I seem to remeber there was a post about a remap by a German Company which could gain 25 hp extra, whilst extracting 1200 EUROS from your pocket.

Has any one tried anything yet? When I google chips for 1.2 TSI some VW Polo forum comes up and someone note that the engine is "10 hp more than it should have for starter".

I am not finding myself needing more power, especially when I am still running it in, it seems responsive and have plenty of enough power - this is comparing to my old 450SLC! However, I wouldn't mind gaining 25 extra hp and 50 NM more torque - truly amazing to have a 2.3 litre engine power in a 1.2. Any thought or experience?

Unless they can produce rolling road graphs that are independently witnessed I wouldn't always trust what they say.

ive seen a company that can get 140 bhp out of the 1.2....cost was somewhere around the £1000 mark tho'..cant find the link at mo

ive seen a company that can get 140 bhp out of the 1.2....cost was somewhere around the £1000 mark tho'..cant find the link at mo

Here you go http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/158308-remaps-becoming-available-for-12tsi/, I take that this is the one you saw, its in Euros though. I think it gives you similar performance as 2.3 litre.

If the 1.2 is similar to other VW engines it will already be producing around 110bhp. Certainly feels it.

Have a look at Celtic tuning. They can remap a VW polo with a 1.2 Tsi engine, I imagine its the same one used in the Yeti?

Results:

Standard Power (Bhp) 105 Modified Power (Bhp) 125

Standard Torque (lb/ft) 129 Modified Torque (lb/ft) 160

Have a look at Celtic tuning. They can remap a VW polo with a 1.2 Tsi engine, I imagine its the same one used in the Yeti?

Results:

Standard Power (Bhp) 105 Modified Power (Bhp) 125

Standard Torque (lb/ft) 129 Modified Torque (lb/ft) 160

That's brilliant thanks, I am not entirely sure if I need a remap yet, as I have not tested the real power of the engine.

However, I was browsing K&N the other day, when I was younger I used to swap air filters to see responsiveness difference, I have to say the ones with carbon fibre shells (BMC, Viper etc) are less affected by heatsoak and makes the car more responsive at low revs. However, take a look at this: http://www.knfilters.com/search/product.aspx?Prod=57S-9500 How would this help with engine breathing, I really fail to understand, it still uses the same air intake hose, which is long and restrcited, coupled with their "specially designed" air box.

Basically stuffing a K&N in an air intake box - how would this help!!!

That's brilliant thanks, I am not entirely sure if I need a remap yet, as I have not tested the real power of the engine.

However, I was browsing K&N the other day, when I was younger I used to swap air filters to see responsiveness difference, I have to say the ones with carbon fibre shells (BMC, Viper etc) are less affected by heatsoak and makes the car more responsive at low revs. However, take a look at this: http://www.knfilters.com/search/product.aspx?Prod=57S-9500 How would this help with engine breathing, I really fail to understand, it still uses the same air intake hose, which is long and restrcited, coupled with their "specially designed" air box.

Basically stuffing a K&N in an air intake box - how would this help!!!

Things you pay a lot of money for always seem to help - just like the car drives much better when it has just been washed.

Other than that, in a turbo engine, the pressure drop across the (CLEAN!!) air filter is minimal in relation to the boost.

170BHP and 250NM for 6000Euros! http://www.bb-automobiltechnik.de/bb2004/de/typen/vw/golf/VI/motoren/mvw_golf_vi_12tsi.php

^^ 170bhp!!! Holy carp!

Thinking about getting my little Fab mapped once it`s been run in - or is it better to do it sooner???

Don`t really know too much about mapping!

I planning on a remap on my cr140 tdi. Improved economy is what I'm after. Oh and the power & torque!

To me it seems strange that someone may tweak the engine better than Skoda itself. If this is like overclocking in computers , than it may work for some time but it will shorten the life span of the engine, which it's overloaded as it is (the 1.2 TSI at least).

K&N filters are a chocolate fireguard when fitted to a standard road car. Even more so when forced induction is thrown into the equation. I put them in the same category as fuel magnets, eBay electric superchargers and snake oil. Stick to the OEM filter and spend the saved cash on wine gums or something. My mate used to think his N/A car was miles faster with his K&N, innit. All he did was succeed in covering his MAF in oil from it, nice one.

I foolishly removed my OE filter box and fitted a silly K&N cone filter contraption and it was nothing but trouble.

Same rule for remaps under the guise of improved fuel efficiency.........

A remapped TSI engine consumes more oxygen and fuel to produce more power which makes the car go faster. I have always failed to understand people who try to remap purely for economy unless they map to a lower power output. There is a reason we don't have the CR170 or 2.0TSI in the Greenline and Bluemotion cars - Physics!

I appreciate the altered power/torque curves allow for a higher gear than usual but how come the manufacturers don't do this to start with? Most likely to ensure reliability from the engine and drivetrain - DMF in particular.

And of course the usual warranty and insurance arguments as well.

I appreciate the altered power/torque curves allow for a higher gear than usual but how come the manufacturers don't do this to start with? Most likely to ensure reliability from the engine and drivetrain - DMF in particular.

Your argument is naturally correct, unless the remapping results in better engine efficiency - specific fuel consumption per HP.

If you look at the TDI engines for the SM, the 170 hp is more efficient than the 140 hp and the 110 hp only slightly better in consumption than the 170. All three are the same size, so the same rotational losses. The 140 and 170 share identical drive trains.

As I understand it, the engines are powered down to the lowest common denominators - bad fuels, environment etc. Lots of these can be ignored in the UK as we have a very high standard of fuel, and so the re-mappers can push more power out of the engine with out any risk.

On the warranty front, last time I talked to an engineer who remapped my 530d, he said that the manufacturer can't tell if a car has been remapped, and a skoda dealer told me that as well. Only the person who re-mapped can tell if it has been re-mapped.

When I sold my 530d, the person buying it was informed. Their son had a saloon 530d which was slow in comparison. For some silly reason, when having the son's car re-mapped, they remapped my old touring as well and made it almost un-driveable. He hen had to get them to put it back to how it was before they remapped it. Most re-mappers will copy the old ecu map as backup for this very reason.

Mike

As I understand it, the engines are powered down to the lowest common denominators - bad fuels, environment etc. Lots of these can be ignored in the UK as we have a very high standard of fuel, and so the re-mappers can push more power out of the engine with out any risk.

Mike

That's exactly my understanding Mike. I've had a few remaps on different cars now and the liberation of the untapped reserve has worked well for me.

I guess the 1.2 TSi unit must have some redundant horses built into its design, but probably not a vast amount. I'd love to see a dyno printout of one of these before and after, as a lot of the VAG engines seem to be under rated in their published figures, judging from the dyno printouts I've seen.

Somebody has to get their 1.2 TSi done and report back.

Hee hee lets just say thats being looked at already - awating a few emails back!

Mmm, interesting. keep us posted Ross, and don't forget to ask whether the outputs stated are with V power type fuel or normal.

When I google chips for 1.2 TSI some VW Polo forum comes up and someone note that the engine is "10 hp more than it should have for starter".

Even more . This is my brand new Yeti 1.2 TSI (not remapped):

If I'm reading that graph right, its very impressive, appears way over what the quoted figures for the 1.2 are.

I may have opted for the wrong engine with the 1.4!

What octane fuel was the car using?

AS with all VAG cars the engines deliver more than the 'official' figures. My 140PDTDi on one run showing 190bhp! ok that was an operator error, but on a successful run it was in the low 150's.

So your 1.4, which may turn up before my 140DSG, will more than likely produce more than the 122? bhp.

Mike

Even more . This is my brand new Yeti 1.2 TSI (not remapped):

Thanks for the print-out, very interesting, at least in the real world, it feels like it.

Was driving a Mondeo 1.8 the other day, similar weight, I think Yeti is about 30kg lighter and the Yeti does feel a lot quicker in mid revs.

AS with all VAG cars the engines deliver more than the 'official' figures. My 140PDTDi on one run showing 190bhp! ok that was an operator error, but on a successful run it was in the low 150's.

So your 1.4, which may turn up before my 140DSG, will more than likely produce more than the 122? bhp.

Mike

I'll have to get mine on a dyno at some point then to see!

( When I get it, that is. Apologies Mike , if mine does turn up sooner. :S Got no official confirmation yet, just the comment from Friday)

I understand the [email protected] bit which in old money according to my maths is 146lb/ft.

Is the 125.4 KM the same as 125.4 Kw?.If so thats about 170 bhp?.