GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk6 => Topic started by: RickS on 03 February 2010, 13:14
-
I've noticed quite a number of you guys talking about remapping a GTi like you're buying a loaf of bread. Surely there has to be implications, such as warranty for a start. But ignoring that aspect, yes, you can get up to 300BHP and more torque, but what about grip, you have all that extra BHP and torque going through 2 front wheels, surely the TCS will be working overtime and you won't get the benefit of the extra power [On acceleration at least]. The R is 4 WD isn't it? that's why it can manage the extra power and torque. [Doesn't it also have uprated con rods and pistons?]
You're messing with a set up which takes years to design by professionals who specialise in building cars, maybe they know best? [Maybe not?]
:huh:
-
I've noticed quite a number of these noobs asking questions like they've never been on a forum before. Surely there has to be a better way, such as using the search function for a start?
But ignoring that aspect, yes, people with remaps have posted about their experiences and it has been nothing but positive feedback.
You're messing with forum ettiquette that has been set up for years.
:evil:
-
now that there are legally binding requirements for car makers to reduce average CO2 emissions bhp pays the penalty. reliability (read warranty) costs will also impact any decision to push the power envelope.
I spoke with a guy who reckons once you remap your car and make use of the extra power you can expect to replace your tyres and brakes twice as often. I was all set for a map but aint gonna bother; fair play to those who do though, each to their own.
-
If you drive a standard car like a loon you'll replace tyres and brakes more often.
Just because you have a re-map doesn't mean you drive like a nutter all the time, how fast can you actually go on public roads?
There's a lot more to a re-map than just going fast all the time.
If you're scared of doing it then don't. If you think the car is fine as standard then don't.
It's a bit like saying drinking makes you fall over and be sick......
-
I think sometimes people look at bhp figures and make their remap choice. I would suggest driving a remapped car before making any kind of choice.
-
I think sometimes people look at bhp figures and make their remap choice. I would suggest driving a remapped car before making any kind of choice.
Agree, luckily Revo seem to have strong figures and a well configured map to deliver the power. It would be cool to get other maps up to compare but I still haven't seen many. Did we see bluefin results yet?
As for the OP, if you are satisfied then great although you are missing out on a lot of unleashed performance...
-
The car was mapped at 7k and sold at 73k without a single ( remap related ) issue.
What unrelated issues did you have?
-
Dear Keelaw, I don't know what a noob is, but I'm going to take it as a compliment. Also I was not asking questions [rhetorical maybe] but making some comments, am I not allowed to do that?
I don't see how using search would have helped me to post my comments.
All the best
-
Dear Keelaw, I don't know what a noob is, but I'm going to take it as a compliment. Also I was not asking questions [rhetorical maybe] but making some comments, am I not allowed to do that?
I don't see how using search would have helped me to post my comments.
All the best
Well said my man!!
-
Get it done..................
-
I've noticed quite a number of you guys talking about remapping a GTi like you're buying a loaf of bread. Surely there has to be implications, such as warranty for a start. But ignoring that aspect, yes, you can get up to 300BHP and more torque, but what about grip, you have all that extra BHP and torque going through 2 front wheels, surely the TCS will be working overtime and you won't get the benefit of the extra power [On acceleration at least]. The R is 4 WD isn't it? that's why it can manage the extra power and torque. [Doesn't it also have uprated con rods and pistons?]
You're messing with a set up which takes years to design by professionals who specialise in building cars, maybe they know best? [Maybe not?]
:huh:
All a remap does is unlock the latent potential - VW want to sell cars to everyone, so you get a set of compromises, ride comfort v handling etc. Even at GTi level, thats still the case, but if you want it, theres more performance to be had easily. In my experience, most of the action is in the in gear times, rather than fireworks beyond however many revs, which imho gets you possibly a safer car for a start (ie more chance of getting out of the way of the merde before it hits your fan), safer overtaking & a more fun version of the car you loved enough to buy. It doesn't mean you have to drive like Lewis :wink: Same goes for most mods, aftermarket suspension can be set how you want it, an exhaust will both work better & probably be lighter than the original. For me at least, its another way you really engage with the car you drive.
-
RickS: Like Keelaw, I too mistook the original post for a typical re-map question so I apologise if I souded a little condescending(sp) in my reply. The trouble with spending a while on forums is that you get to see the same old things time and again and I'm sure most of us just skim read a lot of threads. I've often spend a bit of time trying to be constructive or maybe even witty but it either gets ignored or goes over peoples heads. So don't take it personally. Maybe I'm a bit thick, I dunno.... :grin:
MDSS sums it up quite nicely there though and that is more or less what I was trying to say.
And I'll also say this to your comment about the engineers spending millions on development - they have to work within budget, emissions control and warranty margins. Hence the cars are usually well engineered but a bit dull to drive. A re-map cures this little issue somewhat.
A good re-mapper who cares about their reputation will work within the engine's built in parameters and try and make the car just as smooth to drive as original.
However, if VW decide to uprate an engine they uprate all sorts of components on top of the mapping, so yes VW will do it better, but the car will still be a bit dull to drive.
-
Clearly my wit fell on deaf ears (eyes?!). Or my wit wasn't all that to begin with!
-
[Doesn't it also have uprated con rods and pistons?] You're messing with a set up which takes years to design by professionals who specialise in building cars, maybe they know best? [Maybe not?] :huh:
I like your thinking.
As a design engineer myself i understand all the forces stresses and strains they have to calculate for. You will often find that when people remap they then later have to replace this or that bush etc as they have increased the stresses on it by increasing the torque of the engine at different rpm this can but much larger strain on things. Most of them don’t think of that. Everything has a design tolerance but in the case of the motorcar they have to include very harsh climates and large temperature variances of different countries the car maybe used in. They also have to design the car so each part has at least a certain life span both in years and miles use. All the components be it suspension, engine, or the body shell are designed with these forces place on it by the engine took into account. Some will have much higher tolerances than others so something maybe classed as the weak spot.
You often here tuners say thing like there’s a 20% margin designed in by VW or something like that. Maybe back in the late 70s and 80s when things were over engineered but not today when you have the accountants hovering over you, you don’t get this luxury anymore i know! It may be 20% but i doubt it due to the UK climate but it was not design for just the UK climate. Marketing men rule the world now :tongue:
As you say the R engine has an up-rated head, stronger block, bigger turbo etc etc, and probably other things to do with suspension and gearboxes under the skin most people would not know about. Do VW engineers with all there equipment to measure and model such things know better than some small group of guys called tuners yes but most people don't want to here it :tongue:
-
I'm feeling wordy today.
Maybe back in the late 70s and 80s when things were over engineered but not today when you have the accountants hovering over you, you don’t get this luxury anymore i know! It may be 20% but i doubt it due to the UK climate but it was not design for just the UK climate. Marketing men rule the world now :tongue:
Although it varys a lot, out environment here in the UK is pretty benign and free of extremes. If anywhere in the world is safe to run a tweaked engine, it's England. Modern engines might run smaller 'safety factors' but they're still going to be designed with life and component failure in mind - if only to keep the bean counters happy about potential warranty claims (see Toyota, "the car in front" and now you know why - the accelerator is jammed wide open :grin:).
I think that the major tuning compromises on modern turbo-charged engines are less to do with component reliability and more to do with fuel consumption and CO2 emissions. But component reliability is what causes your car to break down so you are right to look there, particularly as the gains from remapping are essentially to do with upping boost pressure.
The engineering compromises in the standard engine components may be less in favour of reliability than 30 years ago but there will still be a healthy margin in a car designed to survive 12 years/120,000 miles. Having said that, I agree that the tuning companies will have been unlikely to have analysed the increased stresses on a con rod bearing from raising turbo boost (for example). They won't have had access to VW design data or computer models. In place of calculation and modelling, their knowledge and experience have to be used instead - which can be just as valuable, if not more so. Only time, testing and use can reveal the long term effects of the changes they make but I doubt any of them have driven a dozen remapped Mk6 GTI's 150,000 miles just to be sure.
However, they do have access to (admittedly far less reliable) life data in the form of the experience of customers, owners and other tuners who have collectively driven many hundreds of thousands of miles in modified cars. If, say, turbo failures were starting to happen at 50,000 miles then this information would start to appear on forums like this one and feed back not only to the tuner but into the customer domain. The EA113 is now several years old but I doubt there's much information on 100,000+ mile cars yet.
This is why more than anything when I look for a company to modify my engine I look for the history and pedigree of the company - what have they done before and how long have they been doing it? Do they have experience from motorsport or ties with the car manufacturer, etc. This personally is what gives me confidence that they are going to change my engine in ways which will not significantly compromise its reliability.
It's why I haven't yet made my mind up about Revo and why in the past I've gone to Abt in Germany, who although expensive have close historical ties to VW. Before I decide on Revo, I'll talk to them, get to know them a little, find out what they did before 2004 (when their website was created), understand a bit about the way they go about doing things. Some might say this is overkill but I like to keep my cars for much longer than the 3 years/30,000 miles that seems more typical on here. Thus the long term effect on conrod bearings and the experience of the bloke altering the code in my engine management is of importance.
And of course I'll listen to the feedback of actual owners, who use their cars in anger on and off track, on forums like this one.
-
I go a little bit more to the other extreme. I've re-mapped half a dozen or more of my own cars (paid for with my own money, not company cars nor do I get any car allowance) but I don't tend to keep my cars that long. It's not so much worrying about the turbo going kaput that makes my sell them though, it's just that VW/SEAT/Skoda (not really into Audis) keep bringing out shiny new things to tempt me and the fact that I don't like keeping cars too far out of warranty as they have too many electrical things that keep going on them for my liking. It all mounts up £££££ either way you look at it.
One of the reasons I got shot of my mk5 was the air-con pump was on its way out (very common problem) and it needed new brakes, dump valve etc so I looked to the mk6 (5.5) as a complete change rather than get a newer mk5 which would have made a bit more financial sense.
But for me just about the only reason I get the turbo cars is that they have that hidden re-map potential. I only go stage 1 as stage 2 really does involve uprating a lot more parts and pushing things towards their limits, but to my eyes the car just feels flat without the re-map.
If it wasn't for the added mid range oooomph of the re-mapped turbo GTIs and TDIs I'd probably buy older bigger engined N/A cars (2.1 litre mk2 8v GTI for me please!).
And for info, one of the guys behind REVO is Mark Yates (MYTECH and Stealth Racing), he's been round VWs for a little while you know :smiley:
-
And for info, one of the guys behind REVO is Mark Yates (MYTECH and Stealth Racing), he's been round VWs for a little while you know :smiley:
Ahh, I didn't know that. I'm familiar with Mytech and Stealth - I can remember driving their Mk2 VR6 conversion way back when. That's the pedigree I was looking for right there. :smiley: