122 PS TSI

[Hannan]

Hey guys,

I've been reading up about Sciroccos alot lately as I'm due to recieve mine at the end of the month which is the 1.4 122 PS TSI.

I am very excited as it is a Scirocco but I only just came across noticing that the 122 PS does not have a Supercharger and that it only starts from the 160 PS TSI Engines.

Does anyone know why VW didnt put a Supercharger in the 122 PS? I can understand that it is quite a small engine but im guessing that the Supercharger is what gives the 160 PS that extra 40 bhp?

Also my Scirocco that I am getting is on the Mobility Scheme and due to my age is why I am only able to get the 122 PS TSI.

Are there any cool/interesting facts that I should know about before I get my Scirocco?

I've added the Interlagos 18'' to the Scirocco but I do want to spray them Black as my Scirocco is Candy White, but will I be able to do that because the Scirocco is on the Mobility Scheme? Obviously I will get them sprayed back to the original colour when I have to return the car which is in 3 years, but the car will go to VW for a regular service and so on.. So would they say somthing if they noticed a change on the car such as the alloys being sprayed? Also would I be able to connect my sub to the Scirocco which means running a wire from the battery to the back of the car and also taking out the stereo to connect some wires into the back of that?

Thanks

[RW1]

Peak power, ie. 122PS or 160PS, are developed on the turbo charger's. The 160's Supercharger is switched off by 3,500rpm. Tweaks in the ECU get that power level. Supercharger helps low down RPMs on the 160PS to deliver more power early combined with ECU tweeks. Different engine characteristic.

Before changing the wheel colour, check your insurance is happy. Don't get caught out cos when it catches you up, the car could be impossible to change the wheels back before they assess damage repair. (ie. a wheel is wrecked is one case, write off is another). And therefore possibly invalidate your insurance.
Take a note here....http://www.sciroccocentral.co.uk/forum/ ... 34&t=10061" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Comments in the topic are broader than just the springs when it comes to changes.

C.

[Hannan]

I'm sure that the Supercharger in the 160 makes all the difference even though its switched of by 3,500rpm. If the 160 Sciroccos and above have a Supercharger which all say TSI meaning Turbo Supercharged Injection? Then what does the TSI on the 122 Scirocco mean? Surely the 'S' has a different meaning?

That is a good point, I'm just thinking that because its a Mobility car.. The insurers will not allow any modifications due to it not being needed for the purpose of the car. What if I ask my VW dealer when I pick the car up from him?

[RW1]

I'm sure that the Supercharger in the 160 makes all the difference even though its switched of by 3,500rpm. If the 160 Sciroccos and above have a Supercharger which all say TSI meaning Turbo Supercharged Injection? Then what does the TSI on the 122 Scirocco mean? Surely the 'S' has a different meaning?

TSI is a marketing badge and has lost it meaning by the letters it is composed of. Its just TSI now, nothing more, nothing less.
A quick rumage .... http://www.sciroccocentral.co.uk/forum/ ... +tsi+badge" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Not missed much on here these days!

C.

[dazz 1989]

Hi bud,

I cant use PM's yet. new member or somthing.

Anyway to answer your questions, yes you feel the turbo kick in. It's quite agressive in first, second n third but as you climb the gears you feel it less. Ive not had any races as such yet, as i been wearing it in as it brand new. Done 690mile in it since 19Nov thanks to a few road trips. Interior is ace i love it, visability is not the best but soon get used to it! The main point that gets me is the mgp's which on a run is around 42mpg but thats driving nicely around town its around 32-33mpg, considering i had a MK4 Ibiza 1.4 prior to this that would do 52mpg on a run and around the 40mpg around town was expecting simular numbers. But like you, mine is also a mobility car, so have to remind myself that i dont pay for anything else... Also if you do want more power... a remap is always on the cards as i belive the map for the 122 takes it up to around 155bhp, but dont quote me... Dealers shouldnt check for a remap on services n stuff, insurance is different story best to ask before having one put on.

hope this helps
anything else you want to know??

[RoccoScientist]

I'm sure that the Supercharger in the 160 makes all the difference even though its switched of by 3,500rpm. If the 160 Sciroccos and above have a Supercharger which all say TSI meaning Turbo Supercharged Injection? Then what does the TSI on the 122 Scirocco mean? Surely the 'S' has a different meaning?

The bolded statement is not true. Only the twincharged 1.4 TSI 118 kW (160 PS) has a supercharger as well as a turbo. All other VW Group TSI-engines (eg. the 210 PS 2.0 TSI) have just the turbo and the TSI stands for "Turbo Stratified Injection". As for why VW didn't put a supercharger in the 90 kW (122PS) 1.4 TSI, I would ask instead why on Earth would VW have done that? The twincharged construction is more expensive to make than a simple turbo engine and if the aim is a power output of 122 PS then there's no sense in twincharging. It's not a question of engine size, since the twincharged unit has the same displacement, it's a question of sensible engineering - using both a turbo and a supercharger to get 122 PS out of a 1.4 l lump is a waste of resources.

On the other hand, using twincharging is sensible if one wants to get 160 PS (or more) out of a 1.4 l lump as well as certain engine characteristics. The twincharged 160 PS engine has a bigger turbo than the 122 PS engine, which makes it easier to achieve the desired 160 PS but also means the low-rpm performance will be compromised. The easy answer to this is to twincharge the engine so that you have one charger for each ~half of the rpm-range. VW chose to use a supercharger for the low-rpm performance, but they could've used a smaller turbo as well.

[Komar]

Hannan - just enjoy your car

[Hannan]

Hi bud,

I cant use PM's yet. new member or somthing.

Anyway to answer your questions, yes you feel the turbo kick in. It's quite agressive in first, second n third but as you climb the gears you feel it less. Ive not had any races as such yet, as i been wearing it in as it brand new. Done 690mile in it since 19Nov thanks to a few road trips. Interior is ace i love it, visability is not the best but soon get used to it! The main point that gets me is the mgp's which on a run is around 42mpg but thats driving nicely around town its around 32-33mpg, considering i had a MK4 Ibiza 1.4 prior to this that would do 52mpg on a run and around the 40mpg around town was expecting simular numbers. But like you, mine is also a mobility car, so have to remind myself that i dont pay for anything else... Also if you do want more power... a remap is always on the cards as i belive the map for the 122 takes it up to around 155bhp, but dont quote me... Dealers shouldnt check for a remap on services n stuff, insurance is different story best to ask before having one put on.

hope this helps
anything else you want to know??

Well I was just abit worried that I wouldn't feel the power but you have reasurred me about that! And yeah I know I could remap but like you say, insurance is a different story.. Do insurances have a way of telling if the car has been remapped or not??

Thanks Dazz, it did help and nope thats it for now, unless you know any cool little facts that may interest me?

Thanks RW1 for posting that link to clear a few things up. Much appreciated!

The bolded statement is not true. Only the twincharged 1.4 TSI 118 kW (160 PS) has a supercharger as well as a turbo. All other VW Group TSI-engines (eg. the 210 PS 2.0 TSI) have just the turbo and the TSI stands for "Turbo Stratified Injection". As for why VW didn't put a supercharger in the 90 kW (122PS) 1.4 TSI, I would ask instead why on Earth would VW have done that? The twincharged construction is more expensive to make than a simple turbo engine and if the aim is a power output of 122 PS then there's no sense in twincharging. It's not a question of engine size, since the twincharged unit has the same displacement, it's a question of sensible engineering - using both a turbo and a supercharger to get 122 PS out of a 1.4 l lump is a waste of resources.

On the other hand, using twincharging is sensible if one wants to get 160 PS (or more) out of a 1.4 l lump as well as certain engine characteristics. The twincharged 160 PS engine has a bigger turbo than the 122 PS engine, which makes it easier to achieve the desired 160 PS but also means the low-rpm performance will be compromised. The easy answer to this is to twincharge the engine so that you have one charger for each ~half of the rpm-range. VW chose to use a supercharger for the low-rpm performance, but they could've used a smaller turbo as well.

Thanks for correcting me RoccoScientist. What you have said is quite interesting, but I think there is a sense in twincharging because its giving you power throughout the revs which is why I can understand that they made the 160 PS Scirocco for people who wanted abit more power but couldnt really afford the 2.0 TSI even though thats just a Turbo. Please do feel free to correct me RoccoScientist as you are the expert and im just someone who reads what others say .

Hannan - just enjoy your car

I know Komar, I should appreciate me even getting a Scirocco and I do.. Just trying to get a better understanding of what I'm getting if that makes sense.

[buster]

With a motability car ask motabily ,they have rules that seem quite unrelated to your enjoyment of the car, as a motabiliy customer of 17 years these rules change even in the course of the lease . to mention a case i had with my scirocco, i missed ordering rear windows tint, on my original order through motability. but hay! i could add this with the after market tinting companies . motabity declined permission with no reason. I would say if you want black wheels they would say order the ones available through VW, and as for mapping or lowering foget it, I beleive that some rules have changed that restrict younger drivers even further, and you may have just missed these. which would mean you would not have been able to order a scirocco now. enjoy the car as it is add the chrome exhaust tips the sill strips and carpet tops." it may only be a 122 ps 122tsi" but its quite fast enough as it is for normal road use , and just remember if it gets damaged and becomes a write off you dont get your advance payment back or your wheels.

[Hannan]

it may only be a 122 ps 122tsi but its quite fast enough as it is for normal road use , and just remember if it gets damaged and becomes a write off you dont get your advance payment back or your wheels.

So that means that once I give the car back after 3 years I will get the advance payment back?

[buster]

im sorry you never get the advanced payment back ever, it is paid to make up the lease cost to motabilty should the car be writen off in the life of the lease the advance payment is lost on that car , and if you leased another you would have to pay another advance payment that was asked for, depending which car was leased as a replacement.
the same goes for and extra s added to the car. you may pay for them,but they become part of the lease and have to be handed back at the end of lease or removed at your cost.
I can understand looking at the extras you have added you could have had a 2.0 gt for what you have to put down but just enjoy the car my grandson who is your age would love it .he is disabled but cant get the higher rate due to the nature of his disabilty.

[Hannan]

I thought so, that you dont get the advance payment back. And its a shame about the extras that you pay to have for 3 years but then they go back with the car when you return it. And I never thought about the 2.0 gt untill now, and now i feel like such an idiot.. I was so excited that I just rushed into things! Stupid me i guess . Whats the nature of your grandsons disability if you dont mind me asking Buster?

[RoccoScientist]

Please do feel free to correct me RoccoScientist as you are the expert and im just someone who reads what others say .

I'm no expert, not by a long shot. I'm also just someone who reads what others say. Maybe I've just done it a bit longer than you have. Anyways, you have to remember that it's not about making the best engines, it's about making a profit. There's a lot of factors to consider when deciding what kind of engines to make. Manufacturing and maintenance costs need to be kept down, the engines need to be reliable enough, there needs to be a certain amount of variation and big enough differences between the choices (no sense in having e.g. two petrol engines on offer with power outputs of 160 PS and 150 PS), there needs to be a certain hierarchy within the VW Group (the best VW engine can't be better than the best Audi engine), regulations have to be followed, power vs. mpg needs to be balanced, customer profiles need to be taken into account etc.

So, it's all about finding the right kind of compromises and that's why it's not hard to come up with ways the engines could give more power throughout the rev range. A good example is twincharging the 2.0 TSI: Sure, from an engineering point of view it could be done and you could get more punch out of the same unit, but how much would be the appropriate amount? One would need to go over 265 PS / 350 Nm, since that's what the current 2.0 TSI gives in Scirocco R, but then it would probably have close to or more power and torque than the 3.6 V6 that's found in Passat CC (300 PS / 350 Nm) or the 3.0 TFSI found in Audi A5 (272 PS / 400 Nm), not to mention the Audi A7 SB engines. Of course, the same twincharged engine would need to be put in the Audi S3 also, since it can't really be weaker than VW's coupé. Thus, the twincharged 2.0 TSI could step on some toes which would mean that either the other engines need to be made more powerful, or the limit the twincharged 2.0 TSI's power to 265 PS / 350 Nm. The former would mean lots of money spent and the changes would need to be worth it and more (profit-wise) to warrant the extra effort. The latter would mean there's no sense in twincharging since the turbo 2.0 TSI is cheaper to manufacture. This is of course just a simple consideration that doesn't take into account possible reliability issues and a plethora of other stuff, but it still demonstrates that changing just one thing may lead to a need to balance several other variables as well.

[Hannan]

Please do feel free to correct me RoccoScientist as you are the expert and im just someone who reads what others say .

I'm no expert, not by a long shot. I'm also just someone who reads what others say. Maybe I've just done it a bit longer than you have. Anyways, you have to remember that it's not about making the best engines, it's about making a profit. There's a lot of factors to consider when deciding what kind of engines to make. Manufacturing and maintenance costs need to be kept down, the engines need to be reliable enough, there needs to be a certain amount of variation and big enough differences between the choices (no sense in having e.g. two petrol engines on offer with power outputs of 160 PS and 150 PS), there needs to be a certain hierarchy within the VW Group (the best VW engine can't be better than the best Audi engine), regulations have to be followed, power vs. mpg needs to be balanced, customer profiles need to be taken into account etc.

So, it's all about finding the right kind of compromises and that's why it's not hard to come up with ways the engines could give more power throughout the rev range. A good example is twincharging the 2.0 TSI: Sure, from an engineering point of view it could be done and you could get more punch out of the same unit, but how much would be the appropriate amount? One would need to go over 265 PS / 350 Nm, since that's what the current 2.0 TSI gives in Scirocco R, but then it would probably have close to or more power and torque than the 3.6 V6 that's found in Passat CC (300 PS / 350 Nm) or the 3.0 TFSI found in Audi A5 (272 PS / 400 Nm), not to mention the Audi A7 SB engines. Of course, the same twincharged engine would need to be put in the Audi S3 also, since it can't really be weaker than VW's coupé. Thus, the twincharged 2.0 TSI could step on some toes which would mean that either the other engines need to be made more powerful, or the limit the twincharged 2.0 TSI's power to 265 PS / 350 Nm. The former would mean lots of money spent and the changes would need to be worth it and more (profit-wise) to warrant the extra effort. The latter would mean there's no sense in twincharging since the turbo 2.0 TSI is cheaper to manufacture. This is of course just a simple consideration that doesn't take into account possible reliability issues and a plethora of other stuff, but it still demonstrates that changing just one thing may lead to a need to balance several other variables as well.

Thanks for the detailed description.. Made things a little more clear I think