Page 1 of 1

Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 12:14 pm
by Geoff Hibbert
As the title suggests, if the engine can produce the extra torque and BHP, why don't VW issue it with the increased BHP from the start?

People on here claim better MPG too (which may mean less emissions)

What I mean is, are there reliability or longevity issues if you have the Roc re-mapped?

Geoff Hibbert

Re: Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 12:48 pm
by CTRnutter
Insurance! That would be my first guess, thats why they underquote the the acceleration figures too, 0-60 takes 7.2 secs according to VW which is actually comical :shake: :D

Re: Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 1:34 pm
by Sam Greir
CTRnutter wrote:Insurance! That would be my first guess, thats why they underquote the the acceleration figures too, 0-60 takes 7.2 secs according to VW which is actually comical :shake: :D
What do you think a more likely figure is for a standard 2.0TSI? The only reason i ask is because i seem spank my mate in his new 3.25 coupe, i think figures are 0-60 6.6. His excuse is he's still running it in
:)

Re: Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 1:46 pm
by CTRnutter
Sam Greir wrote:
CTRnutter wrote:Insurance! That would be my first guess, thats why they underquote the the acceleration figures too, 0-60 takes 7.2 secs according to VW which is actually comical :shake: :D
What do you think a more likely figure is for a standard 2.0TSI? The only reason i ask is because i seem spank my mate in his new 3.25 coupe, i think figures are 0-60 6.6. His excuse is he's still running it in
:)
VW driver quote 5.6 which I think is pretty hard to achieve real world but 6 secs I'd say is achievable I managed a 14.2 1/4 mile at santa pod when the car was completely standard so I'd say a 6 sec 0-60 would be about right :)

Re: Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 9:07 pm
by Geoff Hibbert
If that's the case, what's the 0-60 like on a Bluefin re-mapped 2.0 Roc???

Still no answers to my question though.

The reason I ask I that I have got to keep mine for three years and am worried that if I re-map I may suffer engine fatigue?? I may of course be barking up the wrong tree!!

Re: Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 9:10 pm
by BlackRoc
Sam, your 'Roc will take on and beat a 325i Coupe no probs (Run in or Non run in lol) The original Scirocco review in Top Gear magazine had a BMW 125i coupe (same engine as in the 3 series, 3 litre non turbo) and a Golf GTi and the 'Roc thrashed both around a track. There is also video footage (on here or SciroccoNet) of a similar test in the wet. Again the Beemer didnt stand a chance. Bet you are glad you got the 'Roc now :clap:

Re: Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 9:45 pm
by jmn82
Geoff Hibbert wrote:If that's the case, what's the 0-60 like on a Bluefin re-mapped 2.0 Roc???

Still no answers to my question though.

The reason I ask I that I have got to keep mine for three years and am worried that if I re-map I may suffer engine fatigue?? I may of course be barking up the wrong tree!!
Part of it comes down to the fact that they makes the engines so that they are able to run on the worst possible grade of fuel you can imagine. There is no guarantee that the fuel quality is going to be the same wherever you go, and in some countries it will be significantly poorer than in others. The fuel quality in the UK and in Europe in general is pretty high, so they then engines can be tuned to make the most of this.

As long as you're not planning a road trip to rural Kazakhstan any time soon, then you're unlikley to run into problems :)

As CTR mentioned, power is another consideration. I don't know how it calculated in reality, but if they'd made the Roc with 250bhp as standard, then it probably would have put it straight into insurance group 19 or 20 which could potentially have harmed sales.

There definitely is the possibility of greater wear and tear in the engine with a remap, due to the increased stresses as you mention. That's where you put your faith in the tuner and hope they adjustments they've made are balanced and sensible :) From personal experience I'd say that the part that is most likely to fail early is the turbo. That's why upgrading from the K03 to K04 turbo is a popular move if you're going for much more power.

Re: Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Thu May 28, 2009 9:49 pm
by wigit
video's been on here ages in reviews section :yes:

vw have to make cars to work in all sort of climates and fuel quality is also an issue, they also put in tolerances on their components, mapping is nothing new, some companies also give warranties if damaged as a result of the map, read the small print, i change mine every couple of years so not really bothered

Re: Re-Maps - Why don't VW give the extra BHP in the first place

Posted: Fri May 29, 2009 3:29 pm
by Sam Greir
BlackRoc wrote:Sam, your 'Roc will take on and beat a 325i Coupe no probs (Run in or Non run in lol) The original Scirocco review in Top Gear magazine had a BMW 125i coupe (same engine as in the 3 series, 3 litre non turbo) and a Golf GTi and the 'Roc thrashed both around a track. There is also video footage (on here or SciroccoNet) of a similar test in the wet. Again the Beemer didnt stand a chance. Bet you are glad you got the 'Roc now :clap:
:D Excellent, will find that clip and show my mate! :clap: