Found a short Skoda news article on the 1.2TSI engine.

?koda Auto launches production of a new low-volume supercharged engine ?koda Auto -

plus

?koda Auto - ?koda Auto celebrates 110 years of engine production in Mladá Boleslav

I am sure this article has been published before on the SMOC but I noticed a new date so there must have been amendments to that previously written. Some great pictures of the Monster in Muscovado as an added bonus.

My link

TP

Thought the 1.2 was turbo, not super charged ?

Thought the 1.2 was turbo, not super charged ?

I think we discussed this on a previous thread - bit of a translation difference. We in the UK think of 'turbocharging' and 'supercharging' as being two distinctly different forms of forced induction. 'Turbocharging' is actually more correctly known as 'turbo-supercharging'. It is turbocharged ie by an exhaust driven turbocharger not an engine driven 'supercharger'. Confused, you will be now....

There should be 2 more versions of the 1.2TSI available in the near future, although not sure either will be in the Yeti.

One with 85BHP (to replace the old 1.416v engine accross the VAG range and one with about 125BHP probably to replace the lower powered 1.4TSI. Latter would be ideal for the Yeti in my opinion and would fill the gap that many have been asking to be filled by the 1.4TSI.

There should be 2 more versions of the 1.2TSI available in the near future, although not sure either will be in the Yeti.

One with 85BHP (to replace the old 1.416v engine accross the VAG range and one with about 125BHP probably to replace the lower powered 1.4TSI. Latter would be ideal for the Yeti in my opinion and would fill the gap that many have been asking to be filled by the 1.4TSI.

Interesting - wonder if the chip tuners will be able to do much with the standard 1.2 as in polo/golf/yeti etc ?

Interesting - wonder if the chip tuners will be able to do much with the standard 1.2 as in polo/golf/yeti etc ?

I would have thought yes as the different powered versions are probably just running different engine maps.

There should be 2 more versions of the 1.2TSI available in the near future, although not sure either will be in the Yeti.

One with 85BHP (to replace the old 1.416v engine accross the VAG range and one with about 125BHP probably to replace the lower powered 1.4TSI. Latter would be ideal for the Yeti in my opinion and would fill the gap that many have been asking to be filled by the 1.4TSI.

That's interesting. i'd heard about 85bhp version with regard to the forthcoming Audi A1,but not a c125 one. Does this mean the relatively new 1.4tsi 122 will become obsolete?

That's interesting. i'd heard about 85bhp version with regard to the forthcoming Audi A1,but not a c125 one. Does this mean the relatively new 1.4tsi 122 will become obsolete?

That would appear somewhat strange but could it explain why the 1.4TSi is not available in the Yeti ??? Hmm.

Stranger still regards the Golf which utilises the 1.4TSi in both turbo only & twincharger forms.

I think we discussed this on a previous thread - bit of a translation difference. We in the UK think of 'turbocharging' and 'supercharging' as being two distinctly different forms of forced induction. 'Turbocharging' is actually more correctly known as 'turbo-supercharging'. It is turbocharged ie by an exhaust driven turbocharger not an engine driven 'supercharger'. Confused, you will be now....

Wrong. It's an out-dated term.

The correct terms are "turbocharger" for exhaust gas turbine driven, and "supercharger" for engine driven.

There should be 2 more versions of the 1.2TSI available in the near future, although not sure either will be in the Yeti.

One with 85BHP (to replace the old 1.416v engine accross the VAG range and one with about 125BHP probably to replace the lower powered 1.4TSI. Latter would be ideal for the Yeti in my opinion and would fill the gap that many have been asking to be filled by the 1.4TSI.

News to me!

Wrong. It's an out-dated term.

The correct terms are "turbocharger" for exhaust gas turbine driven, and "supercharger" for engine driven.

Mmmmm! Tad harsh I think. Just because the modern language is as you (and I) described has changed, doesn't actually make my statement 'wrong'!

The fact is that forced induction by whatever means is known as supercharging, hence the Skoda-Auto website in its English translation' using that term.

Mmmmm! Tad harsh I think. Just because the modern language is as you (and I) described has changed, doesn't actually make my statement 'wrong'!

The fact is that forced induction by whatever means is known as supercharging, hence the Skoda-Auto website in its English translation' using that term.

Listen, I said it's an outdated term. The fact is not that any form of forced induction is known as supercharging. Hence, you are wrong! (and trying to be all "well, yes, I know an ancient technical term, I am winner!" about it all doesn't help )

Not wishing to get deeply involved in a debate on chargers but like myself aerofurb is an aircraft engineer and to us a Turbo-charger in the car world is a Turbo-supercharger on an aircraft.

Regards,

TP

That's nice. But this is a car forum

That's nice. But this is a car forum

Very true but aircraft were using Turbo's as opposed to Super's long before cars, particularly the Americans and to some extent the French.

Use in road vehicles started with diesel trucks in the Thirties, cars your looking at the Sixties, by which time aircraft had moved on to axial flow gas turbine engines, leaving centrifugal compressors in the history books with the likes of Frank Whittle.

Anyway back to cars; don't suppose we can tempt you away from your VW for a Monster even with a TSI engine? :yes:

Regards,

TP

To be honest, for a day-to-day car... my car is ****!

It's stiff, low, and drinks petrol. I love driving it, but hate commuting, going to the shops etc

I would gladly have a 1.2 TSI Fabia, or Yeti. I really like the Yeti I had a look around, it would suit me fine

If I got a good enough deal on one I might even buy one!

To be honest, for a day-to-day car... my car is ****!

It's stiff, low, and drinks petrol. I love driving it, but hate commuting, going to the shops etc

I would gladly have a 1.2 TSI Fabia, or Yeti. I really like the Yeti I had a look around, it would suit me fine

If I got a good enough deal on one I might even buy one!

Get a Skoda and stick the Golf in the garage for weekends, you know it makes sense

To be honest, for a day-to-day car... my car is ****!

It's stiff, low, and drinks petrol. I love driving it, but hate commuting, going to the shops etc

I would gladly have a 1.2 TSI Fabia, or Yeti. I really like the Yeti I had a look around, it would suit me fine

If I got a good enough deal on one I might even buy one!

The Golf more a track car then :yes:

Think Skoda's 1.2TSI will find it's way into the Fabia this year, hoping so anyway. An update would not go amiss either, particularly inside as the dash looks dated.

Hence my other half switching to a Corsa; she thought the Fabia II was a step backwards compared to her Fabia I. Would like her to consider a Yeti 1.2 next time round but she prefers 'small' cars. :S

Regards,

TP

Very true but aircraft were using Turbo's as opposed to Super's long before cars, particularly the Americans and to some extent the French.

Use in road vehicles started with diesel trucks in the Thirties, cars your looking at the Sixties, by which time aircraft had moved on to axial flow gas turbine engines, leaving centrifugal compressors in the history books with the likes of Frank Whittle.

Anyway back to cars; don't suppose we can tempt you away from your VW for a Monster even with a TSI engine? :yes:

Regards,

TP

Ehhh, arent we forgetting the 4½ Blower Bentley, anno 1926?

http://www.russellbrockbank.com/viewproduct.asp?id=104&page=1&departmentID=2&returnto=shop.asp

And, yes I do know it was a supercharger, engine driven.

Edited 3 January, 201016 yr by Agerbundsen

Ehhh, arent we forgetting the 4½ Blower Bentley, anno 1926?

http://www.russellbrockbank.com/viewproduct.asp?id=104&page=1&departmentID=2&returnto=shop.asp

And, yes I do know it was a supercharger, engine driven.

Yes the great Bentley Blower fantastic.

Super's (compressor driven by gears or belts) I believe were first used in car racing somewhere around 1910 I think, so they do pre-date aircraft just.

Was more thinking of devises using a turbine (turbo) to drive a compressor though.

TP

"Yes the great Bentley Blower fantastic."

Careful, you'll upset the pureists. WO never regarded it as "great".

If the car needed a blower he would have designed it that way!

tom

Get a Skoda and stick the Golf in the garage for weekends, you know it makes sense

I'd love to! Will have to take a look into it once I'm slightly more buoyant/have a job that actually pays well!

The Golf more a track car then :yes:

Think Skoda's 1.2TSI will find it's way into the Fabia this year, hoping so anyway. An update would not go amiss either, particularly inside as the dash looks dated.

It's got a full interior, air conditioning, full electrics, and I'd prefer it that way "Fast road" maybe, but certainly not track! I need 3 cars, to be honest. Fast road, track, and daily. And another car to tow track car... damnit!

Okay, so we all know that in modern parlance what is fitted to the 1.2TSI is a 'turbocharger'.

So, just playing devil's advocate as I do, how come Skoda-Auto on their website (as linked at the beginning of the thread) call it a 'supercharger' than?

Because the numpty they've got to do the website is a spastic?

1.2 TSI = Turbo

1.4 TSI 120ps = Turbo

1.4 TSI 150+ps = Turbo & Supercharger

After some very active topics about 1.2 TSI model , i'm a bit surprised that there are no new information's about them.

C'mon guys (1.2 TSI owners), please share with rest of us your experiences from owning and driving the smallest monster.