Clubsport Remap

[sdGT]

Or Litchfield is £780 for engine and TCU

https://www.litchfieldmotors.com/audi-skoda-seat-vw-2018-2-0-tsi-e888-4/ecu-tuning-stage-upgrades/

Thanks for posting this. I was lurking, stumbled across your post, and just booked my MK8 CS in with Litchfield for their stage 1 off the back of it.

Anyone here have any experience with them and/or their stage 1 tuning for a 2.0 E888.4?

I've read a review on EVO, which sounded promising. Looks like he had the stage 2 with OEM Downpipe though, so our experiences may differ a little.

https://www.evo.co.uk/volkswagen/golf-gti/205846/litchfield-volkswagen-golf-gti-clubsport-2023-review?fbclid=IwAR3GfoLm-W8PKli5DpX5K3jojO9VEfQxeDSXx-IRgLobqdVOsNX_8FkkS0E

Cheers

[sdGT]

So I've had a few final tweaks at Lichfield again today, as I wasn't fully satisfied with the 364bhp dyno result from the TVS ECU tune last month. I've been back in between for other TCU tweaks, but those were very minor.

It's now reached 395 bhp at around 7,300rpm, the torque didn't climb above 430nm though. Not sure why I didn't see a higher climb in torque, or whether peak power is ideal at such a high rev count. I didn't think to ask about it until later, as I was too wrapped up in the higher bhp result.

Dyno run attached. Anyone more in the know than me care to share their thoughts on the results? Cheers

[sdGT]

Yes I had been comparing their example graph online to the one I've had. My bhp pushes a touch higher, granted at an 800rpm higher rev, but my torque takes a 40nm hit.

Both my torque and bhp climb considerably faster than their's in the 2,000-3,500rpm range, but the torque tapers off after that point. The bhp also has a much more gradual climb after that, all the way up to 7,300rpm, whereas their's cuts at 6,400.

From the stats I don't really know what to think of it.. It is worth mentioning that my map isn't identical to their's though. As their's is their own ECU tune, with TCU enhancements.

• I had a TVS stage 2 ECU and stage 2+ TCU, with recommended settings, which included raising rev limit.
  
  
• Then the TCU was tinkered with to remove the up/downshift and kickdown in manual, to have the rev count hiked slightly, and they did also try to remove the hard cut rev limiter, but said they couldn't do it.
  
  
• Then the ECU was essentially remapped again yesterday with their own tune, that they got around 385bhp for initially, but continued tweaking it until it hit 395.
  

I feel the tweaks to gain the bhp may have sacrificed some torque, and honestly I'm not sure whether I should be happy with that (and the high rev count peak power) or not.

It's not all that comparable, as its on a different dyno, but here's the results I had from the run a few weeks back, before they added their own map to the ECU yesterday.

[sdGT]

I can't say I do either really.. but that's what I feel like as well.

It went back in because after running it on a dyno locally I essentially complained that the bhp and torque was well below the levels TVS quoted for their stage 2 map.

Litchfield said the TVS figures were unrealistic, but they would run it on their own dyno to confirm and add their own map tweaks to get the bhp up closer to where I wanted it.

[sdGT]

That probably should've been something I asked yesterday in all fairness. Thing is mine was TVS tuned first, then tweaked a little, then tweaked a little more. So I think the map is entirely different to be honest, plus they can say no 2 engines are alike etc...

The thing is that's the 2nd time I've been back now, with a fair bit more time spent on it, and they haven't charged me any more than the initial £930 I paid for the 2 TVS tunes. I doubt I'd get away with a 3rd free visit..

[sdGT]

Yeah, fair point. My fault, i should've sat and looked over the graph properly yesterday, and not just jumped at the increased bhp. I'll probably give them a call later and talk through it with the chap who tuned it.

[sdGT]

Called Litchfield and spoke to the chap who tuned it. He's explained the high rev is because of the TVS TCU tune, and the rev limiter being set that far above the 6,500rpm stock their test CS ran on. I spoke to Edd moore about it as well, and he said that reaching max power at max rpm is absolutely fine, so that's that sorted.

The torque he thinks is a mistake, likely the Dyno not calibrated properly. When I'm local next he said to pop in and he'll run the dyno again for me free of charge.

He did send me another graph through, comparing what it came in with (TVS ECU Stage 2) vs how it left. There are torque gains there around 4,000rpm of say 15lbft, so assuming the 346lbft figure i had from the previous dyno is accurate, that should mean i'm likely looking at 490nm+.

Which isn't jaw dropping, but as with the 395bhp, it's a hair more than Litchfield's own stage 1, so that's okay for stage 1.

[davo245]

I would prefer more torque lower down the rev range all day long that high bhp numbers a lot of companies quote big bhp figures to attract customers but in real world they are a lot slower than a better mapped car with more mid range.

If I get mine done it will be with racingline been in lots of different mapped cars over the years and big bhp number cars can be not that great to drive and slower than the figures suggest.

[Exonian]

I’m agreed with davo, I’ve had plenty of remaps over the decades and will always go for drivability as opposed to peak numbers. The low-mid range kick in the back is addictive and super-useful as opposed to high peak figures that you can’t use on the road.
Maybe if you’re a drag strip regular or do track days you’ll want a different delivery and the beauty of turbo cars is that you can do this without changing cams, displacement and fuelling systems but for me it’s the mid range thrust that I went for in a remap.