes but you do get what you pay for.

it really comes down to where you live if you want a remap, as the difference between tuners is negligable really. I was prepared to drive from yorkshire down to jabbasport in peterborough as i wanted a "custom remap" - a remap tailored to how you like it i.e. certain amount of torque, where you want the power in the rev range and it also takes into account other modifications such as exhausts, different air filters and better air intake systems. jabbasport gave my car 195 bhp and 323 lb/ft of torque (if you believe their rolling road, i have had other runs which give very different outputs), it has been driveable for in excess of 40,000 miles with no signs of any issues.

It's a doddle. Many vRS fabias seem to push 140bhp+ from the factory anyway, so achieving a tiddly bit more is easy. Tuning box is the way to go, but a remap alone would see you 170+

Many vRS fabias seem to push 140bhp+ from the factory anyway

They do? :confused:

Tuning box basically fools the car into overfuelling (which is how you tune a diesel) and won't affect the ECU map or turbo's boost which means that it can be removed without trace easily

Chris

LOL. Nothing changes.....on the e36Coupe BMW forum I used to go on loads of people came on claiming insane rolling road figures with just a few mods like a chip and a filter. I couldn't get through to them that many RR's are a little optimistic at best.

Go to one RR session and you're seeing 128bhp......go to another and you're seeing 140bhp with the same atmospheric conditions (volumetric efficiency has a lot to do with it).

Best way to tell IMO is how much it shaves off the 0-60 time over several runs, like a day at Santa Pod or something.

There's no arguing with a stopwatch.

It has been said though that Skoda/ VAG have been quite conservative with the figures they quote for the vRS. With it being aimed at a budget concerned audience I'll bet they did it to keep insurance groupings low, hence it's only a group 9 yet is quicker or as quick as in standard guise as many other 'hot' hatches.

Perhaps it's like what the Japs do with their insane motors. Skylines that only push 270bhp on paper yet RR at over 300. Something to do with a gentlemens agreement? I feel a google coming on......

It has been said though that Skoda/ VAG have been quite conservative with the figures they quote for the vRS.

But who's said that? Oh that's right, the owners of said cars It's the same on every car forum I've been a member of - my Mondeo allegedly pushes out 140-150bhp as standard and I can't see Ford needing to hide that...

Chris

Yeah you do have a point there. The car is rated at 130ps....or 128bhp by VAG.

Having said that, figures do vary wildly due to varying maps / ECU's used during manufacture etc making some cars produce more power than others.

TBH we all know the Furby vRS is quick....quick enough to surprise much more expensive gilloppies. A RR figure is only part of the story. Driver skill and how quick the car actually is on the road are other things.

Just out of curiosity, how much do power they knock off these days for drivetrain losses on FWD cars? Seeing as though you can only measure what the wheels are telling you it's anyones guess what the engine is actually shoving out to ye olde flywheel.

Gearbox resistance (oil viscosities included), driveshaft/ tyre/ wheel/ hub etc inertia....I mean there are so many variables how can you actually get an accurate figure from just a rolling road?

Having said that, figures do vary wildly due to varying maps / ECU's used during manufacture etc making some cars produce more power than others.

But they have one of the most hi-tech plants in the world - surely they're not going vary that much A couple of bhp maybe?

As for rolling roads, the transmission losses are calculated based on the "run-down" from high rpm, but as you say with so many variables it's nigh on impossible to get an accurate figure. There only real use is to do before and after runs, but even then there's still too many variables. Only real way is to do what Skoda do and strap an engine dyno to the flywheel as manufacturers do for their published figures ... and why would they knowingly undersell a car?

Chris

But who's said that? Oh that's right, the owners of said cars It's the same on every car forum I've been a member of - my Mondeo allegedly pushes out 140-150bhp as standard and I can't see Ford needing to hide that...

Chris

I've been to a few VAG rolling road days at various tuners and I've never seen a modern car put out less power than its meant to have in standard form. Most cars seem to be at least 5bhp up on manufacturers quoted figures, with a lot of PD TDi engine'd cars being a good bit up on standard power. My mates Golf GT TDi (110) was putting out 118 standard before it got chipped and puts out 149.9 according to Bedrock's rollers.

As said earlier I think manufactuers put a close basic BHP figure to keep insurance groups and emissions as low as possible.

As said earlier I think manufactuers put a close basic BHP figure to keep insurance groups and emissions as low as possible.

But surely that's fraud - especially if all their cars are making well over what they say?!

I'm also interested why do they also quote their TFSI engine running on super unleaded, etc, rather than playing the figures down and running it on normal unleaded? :confused: If you can show me an engine dyno plot of a car making 140+ bhp out of a standard PD130 then I'll believe you :P:rofl:

Chris

Ahh.....so the manufacturers actually take a direct reading from the flywheel. I see.

Going from my own experience with BMW's, many varied so much at RR runs.

