Thinking of remapping my Polo.

[l3rady]

There's maybe perfectly valid reasons why tuning his 95bhp is a better option for him than buying a Gti.
Insurance is maybe miles cheaper, with the tuning only adding a percentage that still makes it cheaper than the Gti.
For example, tuning a motorbike only often adds 10% to the premium - cheaper than insuring the next bike up the line.
The mods themselves needn't be expensive if he sources the parts right and fits them himself.
Sounds like he knows what he's talking about, so I'd venture he's going DIY.

Also if you are into tuning the GTI's ECU has yet to be cracked so cannot do anything there yet.

[Andy Beats]

Some folk just get a kick out of tuning too.
Motorbike trackdays I go on, you see some tuned-to-the-gunnels small bikes and you think "why not just get a bigger bike?"
Fact is they just like tuning and maybe surprising people.
Imagine what a 95 Polo going past a Gti would do to the Gti owner's face....that's enough motivation for some.

[fazzy]

So the car said it was 70kw stock, I did a dyno before the Tune but the car did have a freeflow and downpipe, this dyno'd at 85kw on the wheels, then after the map 99.5kw on the wheels.

Something doesn't stick here...
85kW at the wheels?? Stock with just exhaust? That means that you had 115 HP at the wheels before the tune, and that means that the car stock has roughly about 130-140HP at the crank... I've heard of "freebees" from the factory, but this one takes the cake
Just for interest sake, my Golf Mk1 GTi stock had 82 kW at the crank, but only about 66 at the wheels...

100 kW at the wheels that is some serious power from a 1.0.

Ford's Ecoboost 1.0 litre is putting out 140PS, which is 105KW.
They reckon they can get it to 200PS no problem.

Andy... that's 105 kW at the crank... not the wheels.

[JarrydDempsey]

So the car said it was 70kw stock, I did a dyno before the Tune but the car did have a freeflow and downpipe, this dyno'd at 85kw on the wheels, then after the map 99.5kw on the wheels.

Something doesn't stick here...
85kW at the wheels?? Stock with just exhaust? That means that you had 115 HP at the wheels before the tune, and that means that the car stock has roughly about 130-140HP at the crank... I've heard of "freebees" from the factory, but this one takes the cake
Just for interest sake, my Golf Mk1 GTi stock had 82 kW at the crank, but only about 66 at the wheels...

100 kW at the wheels that is some serious power from a 1.0.

Ford's Ecoboost 1.0 litre is putting out 140PS, which is 105KW.
They reckon they can get it to 200PS no problem.

Andy... that's 105 kW at the crank... not the wheels.

Yea so rate the car was slightly over 70kw when I got it, VW must have put mine together on a Friday when the drinks were flowing. But the exhaust and downpipe was custom made so I'm not surprised it gave a 15 odd kw. Cars are know for not being exact out the factory. The differ on climate. I also only use 95 Ron petrol and on occasion I run some octane booster.

Today I was at a robot and had to get ahead of a golf tsi, he had the same idea and I won that by a car length at the end on 2nd gear. Loving this TSI.

[JarrydDempsey]

By the time you replace the intercooler, turbo and injectors (don't forget the clutch if you're manual), it would've been far more cost effective to buy a GTI, and you wouldn't have an engine straining at the seams.

Those 140ps EcoBoost engines are dropping like flies at 2 years old.

So I will be doing this diy. I have worked on all my cars I've owned because it's a passion. The GTI's in South Africa are almost double the price of the 95ps. So it is much cheaper to do it this way and the car has a sense of pride and personal achievement. Yes logically it makes more sense to buy the GTi, you are right. That's just not the route I chose.

[monkeyhanger]

By the time you replace the intercooler, turbo and injectors (don't forget the clutch if you're manual), it would've been far more cost effective to buy a GTI, and you wouldn't have an engine straining at the seams.

Those 140ps EcoBoost engines are dropping like flies at 2 years old.

So I will be doing this diy. I have worked on all my cars I've owned because it's a passion. The GTI's in South Africa are almost double the price of the 95ps. So it is much cheaper to do it this way and the car has a sense of pride and personal achievement. Yes logically it makes more sense to buy the GTi, you are right. That's just not the route I chose.

Do you have a harsh taxation on the initial purchase in South Africa? In the UK the GTI is only £3k or 15% more than the 95ps beats, and your changes would cost more tha that In parts alone here in the UK. There's not so much more on the GTI to justify it costing twice as much as the beats, if not for punitive taxation on higher output cars.

The ACC as standard on the GTI+ really helps keep the insurance premium down too as it is perceived to mitigate a lot of the risk of you rear-ending the car in front.

[fazzy]

Yea so rate the car was slightly over 70kw when I got it, VW must have put mine together on a Friday when the drinks were flowing. But the exhaust and downpipe was custom made so I'm not surprised it gave a 15 odd kw. Cars are know for not being exact out the factory. The differ on climate. I also only use 95 Ron petrol and on occasion I run some octane booster.

Today I was at a robot and had to get ahead of a golf tsi, he had the same idea and I won that by a car length at the end on 2nd gear. Loving this TSI.

JarrydDempsey, we don't understand each other...

How could you get 15 kilowatts if the 70 kilowatts manufacturers figure is power at the crank and you said that 85 kW was at the wheels??
That's like comparing oranges to lemons
Please tell me, that you realise that it's not the same thing.

That is why I asked in the beginning if you had a stock run, which you said you didn't. So actually it's all hypothetical...

[JarrydDempsey]

Yea so rate the car was slightly over 70kw when I got it, VW must have put mine together on a Friday when the drinks were flowing. But the exhaust and downpipe was custom made so I'm not surprised it gave a 15 odd kw. Cars are know for not being exact out the factory. The differ on climate. I also only use 95 Ron petrol and on occasion I run some octane booster.

Today I was at a robot and had to get ahead of a golf tsi, he had the same idea and I won that by a car length at the end on 2nd gear. Loving this TSI.

JarrydDempsey, we don't understand each other...

How could you get 15 kilowatts if the 70 kilowatts manufacturers figure is power at the crank and you said that 85 kW was at the wheels??
That's like comparing oranges to lemons
Please tell me, that you realise that it's not the same thing.

That is why I asked in the beginning if you had a stock run, which you said you didn't. So actually it's all hypothetical...

Yea im with you on the fact that VW says 70kw and usually thats taken on the Flywheel and not on the wheels. However experience has taught me (with two of my previous cars) that a stock car, dyno'd usually does make the same quoted figure on the wheels. Eg my Subaru was quoted at 200kw from Subaru, on the dyno before any modes it made 203kw. So for the sake of simplicity I said it made 15kw from the exhaust and downpipe, that estimated as unfortunately I will never know. I do however know that with the downpipe and exhaust the car made 85kw.

Although we have gone quite offtopic on this thread, to the OP, if you are concerned about warranty, don't fiddle with the ECU. If you are not concerned, do a proper ECU remap, these typically yield better results then plug and play and from my experience do support mods before the ECU remap such as exhaust and downpipe. This should get you around 134ps from both your models 95ps and 115ps as they are the same engine with slightly different boost settings using the same turbo.

[JarrydDempsey]

By the time you replace the intercooler, turbo and injectors (don't forget the clutch if you're manual), it would've been far more cost effective to buy a GTI, and you wouldn't have an engine straining at the seams.

Those 140ps EcoBoost engines are dropping like flies at 2 years old.

So I will be doing this diy. I have worked on all my cars I've owned because it's a passion. The GTI's in South Africa are almost double the price of the 95ps. So it is much cheaper to do it this way and the car has a sense of pride and personal achievement. Yes logically it makes more sense to buy the GTi, you are right. That's just not the route I chose.

Do you have a harsh taxation on the initial purchase in South Africa? In the UK the GTI is only £3k or 15% more than the 95ps beats, and your changes would cost more tha that In parts alone here in the UK. There's not so much more on the GTI to justify it costing twice as much as the beats, if not for punitive taxation on higher output cars.

The ACC as standard on the GTI+ really helps keep the insurance premium down too as it is perceived to mitigate a lot of the risk of you rear-ending the car in front.

So our GTI costs R400 000, my 95ps cost me R220 000, thats 11 000 pounds vs 21 000 pounds. My mods so far only cost R18 000 or 978 pounds. The cost of changing the turbo with intercooler and injectors will be another R25 000 or 1500 pounds which still puts me at well below the cost of the GTI. As well as our insurance is about 50% more on the GTI vs the Beats, and lastly I havent locked myself into the high repayments of the GTI for 4 years.

Comparing the cost of cars in the UK and even USA compared to South Africa is alot better in relation to your cost of living than here is SA.

[Andy Beats]

The ACC as standard on the GTI+ really helps keep the insurance premium down too as it is perceived to mitigate a lot of the risk of you rear-ending the car in front.

The anti-collision stuff, which I think is standard on all Polos, allegedly reduces premiums.
Does Active Cruise Control reduce it even more?

[monkeyhanger]

The ACC as standard on the GTI+ really helps keep the insurance premium down too as it is perceived to mitigate a lot of the risk of you rear-ending the car in front.

The anti-collision stuff, which I think is standard on all Polos, allegedly reduces premiums.
Does Active Cruise Control reduce it even more?

Yes. The standard system is only for low speed/pedestrian avoidance, I believe. ACC is effective up to 110 mph.

[MilgeS]

You might have seen this before but I just seen it shared by vrskeith over at Briskoda forum

https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_contin ... LixQejv_fw

[AND_031]

How reliable have proven to be the 1.0TSI during this 5 years they are in production and how they handle remapping?
I have heard that the 95hp version is prone to valve destruction if pushed to hard with remapping.
Has someone remapped their 1.0 TSI and put some serious miles on it?
I was offered to do a DigitalTuning remap of my 1.0TSI (95hp/175Nm) that will push it to 120hp and 225Nm of torqe.
What are your opinions?

[Andy Beats]

I have heard that the 95hp version is prone to valve destruction if pushed to hard with remapping.

The 95bhp is so reluctant to rev up to the redline that I can't see how anyone could get to the point of valve destruction.
Seriously, going anywhere NEAR the redline is just utterly pointless, it just doesn't want to do it.
If I got mine remapped, I'd still stay away from the redline - it's pointless territory.

[AND_031]

I have heard that the 95hp version is prone to valve destruction if pushed to hard with remapping.

The 95bhp is so reluctant to rev up to the redline that I can't see how anyone could get to the point of valve destruction.
Seriously, going anywhere NEAR the redline is just utterly pointless, it just doesn't want to do it.
If I got mine remapped, I'd still stay away from the redline - it's pointless territory.

I guess not valve damage from high RPMs but rather from extensive heat released from the remap.
BTW if you want to get the best 0-60 time you will want to spin it near red line and then shift to a higher gear to drop it to around 2500rpm and then again repeat, wouldn't you?