Cheap "Performance" Diesels?
Discussion
nottyash said:
130bhp vs 182 is hardley suprising.
My car was new I did 33000 trouble free miles with it remapped, so reliabilty wasnt a problem for me.
The remap transformed the car. Standard it was a diesel Fabia, nothing special really. Our Starlet Glanza felt faster.
Two things.My car was new I did 33000 trouble free miles with it remapped, so reliabilty wasnt a problem for me.
The remap transformed the car. Standard it was a diesel Fabia, nothing special really. Our Starlet Glanza felt faster.
The 182 generally only produces about 170 bhp. The fabia generally 145 bhp as standard. At the time some suggested the torque would make up for the deficit. It does in normal driving but flat out it was a fair bit quicker.
I never said the fabia was unreliable, it wasn't. But the side mount intercooler wasn't even up to standard power when driven hard, the brakes weren't up to the job of repeatedly hauling a 1300 kg car with a meaty mid range to low speeds without fade and the standard clutch struggled with the extra torque of a remap unless driven sympathetically. It was not for no reason that octy VRS brakes, an FMIC and upgraded clutch were popular for remapped cars. And if you didn't do those things then tjr car IS compromised for hard driving even as standard. A hot hatch it ain't. Drive a fabia the same way you can drive a Clio you'll be down on power and with cooked brakes in no time while the Clio will still be going strong.
TameRacingDriver said:
My 182 returned similar. My 172 returns a bit more. A few reasons for this IMO. My phase 1 has taller gearing and is lighter. I'm older now so my driving style, while still brisk is probably a little different these days. I got 310 miles it of just shy of 60 quid v-power on my last tank.
I could only wish for 300 miles to a tank ! I'm older too but I don't think that makes much difference ...... 
I take a lot of these claims made by chipped Fabia VRS's and other tuned TDIs with a pinch of salt. A tuning magazine was on sale a few years back and they tested a whole load of chipped and tuned diesels against a standard Mk5 Golf GTI. They did various tests, like 0-100, 40-80 in 4th and 90-120 in 5th and I remember the Golf was no lower than 2nd in any of the tests. They included in the test a very seriously tuned Fabia VRS with something like 220 BHP/330 LB ft of torque and the Fabia was no quicker from 0-100 than the standard Golf as I recall, both cars hitting the ton in the high 16 secs bracket. Trouble with TDIs is that all that torque makes them FEEL faster than they really are. I had an Audi A3 TDI 130 with a tuning box on it and it supposedly made 155 BHP and 280 IB FT torque and it felt epic, until one day I tried to hold off a BMW 130i in France and he absolutely caned me!
Bezza1969 said:
I take a lot of these claims made by chipped Fabia VRS's and other tuned TDIs with a pinch of salt. A tuning magazine was on sale a few years back and they tested a whole load of chipped and tuned diesels against a standard Mk5 Golf GTI. They did various tests, like 0-100, 40-80 in 4th and 90-120 in 5th and I remember the Golf was no lower than 2nd in any of the tests. They included in the test a very seriously tuned Fabia VRS with something like 220 BHP/330 LB ft of torque and the Fabia was no quicker from 0-100 than the standard Golf. Trouble with TDIs is that all that torque makes them FEEL faster than they really are. I had an Audi A3 TDI 130 with a tuning box on it and it supposedly made 155 BHP and 280 IB FT torque and it felt epic, until one day I tried to hold off a BMW 130i in France and he absolutely caned me!
True, when I had my standard fabia I was matched by a ford puma and tanned by a saxo VTS with several passengers (I was on my own! )TameRacingDriver said:
@ special k: Most of the time I'm driving to go somewhere so only the odd burst of hard acceleration. If I was hooning all of the time I'm sure it'd be sub 30 :-)
Seriously I drive normally and calm mostly. When I do hoon it does take my average down to below 30 though. I'm relying on the trip meter though not a calculated mileage (trip meter over a tank full) and fuel put in calculation so maybe that's where I'm going wrong .....TameRacingDriver said:
True, when I had my standard fabia I was matched by a ford puma and tanned by a saxo VTS with several passengers (I was on my own! )
Maybe time for a little tuition then ......Not being funny at all here. Try taking a little tuition at your next track day and see what difference it makes, I'll bet it's huge
Special K said:
Maybe time for a little tuition then ......
Not being funny at all here. Try taking a little tuition at your next track day and see what difference it makes, I'll bet it's huge
Not at all. He absolutely spanked me in a straight line. I might not be the stig (hoho) but I think I know how to get the most out of a car in a straight line; I got 5.7s to 60 and a 14.2 qtr out of an e36 328 but thanks for your insight.Not being funny at all here. Try taking a little tuition at your next track day and see what difference it makes, I'll bet it's huge
TameRacingDriver said:
Special K said:
Maybe time for a little tuition then ......
Not being funny at all here. Try taking a little tuition at your next track day and see what difference it makes, I'll bet it's huge
Not at all. He absolutely spanked me in a straight line. I might not be the stig (hoho) but I think I know how to get the most out of a car in a straight line; I got 5.7s to 60 and a 14.2 qtr out of an e36 328 but thanks for your insight.Not being funny at all here. Try taking a little tuition at your next track day and see what difference it makes, I'll bet it's huge
No offence taken. I'm of the opinion that the saxo in question could have been tuned up to 150 to 160 bhp which in a 920 kg car, even with a few passengers makes for a nippy car and as for the handling the saxo is in a different league. The puma is 125 bhp but also just over a tonne. The fabia is a lardy beast at 1300 kg. They aren't that quick standard and become quicker when remapped but to become an all rounder they need a good chunk of money thrown at them IMO.
Bezza1969 said:
I take a lot of these claims made by chipped Fabia VRS's and other tuned TDIs with a pinch of salt. A tuning magazine was on sale a few years back and they tested a whole load of chipped and tuned diesels against a standard Mk5 Golf GTI. They did various tests, like 0-100, 40-80 in 4th and 90-120 in 5th and I remember the Golf was no lower than 2nd in any of the tests. They included in the test a very seriously tuned Fabia VRS with something like 220 BHP/330 LB ft of torque and the Fabia was no quicker from 0-100 than the standard Golf as I recall, both cars hitting the ton in the high 16 secs bracket. Trouble with TDIs is that all that torque makes them FEEL faster than they really are. I had an Audi A3 TDI 130 with a tuning box on it and it supposedly made 155 BHP and 280 IB FT torque and it felt epic, until one day I tried to hold off a BMW 130i in France and he absolutely caned me!
So fr 0-100mph time two cars with similar power made roughly the same time and same speed.... From rest to a set speed it's only about power or rather power to weight. The golf GTi makes less power but has vastly superior set up so can put more of that power down and will not suffer from axle tramp.
In gear on the move is where a turbo diesel has its trump card.
Take my 330d 50-80mph if I'm in say 5th and put a bit of pace on (like usual) I do that split in c5 seconds less if I chose 4th or less still if I choose 3rd but I'd be in 5th as I'm not racing. The petrol behind would see me jump them unless of course they were a few gears lower and expecting it as such the potentially faster petrol would have to accelerate to a much higher speed than I and accelerate hard to catch up else they will not be overtaking.
I notice this a fair bit - i do drive with pace most of te time and sometimes give it everything but I'd say 80% of the time when accelerating I'm making solid progress with say 10% grandad pace the other 10% WOT
TameRacingDriver said:
No offence taken. I'm of the opinion that the saxo in question could have been tuned up to 150 to 160 bhp which in a 920 kg car, even with a few passengers makes for a nippy car and as for the handling the saxo is in a different league. The puma is 125 bhp but also just over a tonne. The fabia is a lardy beast at 1300 kg. They aren't that quick standard and become quicker when remapped but to become an all rounder they need a good chunk of money thrown at them IMO.
Good point, you never know if the opposition has been played with To clear all this "My unmodified Pd130 would sit with a Clio 182" business up.
My 106GTI has a piss poor closed induction kit and most of its interior removed (880kg so nothing specially light) Last night I had a play with two frieneds, one has a Ibiza FR with a remap from darkside developments, the other has a Fabia VRS with a miltek and remap.
The 106GTI consistantly pulled on both of them, the Ibiza FR kept up the best but from 40-90 I'd pull about 2 car lengths. This is from a practically un-modified 15year old French hatchback that can be picked up for about £800.
Also due to the massive difference in throttle response I had to apply throttle progressively to match his turbo lag, just so he didn't think I was simply flooring it first
As mentioned in another thread yesterday, these Pd130 engines feel faster than they are.
To add, I got 220miles from my last £30 in the Pug, thats 44mpg.
This really comes across like I'm slating diesels, if I wanted a cheap performance diesel I would probably get an Ibiza FR
My 106GTI has a piss poor closed induction kit and most of its interior removed (880kg so nothing specially light) Last night I had a play with two frieneds, one has a Ibiza FR with a remap from darkside developments, the other has a Fabia VRS with a miltek and remap.
The 106GTI consistantly pulled on both of them, the Ibiza FR kept up the best but from 40-90 I'd pull about 2 car lengths. This is from a practically un-modified 15year old French hatchback that can be picked up for about £800.
Also due to the massive difference in throttle response I had to apply throttle progressively to match his turbo lag, just so he didn't think I was simply flooring it first
As mentioned in another thread yesterday, these Pd130 engines feel faster than they are.
To add, I got 220miles from my last £30 in the Pug, thats 44mpg.
This really comes across like I'm slating diesels, if I wanted a cheap performance diesel I would probably get an Ibiza FR
StottyZr said:
To clear all this "My unmodified Pd130 would sit with a Clio 182" business up.
My 106GTI has a piss poor closed induction kit and most of its interior removed (880kg so nothing specially light) Last night I had a play with two frieneds, one has a Ibiza FR with a remap from darkside developments, the other has a Fabia VRS with a miltek and remap.
The 106GTI consistantly pulled on both of them, the Ibiza FR kept up the best but from 40-90 I'd pull about 2 car lengths. This is from a practically un-modified 15year old French hatchback that can be picked up for about £800.
Also due to the massive difference in throttle response I had to apply throttle progressively to match his turbo lag, just so he didn't think I was simply flooring it first
As mentioned in another thread yesterday, these Pd130 engines feel faster than they are.
To add, I got 220miles from my last £30 in the Pug, thats 44mpg.
This really comes across like I'm slating diesels, if I wanted a cheap performance diesel I would probably get an Ibiza FR
You don't have to tell me. I was on a PH run along with a standard Fabia VRS (me in a completely standard 182), he thought he would give me a run for my money. He didn't. Not at all. And as I said I got panned by a Saxo VTS in my vRS.My 106GTI has a piss poor closed induction kit and most of its interior removed (880kg so nothing specially light) Last night I had a play with two frieneds, one has a Ibiza FR with a remap from darkside developments, the other has a Fabia VRS with a miltek and remap.
The 106GTI consistantly pulled on both of them, the Ibiza FR kept up the best but from 40-90 I'd pull about 2 car lengths. This is from a practically un-modified 15year old French hatchback that can be picked up for about £800.
Also due to the massive difference in throttle response I had to apply throttle progressively to match his turbo lag, just so he didn't think I was simply flooring it first
As mentioned in another thread yesterday, these Pd130 engines feel faster than they are.
To add, I got 220miles from my last £30 in the Pug, thats 44mpg.
This really comes across like I'm slating diesels, if I wanted a cheap performance diesel I would probably get an Ibiza FR
I'd say as standard the 130 TDI is about similar to a Ford Puma or an Alfa 147 2.0 T-Spark. Why do I say this? Because I had a play with these cars, and that was the result.
