If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed, registering will remove the in post advertisements. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
This means you should apply for your renewal now to avoid any disruptions to your membership whilst the renewal process is taking place! NOTE: If you have an auto renewing subscription this will happen automatically.
Our car comes with 118kW at the crank from the factory. My car being around 60k km's I would have expected close to 5-10kW power loss. Using the guestimator you get around 100kW at the front wheels. My car dyno'd stock (with my custom intake) at 101kW at the wheels and 247Nm of torque, this is at 4700rpm and 2100rpm respectively.
The APR stage 1 tune claims 155kW at the crank which equates to around 132kW at the wheels and 320Nm. I am actually not sure how crank torque converts to wheel torque so I cant exactly compare APR in terms of wheel torque.
What I ended up with from the boys at Harding Performance:
Max power at the wheels is 121kW @ 5500rpm and 282Nm @ 2300rpm. As you can see the graph of the before dyno looks nothing like the APR before graph. This is because they smooth out the dyno. Our engines naturally produce a peaky output. The total power is around 10kW less than what APR claims but you could almost attribute this to the fact that it was 30 degrees today.
Anyways all in all the tune is amazing. The car pulls so much harder than it did before and the torque is across the whole rev range. Where the car used to noticeably start losing power around 4500rpm it now starts pulling like crazy at that exact point. Honestly even after you guys telling me how big the difference is I am still shocked.
Anyways have a look at the dyno graph and let me know what you all think.
Note the data points on this graph show the rpm with the greatest gains.
It's disappointing they have so many issues but there's so many of them that the parts are pretty cheap. I've certainly poured way more into repairs on a previous Prado D4D and WRX than I have into the 118TSI. If i got another 50,000km out of the current CAVD block I have I wouldn't be fazed dropping another couple of grand to switch in a CTHD centre block and keep it rolling as a second car. It's way too much fun to drive to consider selling for what they fetch these days.
Catch cans on the TSI's are tricky as you have both a pressure and vaccuum PCV system due to the pressure difference across the throttle, hard to plumb in just one catch can to the two systems. I've had a few people try it over the years, and they have chosen one system to run, so they at least halve the gunk. Another option is two cans. Diesles just run vac all the time with a pre turbo inlet, they are always working at WOT throttle wise.
I reckon a bit of thought and some decent ( Provent ) one way valves you could do it. It is indeed very hard to find proper one way PCV valves though.
I stumbled across this thread in another forum (see the source at the bottom) and wanted to share. There is actually a number of good posts over there by this guy that are worth reading: SEAT Cupra.net - SEAT Forum
Some great reading there, very in depth, the sad conclusion however is that the 1.4 twincharger is a fundamentally flawed design.
Interesting that he writes "1.4TSI engine is actually based on the old 1.4 16v engine from years ago" when describing the issue of fuel injectors extinguishing the flame due to positioning of the spark plugs relative to the injector. I wasn't aware of this and can't help but think how good this engine could have been if it had been designed from scratch rather than being based on an old engine.
Leave a comment: