GolfGTIforum.co.uk
Model specific boards => Golf mk4 => Topic started by: rench on 20 November 2011, 21:51
-
if i keept my bora pd130 and had it remapped what would it be equivalent to speed wise?
-
a bora pd 150?
sure they remap to about 150 bhp
-
should get around 170bhp ive been told, how would this compare to a petrol golf 1 8t remapped?
-
Usually they remap abit more than 150bhp mate anywhere between 35-50hp gain in my experience depending on the remap and supporting mods on the car.
Its the torque figures which are impresive with the diesels I wouldnt be chasing BHP if I were you :smiley:
-
I wouldnt compare them if im honest two total different cars.
-
just want to know how fast it would be? and if its worth doing or not
-
For the money, yes it's worth doing.
-
Mapped 130 and a mapped 1.8T. 1.8T would pull its pants down!
mapped 130pd and a stock 1.8T - I imagine the diesel will pull ahead.
-
so a mapped 130 is a pritty poor effort?
-
Not really...with the right map and a healthy motor...sure it will make a good quick car
-
ive been offered my leon back 1 8t so tempted to just have that back
-
if i keept my bora pd130 and had it remapped what would it be equivalent to speed wise?
(http://img.alibaba.com/photo/108298305/Ford_555D_Tractor_Backhoe_Loader_CAB_and_HEAT_Diesel.jpg)
-
if i keept my bora pd130 and had it remapped what would it be equivalent to speed wise?
(http://img.alibaba.com/photo/108298305/Ford_555D_Tractor_Backhoe_Loader_CAB_and_HEAT_Diesel.jpg)
:grin:
-
lol!
-
:grin: :grin: :grin:
-
to much soot/ it kills bees .Get a petrol golf. :grin: :evil:
-
A 130 will remap to around 170 I believe but they can make more torque then a pd150.
-
so a mapped 130 is a pritty poor effort?
170bhp and over 300lbs ft of torque is hardly a poor effort. Don't forget you'll also benefit from improved fuel economy as long as you don't drive it like you stole it
-
so a mapped 130 is a pritty poor effort?
170bhp and over 300lbs ft of torque is hardly a poor effort. Don't forget you'll also benefit from improved fuel economy as long as you don't drive it like you stole it
this ^^ :cool:
-
A 130 will remap to around 170 I believe but they can make more torque then a pd150.
i disagree with that.
but they do turn out very good.
-
A 130 will remap to around 170 I believe but they can make more torque then a pd150.
i disagree with that.
but they do turn out very good.
Most of the dyno plots I've seen show the 150's making between 290 and 310lbs ft torque and 130's easily making over 300lbs ft
But that could be down to a number of things on the day etc
I was surprised when my 170 made over 300lbs ft :cool:
-
How does the clutch and gearbox stand up to 300ft ibs? :grin:
-
How does the clutch and gearbox stand up to 300ft ibs? :grin:
Depends on how its been driven previously
Steve_PD got 150K miles out of his clutch; approx of which 50% were remapped miles
I've currently done over 7000 miles in mine but I'm much more aware of how to feed the power in rather than just plant my foot all the time.
A standard clutch can take the power providing you drive it tidy. Obviously its life span will be reduced
-
think im not going to bother getting remap or leon back and waiting a few month and get a golf 1 8t again back with the car i started with but a 3 door this time not a 5.
-
A 130 will remap to around 170 I believe but they can make more torque then a pd150.
i disagree with that.
but they do turn out very good.
Most of the dyno plots I've seen show the 150's making between 290 and 310lbs ft torque and 130's easily making over 300lbs ft
But that could be down to a number of things on the day etc
I was surprised when my 170 made over 300lbs ft :cool:
the differences bewteen 130 and 150 pd engine are negligible - main one being the intercooler.
the 130's seem more peaky and the 150's seem to hang on for longer - my 150 pd seems to like revving the full range while the 130's i've had seemed to die off
-
A 130 will remap to around 170 I believe but they can make more torque then a pd150.
i disagree with that.
but they do turn out very good.
Most of the dyno plots I've seen show the 150's making between 290 and 310lbs ft torque and 130's easily making over 300lbs ft
But that could be down to a number of things on the day etc
I was surprised when my 170 made over 300lbs ft :cool:
the differences bewteen 130 and 150 pd engine are negligible - main one being the intercooler.
the 130's seem more peaky and the 150's seem to hang on for longer -
my 150 pd seems to like revving the full range
-
to back up my waffle - read part way down to sk4tec
http://uk-mkivs.net/forums/p/182559/1204293.aspx
130 and 150 share everything apart from
turbo internals (130 runs a VA turbo 150 runs a VB turbo)
SMIC v's FMIC
OEM mapping to suit
-
Quick car, my mate had a Bora 130 remaped to around 165.
My golf was 195bhp.
The Bora raped me, end off! Torque is impressive only at 120 was I starting to gain on a straight strip. Had I known this at the time of buying a golf I would have chosen the PD. The 1.8t has more tuning options in the long run over the diesels which is when it will shine.
-
I'm well aware of the engine differences :wink:
150 and the 170 units rev more like petrol engines.
My mate with a Fabia vRS which I mapped is quicker to a 100 than a 2.5 Z4
End of the day a lot of it is down to how its mapped and driver skill. But you want AVERAGE power rather than silly peak BHP
Here's my 130 remapped
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y276/Rhyso/R-Tech%20Day%20Out/runwithde-catin4th.jpg)
And my current shopping trolley
(http://i790.photobucket.com/albums/yy183/codling1234/OY57UTM.gif)
Hopefully you can see exactly how the 150 / 170 units make their peak power much higher up
-
i agree......
i've had 3 different maps on the 150 i have now to get it smoothed out.
Was just too aggressive at about 2300 revs hence the new clutch route - a big spike of torque is unusable most of the time and a nightmare in wet
It's a balance of torque and power IMHO and driver skill that make a car quick
i've had 3 1.9 - 130's (all mapped 2 were ASZ and one was BLT) and this is my first 150PD - 150 does feel very revvy
and likes to pull right to red line without effort.
i've had both 140 (bkd) and 170 (BMN) 2.0 engines too but i think 1.9 is better
-
i agree......
i've had 3 different maps on the 150 i have now to get it smoothed out.
Was just too aggressive at about 2300 revs hence the new clutch route - a big spike of torque is unusable most of the time and a nightmare in wet
It's a balance of torque and power IMHO and driver skill that make a car quick
i've had 3 1.9 - 130's (all mapped 2 were ASZ and one was BLT) and this is my first 150PD - 150 does feel very revvy
and likes to pull right to red line without effort.
i've had both 140 (bkd) and 170 (BMN) 2.0 engines too but i think 1.9 is better
Agree 100% :smiley:
I had a customer last week who within 30 minutes of me mapping the car was back on the phone saying his clutch was slipping ( he had the same map as the one on my car albeit in a Golf 170) I met up with him and drove it myself. No matter how hard I tried I couldn't get the clutch to slip. Haven't heard from him since either lol
The newer units are bogged down by silly emission rules and DPF's etc. There are ways around them though lol
It took me a month or two to change my driving style to make the most out of the 170 but now I have, I wouldn't go back :smiley: