VW 2.0 FSi T Re-map figures.
Discussion
Anybody had their FSi T engine remapped? What were the numbers before and after.
I have a 2006 Passat with this engine, I had it in for the camshaft timing chain to be done and thought what the hell and had an APR stage 1 re-map done.
Standard figures are quoted as 197 bhp. 207 lb/ft .
Mine before re-map 200 bhp. 218 lb/ft .
After re-map 225 bhp. 291 lb/ft .
Quoted on their site 245/252bhp 303 lb/ft
I was not after power figure bragging rites but the figure is well down on what was advertised but the torque is pretty close. The increase in torque is very noticeable.
I have a 2006 Passat with this engine, I had it in for the camshaft timing chain to be done and thought what the hell and had an APR stage 1 re-map done.
Standard figures are quoted as 197 bhp. 207 lb/ft .
Mine before re-map 200 bhp. 218 lb/ft .
After re-map 225 bhp. 291 lb/ft .
Quoted on their site 245/252bhp 303 lb/ft
I was not after power figure bragging rites but the figure is well down on what was advertised but the torque is pretty close. The increase in torque is very noticeable.
That does seem a rather low result. But so does their headline estimate. Mine was sightly different as i had the pirelli golf gti so got a result of 300bhp due to the different engine.
However I'm pretty sure a standard mk5 golf g gti can go from 197 to arround 260bhp.
Id be looking into this a bit more or asking for a refund.
Did they give any reason as to why it was so low? I don't know much but maybe something has failed on the car?
However I'm pretty sure a standard mk5 golf g gti can go from 197 to arround 260bhp.
Id be looking into this a bit more or asking for a refund.
Did they give any reason as to why it was so low? I don't know much but maybe something has failed on the car?
The Spruce goose said:
how did they measure the new and old remapped figures. the biggest problem is that everyone takes the remap figures as law, when there are so many variations etc.
The figures were achieved by putting the car on their rolling road when standard, and again after they had done the re-map.I am not going to make a big issue of the actual BHP figure as there is a very noticeable difference in the way the car performs with the increase in torque.
I just wish it was made more clear just what would be achieved. If they say it will be 245bhp and it is actually 225bhp then it needs questioning.
randomeddy said:
I just wish it was made more clear just what would be achieved. If they say it will be 245bhp and it is actually 225bhp then it needs questioning.
Engines vary, no two will make the same power either before (unless artificially limited) or after a remap. One may have a slightly better compression, valve timing, balance etc.Unless it was properly 'blueprinted' (everything checked and built exactly to spec, not just to tolerance) when built, in which case they should be optimised and very similar but they're not. This is an expense spared for race cars and (maybe) some top end supercars.
That said a 20hp shortfall on a 200hp engine is a fair bit off, but who knows the state/condition of the engine before?
catso said:
randomeddy said:
I just wish it was made more clear just what would be achieved. If they say it will be 245bhp and it is actually 225bhp then it needs questioning.
Engines vary, no two will make the same power either before (unless artificially limited) or after a remap. One may have a slightly better compression, valve timing, balance etc.Unless it was properly 'blueprinted' (everything checked and built exactly to spec, not just to tolerance) when built, in which case they should be optimised and very similar but they're not. This is an expense spared for race cars and (maybe) some top end supercars.
That said a 20hp shortfall on a 200hp engine is a fair bit off, but who knows the state/condition of the engine before?
cuprabob said:
To be fair the OP states the dyno run before the map gave 200bhp, so implies a healthy engine.
Fair comment however, it maybe that said engines are really capable of 220hp with no bother but to avoid variations, claims, pub talk, different fuel quality, different market expectations, emissions, noise limits and to keep costs down etc. they are deliberately built 'detuned' so that they all manage similar figures.So whilst the OP's engines makes 200hp (they all do fairly easily) but it still maybe not quite as 'optimised' as another making the same (or similar) power but capable of more without too much work. In reality they all should be 'healthy' otherwise VW are doing something wrong.
I know from (mostly bike) tuning experience that the same work performed on identical engines with almost identical power (pre-tuning) can give quite different results, that and sometimes small things, either done or omitted, can sometimes make a big, unexpected difference to the end results.
Of course what really matters is torque, both how much and where...
Scobblelotcher said:
catso said:
randomeddy said:
I just wish it was made more clear just what would be achieved. If they say it will be 245bhp and it is actually 225bhp then it needs questioning.
Engines vary, no two will make the same power either before (unless artificially limited) or after a remap. One may have a slightly better compression, valve timing, balance etc.Unless it was properly 'blueprinted' (everything checked and built exactly to spec, not just to tolerance) when built, in which case they should be optimised and very similar but they're not. This is an expense spared for race cars and (maybe) some top end supercars.
That said a 20hp shortfall on a 200hp engine is a fair bit off, but who knows the state/condition of the engine before?
Considering the mileage ,(127k) the standard figure surely shows that the engine is spot on as somebody mentioned.
randomeddy said:
Anybody had their FSi T engine remapped? What were the numbers before and after.
I have a 2006 Passat with this engine, I had it in for the camshaft timing chain to be done and thought what the hell and had an APR stage 1 re-map done.
Standard figures are quoted as 197 bhp. 207 lb/ft .
Mine before re-map 200 bhp. 218 lb/ft .
After re-map 225 bhp. 291 lb/ft .
Quoted on their site 245/252bhp 303 lb/ft
I was not after power figure bragging rites but the figure is well down on what was advertised but the torque is pretty close. The increase in torque is very noticeable.
How did they health check the engine before hand? It could be a simple boost issue holding back the power, could be the engine is a little worn given the mileage (I'm surprised at the "before" figures actually, seems a little high).I have a 2006 Passat with this engine, I had it in for the camshaft timing chain to be done and thought what the hell and had an APR stage 1 re-map done.
Standard figures are quoted as 197 bhp. 207 lb/ft .
Mine before re-map 200 bhp. 218 lb/ft .
After re-map 225 bhp. 291 lb/ft .
Quoted on their site 245/252bhp 303 lb/ft
I was not after power figure bragging rites but the figure is well down on what was advertised but the torque is pretty close. The increase in torque is very noticeable.
They have serviced the car for the last three and a bit years and are not shy in reporting any faults.
The VVT and chain etc had been reported as being noisy a couple of times in the past.
I keep in touch with the service manager and mentioned a few weeks ago about getting a re-map as they were doing a special offer at the time, he said the VVT would need doing before they would re-map it which I thought was a very responsible thing to do.
Being Captain sensible and really wanting to keep the car for as long as possible I was just going to have the VVT and chain done and not bother about the re-map but I thought sod it, in for a penny in for a pound and told them to re-map it anyway.
The VVT and chain etc had been reported as being noisy a couple of times in the past.
I keep in touch with the service manager and mentioned a few weeks ago about getting a re-map as they were doing a special offer at the time, he said the VVT would need doing before they would re-map it which I thought was a very responsible thing to do.
Being Captain sensible and really wanting to keep the car for as long as possible I was just going to have the VVT and chain done and not bother about the re-map but I thought sod it, in for a penny in for a pound and told them to re-map it anyway.
Sounds fair, I had my Mk5 Golf GTi done and didn't really care about the figures. It was the feeling of the extra torque and drive ability that counted.
Maybe you could just leave the figures out of the equation and drive it for a bit and see if you think the change in the way it drives was worth the money instead?
Maybe you could just leave the figures out of the equation and drive it for a bit and see if you think the change in the way it drives was worth the money instead?
randomeddy said:
he said the VVT would need doing before they would re-map it which I thought was a very responsible thing to do.
And this could be the reason it's not responding as well as it might. A minor difference, some play in the mechanism for example, could be preventing it from fulfilling it's potential.The way to maximise power is to optimise everything.
For a high miler it doesn't look too bad to me.
Blaster72 said:
Sounds fair, I had my Mk5 Golf GTi done and didn't really care about the figures. It was the feeling of the extra torque and drive ability that counted.
Maybe you could just leave the figures out of the equation and drive it for a bit and see if you think the change in the way it drives was worth the money instead?
Yes that is how I am taking it now, with the extra torque it pulls so well in 6th gear on the motorway, very happy with that.Maybe you could just leave the figures out of the equation and drive it for a bit and see if you think the change in the way it drives was worth the money instead?
I was going back to the place anyway to get the oil changed and while I was there they inspected the diverter valve, said it was fine. The main man said they are still looking into their readings as they were expecting 240 bhp.
They are interested into why the actual figure is down just in case it is a problem at their end.
These engines are getting on a bit and need some maintenance.
AS it's same as a Golf Mk5 plenty of detail on the web.
Poor OEM intake can be causing power so replacing with a panel filter even may help
Also fresh fuel filter may help too. Make sure it's 6.6bar one.
Checking other very common points like diverter valve (can easily cause 30-40hp loss) , pcv and now more so injectors will also keep it safe.
APR maps make good power most of the time so I suspect there is an underlying issue with your particular car.
AS it's same as a Golf Mk5 plenty of detail on the web.
Poor OEM intake can be causing power so replacing with a panel filter even may help
Also fresh fuel filter may help too. Make sure it's 6.6bar one.
Checking other very common points like diverter valve (can easily cause 30-40hp loss) , pcv and now more so injectors will also keep it safe.
APR maps make good power most of the time so I suspect there is an underlying issue with your particular car.
The factory airbox can support well over 320hp, as can the factory cat back, so it's not an hardware issue unless a cat converter is partially clogged, or the MAF sensor isn't reading correctly, or there are some boost leaks.
These engines when healthy always see 240hp minimum after a map, like clockwork, so I'd be looking for the missing ponies personally.
These engines when healthy always see 240hp minimum after a map, like clockwork, so I'd be looking for the missing ponies personally.
Gassing Station | Audi, Seat, Skoda & VW | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff