TSI In late model RS Skoda's

[GTR27]

OK, so we all know that the VW group share bits n bobs between them. What I want to know is, is the new TSI motor in late model vRS Skoda's identical to the golf? What is the difference between that and a S3?

147kw vs 155 vs 190 odd. If they are exactly the same (turbos and all) then surely getting them chipped is perfectly fine from a reliability point of view.

Can anyone point me in the direction of differences if any?

PS I love my RS TSI wagon - so much fun in the twisties

[CanberravRS]

OK, so we all know that the VW group share bits n bobs between them. What I want to know is, is the new TSI motor in late model vRS Skoda's identical to the golf? What is the difference between that and a S3?

147kw vs 155 vs 190 odd. If they are exactly the same (turbos and all) then surely getting them chipped is perfectly fine from a reliability point of view.

Can anyone point me in the direction of differences if any?

PS I love my RS TSI wagon - so much fun in the twisties

They are different heads and turbos in Audi, VW and Skoda are simply exhaust and ECU tune.

[RSwag]

They are different heads and turbos in Audi, VW and Skoda are simply exhaust and ECU tune.

Not to s$&t you with a contradiction but I think you will find it is the same head, ecu, turbos etc in all three makes as if middle this year. They just tune each differently e.g R20 vs RS

Your RS is the same as the GTi and the A3, the kw thing is marketing rubbish, the same 0-100 and nm hints at this.

I'm sure there will be plenty if people who would scoff at the idea their GTi has the same componentry as you RS and not an "updated version" but I can tell you it's not the case

[CanberravRS]

Not ****ting me at all all RSwag.. Infact if I'm wrong im happy to be corrected. I was making comments based upon the research i did when i first got my Skoda where Tuners all stated that the Head on the Audi was different with its flow/cam etc. The Turbo on the Audi also is a different KKK part number meaning it is different. ( to what level i dont know)..

Im not sure about current versions, but 2-3 years ago i believe this was the case.. Either way if you can track down identical part numbers over the manufacturers it would make the point really easily. I know my 1Z went like stink, infact i did out run a mate with a DSG GTI. Im not sold they are all the same.. and im not sold that Skoda Engines are as detuned as VW want them to be.

[woofy]

I'm pretty sure the Skoda 1.8 is a bit more potent than the figures suggest, and I had quite a long discussion with the Europcar guy at Brisbane airport yesterday, they love the Skodas there, and he reckons the same Skoda vs the Jetta equivalent is slightly more potent. He thought it might be in his head, but after they keep driving them around, always feel it is that way.

[K1W1]

Having driven my wifes S3 and a TSI vRS the S3 may as well be a V8 for the extra real world oomph it appears to have. Whether that's tuning or mechanical differences I don't know and don't care but the S3 is a rocket ship and even if you could get the same power out of the vRS the S3 would still run rings around it with it's noticeably better suspension and way more planted feel with the AWD.

[Gaz]

RSwag, I think you missed the "S3" not "A3" in the OP. OK?

[dArK5HaD0w]

i was under the impression that the golf gti, a3, jetta & vrs all had exactly the same 2.0L tsi engine (EA888 = 2.0 R4 16v TSI/TFSI 132-155kW) - i.e. same bore & stroke. the only diff was the ecu mapping, hence the 147 v 155 kW.

while the golf r, s3, & tt have a different version of the 2.0L tsi engine (EA113 = 2.0 R4 16v TFSI 125-210kW) - i.e. slightly bigger bore & stroke, and different turbo too i think. obviously with a different ecu mapping, and hence their figures of 188kW plus.

correct me if i'm wrong.

EDIT: turns out they're the same engine, just with different compression ratios.


2.0 R4 16v TSI/TFSI 132-155kW - EA888
engine displacement & engine configuration
1,984 cubic centimetres (121.1 cu in) EA888 inline-four engine (R4/I4); bore x stroke: 82.5 by 92.8 millimetres (3.25 in × 3.65 in), stroke ratio: 0.89:1 - undersquare/long-stroke, 496.1 cc per cylinder; compression ratio: 9.6:1 (10.3:1 A3 Cabrio 2009), 88 mm (3.46 in) cylinder spacing

cylinder block & crankcase
GJL 250 grey cast iron; 33 kg (73 lb), die-forged steel crankshaft with five 58 mm (2.28 in) diameter main bearings, two toothed chain-driven counter-rotating balance shafts suppressing second degree free inertial forces and oil pump, horizontal-baffled oil sump

2.0 R4 16v TFSI 125-210kW - EA113
engine displacement & engine configuration
1,984 cubic centimetres (121.1 cu in) inline-four engine (R4/I4); bore x stroke: 82.5 by 92.8 millimetres (3.25 in × 3.65 in), stroke ratio: 0.89:1 - undersquare/long-stroke, 496.1 cc per cylinder, compression ratio: 10.5:1

cylinder block & crankcase
CG25 grey cast iron with liquid-blasted cylinder bore honing; 88 mm (3.46 in) cylinder spacing, five main bearings, die-forged steel crankshaft, two simplex-roller chain driven balance shafts

[Antiplastix]

APR have a upgrade kit to the same turbo, manifold etc. as used in the Audi S3.
At $8500 it aint cheap, but probably better value than buying a S3, M3, HSV or FPV.
APR - High Performance Development for Audi, VW and Porsche Vehicles.

[CanberravRS]

APR have a upgrade kit to the same turbo, manifold etc. as used in the Audi S3.
At $8500 it aint cheap, but probably better value than buying a S3, M3, HSV or FPV.
APR - High Performance Development for Audi, VW and Porsche Vehicles.

M3 i could live with.. but HSV or FPV.. PUKE!!!! may as well buy a taxi.

[Antiplastix]

M3 i could live with.. but HSV or FPV.. PUKE!!!! may as well buy a taxi.

Ha Ha, I do believe your some kind of "car snob". Just because they fall to peices and devalue faster than a used condom, dosn t stop people from buying them.

[K1W1]

At $8500 it aint cheap, but probably better value than buying a S3, M3, HSV or FPV.
APR - High Performance Development for Audi, VW and Porsche Vehicles.

And who would seriously want to put 188 or there abouts kW through the front wheels only of a Skoda? It's a sure route to death imo to start with. You need to look at the whole package and I doubt whether the Skoda diff and drive would handle the power all that long after all nobody is going to do the upgrade and then drive like grandma plus the suspension and brakes will need to be re done then there is the question of having a vehicle that would be difficult and extremely expensive to insure and would also be an unsaleable orphan. I would estimate that $15-$20K would probably be required to get something that was half way decent and for what point?

[K1W1]

M3 i could live with.. but HSV or FPV.. PUKE!!!! may as well buy a taxi.

Bad choice of words I suspect judging by how many Skoda Taxis there apparently are in Europe.

[CanberravRS]

Bad choice of words I suspect judging by how many Skoda Taxis there apparently are in Europe.

Thats Europe.. not here! I felt it was a valid comment. And my point of view.

[Inego]

Thats Europe.. not here! I felt it was a valid comment. And my point of view.

You haven't seen that silver superb taxi down there then?