You could have say 3 x 1993 325i's turn up at the same day, all standard. 2 could shove out between 185 and 192bhp, and the third could be pushing closer to 200 in standard guise, all on the same RR within minutes of each other. Open up the ECU cubby hole and then notice that they all have different ECU codes despite being of the same year. It's almost like BMW had a big ECU parts bin and they just fitted whichever Bosch ECU they grabbed at the time during manufacture. Most people wouldn't notice as all the ECU's work fine letting the engine start, run and go normally, but get them on an RR and it tells a different story. But then again we have the variables in drivetrain losses to take into account.

To answer your question about underselling a car.....how's about for insurance purposes? If a car is a group 9 instead of a 10, more people can afford them which means more people are likely to buy them. Therefore, make a car sound marginally slower than it actually is and you'll sell more of them. How's that sound? I'm clutching at straws here.....

Although the numbers make for interesting reading/debate/flaming etc, really what matters I suppose is how you want your car to drive with you behind the wheel.

You can go for max bhp figures, max torque figures. But if you go for max torque and your clutch is standard, it will most likely die before long OR you have to drive around it (which imho sux too as what is the point of getting that torque if you can't use it??)

Most generic maps give a nice increase in torque/power whilst not going too crazy on boost to allow the standard turbo to cope, as well as the standard clutch.

If you have a lot of custom stuff done to your car, you'll need a custom mapping. In this case a good mapper with decent software will likely get much more suitable results

I reckon the figures quoted by manufacturers tend to be fairly accurate.

When I finally get round to properly custom mapping mine I will have to go back to the same RR I used before to see what happens to the curves, I reckon they will go up but I will be looking at max area under the curve (for torque) as I want a nice, driveable car

I thought a certain model of the car all had the same ECU until either revisions were made of there was a change that needed to be made of some variety, I cannot 100's of ECU's each with a different map, they all come the same, setup for a generic engine. That's the good bit about custom remapping, you take a standard car with an engine that will have it's own uniqueness, running a generic map that probably isn't perfectly suited to the engine, then set it up so the map is specific for the vehicle making the most of the engine.

If you can show me an engine dyno plot of a car making 140+ bhp out of a standard PD130 then I'll believe you :P:rofl:

Chris

My very first run back in 2005, the car achieved 141.6bhp and more recently at the Marlin RR day, my car got 139.3bhp (despite needing a service). At the Marlin day, the general concensus was the rollers were giving fair figures, if anything people were achiving lower stats than previously achieved, here's the graph:

Then I can't work out why the manufactures claim 129hp and 229 lbs of torque, and call it a PD130.

At the Marlin day, the general concensus was the rollers were giving fair figures, if anything people were achiving lower stats than previously achieved, here's the graph

So no engine dyno plots then? 37bhp also seems quite hefty transmission losses for a FWD car!

Chris

marlins figures are quite accurate although the transmission loss on my peugeot i lost 31 bhp on the same rolling road a month earlier i am a bit miffed about

So no engine dyno plots then? 37bhp also seems quite hefty transmission losses for a FWD car!

Chris

To be fair, and I don't believe myself it's over 130 but, I've also never seen an engine dyno showing 130bhp. So if you're taking the plot as 'proof' you have neither more, nor less, than Skoda's word for it still?...

To be fair, and I don't believe myself it's over 130 but, I've also never seen an engine dyno showing 130bhp. So if you're taking the plot as 'proof' you have neither more, nor less, than Skoda's word for it still?...

I'm pretty sure there was one published in one of the brochures on the vRS I got mailed, but I might be confusing it with the Ford brochure, but either way Skoda publish peak power and torque figures which will have come from a number of runs of different engines on bench dyno's!

Chris

either way Skoda publish peak power and torque figures which will have come from a number of runs of different engines on bench dyno's!

And Briskoda members publish peak power and torque figures that come from many different vRS engines on RR's. It's still 'he says, she says', which is why you're asking for paper proof: I'm just saying that I have not seen this 'paper proof' to prove either side of the argument, that's all.

I thought a certain model of the car all had the same ECU until either revisions were made of there was a change that needed to be made of some variety, I cannot 100's of ECU's each with a different map, they all come the same, setup for a generic engine. That's the good bit about custom remapping, you take a standard car with an engine that will have it's own uniqueness, running a generic map that probably isn't perfectly suited to the engine, then set it up so the map is specific for the vehicle making the most of the engine.

Your correct, not 100's of different ECU revisions on the Fabia VRS, about 4 in its life time

And Briskoda members publish peak power and torque figures that come from many different vRS engines on RR's. It's still 'he says, she says', which is why you're asking for paper proof: I'm just saying that I have not seen this 'paper proof' to prove either side of the argument, that's all.

Yes, but my point is Skoda publish their figures based on an accurate engine dyno. Briskoda members publish their figures based on an innaccurate rolling road dyno. So to compare the two, you need to make sure both cars are measured in the same way....

I'm happy to believe that VAG (or most modern diesels!) are putting out 10-20bhp more than the manufacturer's published figures (innocent until proven guilty ), but unless someone can measure it accurately, it's a pointless argument imvho

Chris