Even a remapped vRS, which, if we are being generous, might kick out up to 180 bhp, still weighs 1,300 kg (being generous again), which is only 138 bhp / tonne. Even the heaviest Clio 172 which weighs 1,100 kg (full fat Phase 2 model), and allowing for it only being 165 bhp as most are, is 150 bhp / tonne. A saxo VTS is more or less the same PWR as a remapped vRS.
I think sometimes some folks think that because diesels have low down torque, they are going to faster than something that doesn't, until that is, they come across one with a driver who knows how to extract the performance from their high revving vehicle....
TameRacingDriver said:
You don't have to tell me. I was on a PH run along with a standard Fabia VRS (me in a completely standard 182), he thought he would give me a run for my money. He didn't. Not at all. And as I said I got panned by a Saxo VTS in my vRS.
I'd say as standard the 130 TDI is about similar to a Ford Puma or an Alfa 147 2.0 T-Spark. Why do I say this? Because I had a play with these cars, and that was the result.
Even a remapped vRS, which, if we are being generous, might kick out up to 180 bhp, still weighs 1,300 kg (being generous again), which is only 138 bhp / tonne. Even the heaviest Clio 172 which weighs 1,100 kg (full fat Phase 2 model), and allowing for it only being 165 bhp as most are, is 150 bhp / tonne. A saxo VTS is more or less the same PWR as a remapped vRS.
I think sometimes some folks think that because diesels have low down torque, they are going to faster than something that doesn't, until that is, they come across one with a driver who knows how to extract the performance from their high revving vehicle....
Hi my pd ibiza 130 was much faster in every respect to the puma my girlfriend owned may have just been a bad one and yes it was the 1.7. Now remapped to 150 Bhp and egv delete Cupra intake it goes ok mixed bag can keep with my mate Clio 182 but other 182s I can't depends a lot on the driver. I think PDs are great for low down power and lazy overtakes and I like that, but the puma and my old type r were great fun when you drove them in the power band feel flat till it kicks in. The Ibiza feels fast soon as you hit the pedal then soon runs out.I'd say as standard the 130 TDI is about similar to a Ford Puma or an Alfa 147 2.0 T-Spark. Why do I say this? Because I had a play with these cars, and that was the result.
Even a remapped vRS, which, if we are being generous, might kick out up to 180 bhp, still weighs 1,300 kg (being generous again), which is only 138 bhp / tonne. Even the heaviest Clio 172 which weighs 1,100 kg (full fat Phase 2 model), and allowing for it only being 165 bhp as most are, is 150 bhp / tonne. A saxo VTS is more or less the same PWR as a remapped vRS.
I think sometimes some folks think that because diesels have low down torque, they are going to faster than something that doesn't, until that is, they come across one with a driver who knows how to extract the performance from their high revving vehicle....
The most impressive 'normal' diesel I have been in and seen go was a remapped Astra 1.9 CDTi, I think they are 150bhp standard and nearer 200 with a remap, caught me off guard a few times in my Ibiza (Ibiza is circa 232bhp/ton) and it took a long time to catch up! (backing up what previous posters have said).
LiamM45 said:
The most impressive 'normal' diesel I have been in and seen go was a remapped Astra 1.9 CDTi, I think they are 150bhp standard and nearer 200 with a remap, caught me off guard a few times in my Ibiza (Ibiza is circa 232bhp/ton) and it took a long time to catch up! (backing up what previous posters have said).
Yeah a standard Astra cdti is faster than my modified tdi. What Ibiza do you drive. Dakkon said:
bodhi said:
T16OLE said:
330d`s dont have swirl flaps
Not quite accurate. All autos and the 204bhp manuals had them, the initial 184bhp manuals went without. I know for a fact my 204bhp model had them, as I have the receipt for the work to take them out.- You mean you had a bill for someone to not do anything
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff