I have an Elddis Odyssey 482 weighing in at MTPLM 1325kg and tow it with a 2006 Passat 2.0 TDI saloon (140 bhp) with a kerbweight of approx. 1570kg. I am thinking of increasing the bhp to 170 by remapping, has anybody out there had any experience with remapping, and would it make any difference to the towing ability of the car.
Remapping Volkswagen Passat from 140bhp to 170bhp
- Thread starter billyboybrad
- Start date
Hello Billy,
There will be a mirriad of other opinions about this.
One or two facts, remapping consitutes a modificatoin to the car and it must be reported to your insurers. _ some may say its OK and not charge any additional premiums, but with such a large jump in power they will most likey charge you more. If the car were younger it may also affect any manufacturers gurantee.
More power means more fuel consumption. Any hype about improvements is ususally about a very limited set of circumstances.
The debate is still out about the durability of engines with remaps, but it must be the case that more power put through the drive traim must cause greater stresses. With some models its not the mechanical durability but the ability of teh engines cooling systems to cope so you could end up with over heating.
More power does not necesarily translate to better towing. and to be honest your curent 140 bhp is normally more than enough to the weight of caravan you have. More speed or better acceleration can lead to the onset of instability which negates any possibel benefit of power increases
Think very carefully before you buy, and get gurantees from the remapper about any liability if it does not work for you in the way you want it too.
There will be a mirriad of other opinions about this.
One or two facts, remapping consitutes a modificatoin to the car and it must be reported to your insurers. _ some may say its OK and not charge any additional premiums, but with such a large jump in power they will most likey charge you more. If the car were younger it may also affect any manufacturers gurantee.
More power means more fuel consumption. Any hype about improvements is ususally about a very limited set of circumstances.
The debate is still out about the durability of engines with remaps, but it must be the case that more power put through the drive traim must cause greater stresses. With some models its not the mechanical durability but the ability of teh engines cooling systems to cope so you could end up with over heating.
More power does not necesarily translate to better towing. and to be honest your curent 140 bhp is normally more than enough to the weight of caravan you have. More speed or better acceleration can lead to the onset of instability which negates any possibel benefit of power increases
Think very carefully before you buy, and get gurantees from the remapper about any liability if it does not work for you in the way you want it too.
I think from a purely towing point of view you would gain very little. I tow a 1500kg caravan with a 140hp diesel Galaxy, and lack of power is really never an issue. So I can't see much in the way of upside to balance the downsides, eg cost, warranty, long term longevity etc.
Hi,
I own an Octavia vRS with the 1.8 20v turbo engine. Ill state just now that I dont tow with it (but I want to!) but did have the car remapped approximately 3 years ago, and to be honest was purely a performance enhancement.
I went for a 'Revo' remap which is a fairly big company and was recommended by various other owners. The difference between 'stock' and 'performance' is pretty big, and under normal curcumstances I dont notice a difference in consumption, although I have seen the onboard computer reading 7mpg average for a 15 mile journey!
I accepted the risk that the Turbo probably wouldnt last as long (boost pressure increases) and that other parts would probably fail quicker such as clutch etc. There are also other considerations that much more technical people than myself make such as running cooler spark plugs with a smaller gap. (although this wouldnt apply to a diesel.)
The main reason i thought I would post here is as follows:
I also purchased a revo device that allows me to switch between stock and performance via the ODBII port. When travelling with a load (such as 4 passengers/going on holiday) i do tend to switch it to stock as my thinking is there is less 'potential' tourque to pass via the clutch and drivetrain, therefore lessing the stress, and indeed when I/We eventually save the money for a Tourer, I will employ the same routine - dont know whether this is absolute rubbish, but just my thoughts.
Also, when running in 'performance' mode, the car is not as smooth to drive. I find that the power delivery does peak a little as it comes on boost, a little more than stock. Dont get me wrong the delivery is still pretty linear, but its noticeable, enough to get the traction control going in 3rd over wet surfaces that have a 'yump' or two in them. Again, I have little to no towing experience, but I would presume that its probably favourable to be a smooth 'measured' tow as oppsed to 'peaky'?
I would imagine given that diesels tend to boost quite quickly, and they produce lots of tourque, it could actually be quite detrimental in a situation where you were towing off from a wet pitch, producing lots of wheelspin/traction control action?
I am of the understanding that Revo are quite favourable for the VAG range of cars, and a while ago they would do a 5 hour trial (a friend had this and it simply switches back to stock once the 5 hours of 'engine on' time has elapsed. Maybe a trip to a local Revo dealer for a discussion, maybe a trial and a test tow?
Apologies if this is a pointless ramble, but thought my experiences might help?
Cheers
Rob
I own an Octavia vRS with the 1.8 20v turbo engine. Ill state just now that I dont tow with it (but I want to!) but did have the car remapped approximately 3 years ago, and to be honest was purely a performance enhancement.
I went for a 'Revo' remap which is a fairly big company and was recommended by various other owners. The difference between 'stock' and 'performance' is pretty big, and under normal curcumstances I dont notice a difference in consumption, although I have seen the onboard computer reading 7mpg average for a 15 mile journey!
I accepted the risk that the Turbo probably wouldnt last as long (boost pressure increases) and that other parts would probably fail quicker such as clutch etc. There are also other considerations that much more technical people than myself make such as running cooler spark plugs with a smaller gap. (although this wouldnt apply to a diesel.)
The main reason i thought I would post here is as follows:
I also purchased a revo device that allows me to switch between stock and performance via the ODBII port. When travelling with a load (such as 4 passengers/going on holiday) i do tend to switch it to stock as my thinking is there is less 'potential' tourque to pass via the clutch and drivetrain, therefore lessing the stress, and indeed when I/We eventually save the money for a Tourer, I will employ the same routine - dont know whether this is absolute rubbish, but just my thoughts.
Also, when running in 'performance' mode, the car is not as smooth to drive. I find that the power delivery does peak a little as it comes on boost, a little more than stock. Dont get me wrong the delivery is still pretty linear, but its noticeable, enough to get the traction control going in 3rd over wet surfaces that have a 'yump' or two in them. Again, I have little to no towing experience, but I would presume that its probably favourable to be a smooth 'measured' tow as oppsed to 'peaky'?
I would imagine given that diesels tend to boost quite quickly, and they produce lots of tourque, it could actually be quite detrimental in a situation where you were towing off from a wet pitch, producing lots of wheelspin/traction control action?
I am of the understanding that Revo are quite favourable for the VAG range of cars, and a while ago they would do a 5 hour trial (a friend had this and it simply switches back to stock once the 5 hours of 'engine on' time has elapsed. Maybe a trip to a local Revo dealer for a discussion, maybe a trial and a test tow?
Apologies if this is a pointless ramble, but thought my experiences might help?
Cheers
Rob
PROF. with all due respect do you actually have any on hand experience to how what and why, happens when a car is remapped? When claims are made to gains in Mpg,they might exagerate the gains but under the normal way most people drive their cars,gains are indeed made..
More power up from 140 to 170? 2006 model should be the old PD model and not the smoother CR model, but the VWs PD engine is more than capable of handling that BHP gain,although remember if its done high mileage then worn clutches DMFs might not be too happy especially by too bigger gains in torque.
More power up from 140 to 170? 2006 model should be the old PD model and not the smoother CR model, but the VWs PD engine is more than capable of handling that BHP gain,although remember if its done high mileage then worn clutches DMFs might not be too happy especially by too bigger gains in torque.
From what i remember the only difference between the 140 and 170 bhp diesels was the turbo, mechanically they are the same,i owned a 170bhp Audi Avant and found that in damp conditions the front wheels would scrabble for grip if loaded up or towing.
The differences between stock 140 and 170 vw tdi's are
VNT1749VC turbo with improved impeller and inlet housing with more precise vane control
Top mounted to allow for DPF over 140 without
Improved water jacket around uprated Siemens pizeo injectors and exhaust ports
- these Siemens injectors are dying left and right though!
Ceramic glow plugs
CTC toothed belt sprocket on the camshaft - it's oval to reduce belt tensions
Improved head gasket to both strengthen head and improve combustion chamber
Valves recessed flat into head allowing removal of valve pockets in pistons, improving swirl and compression
Improved oil separation system in cam cover
Uprated "hotdog" style EGR cooler
Forged and lightened crank with 4 counterweights instead of 8
A balancer shaft in the Passat level cars
Swirl flaps in the inlet manifold, improving swirl and flow across the rev range
A new electric EGR valve
It is extremely rare for any manufacturer to just remap or change just a turbo to gain extra power.
VNT1749VC turbo with improved impeller and inlet housing with more precise vane control
Top mounted to allow for DPF over 140 without
Improved water jacket around uprated Siemens pizeo injectors and exhaust ports
- these Siemens injectors are dying left and right though!
Ceramic glow plugs
CTC toothed belt sprocket on the camshaft - it's oval to reduce belt tensions
Improved head gasket to both strengthen head and improve combustion chamber
Valves recessed flat into head allowing removal of valve pockets in pistons, improving swirl and compression
Improved oil separation system in cam cover
Uprated "hotdog" style EGR cooler
Forged and lightened crank with 4 counterweights instead of 8
A balancer shaft in the Passat level cars
Swirl flaps in the inlet manifold, improving swirl and flow across the rev range
A new electric EGR valve
It is extremely rare for any manufacturer to just remap or change just a turbo to gain extra power.
I remember a few years ago when VW were Caddy racing they were uprating the 140 bhp engine with the turbo from the 170 bhp engine, the VW tech said they were the same engines,he commented it makes it cheaper during assembly so that they can change the demand at the end of production.
They are the main difference between the 140 and 170 version as i have stated, but i would also thing the clutch and DMF could also be different as the 140 pre dates 170.and the 140 being discussed here is a 2006 version so its possibly a PD engine,there are no170 PD engines. the newer 2.0 140 and 170s are CR engines.
It would surprise me if the changes are limited to the ones relating to the engine, as listed by JonnyG. I would have expected at least some changes also to the transmission and/or brakes, possibly even the tyre equipment.
No no there was some very early 170 pd,s knocking about.Infact if i remember a guy on here had a skoda with a 170pd in it.Does make you wonder though,i read on a vag forum that most 170,s were detuned to 150 on the first service due to DPF problems,yet one forum member had a Leon on the rollers at just on 200hp as standard,this was a later common rail though.Makes me think, by recessing the valves more and reducing valve protrusion,thus reducing compression ratio and ultimately cylinder pressure is this to make them safer at higher outputs?When you remember a simple uprate of 50hp can produce an extra 100bar of cylinder pressure maybe the reason for the new cylinder to head gasket?
…….… the OPs outfit has a power to weight ratio of over 46bhp/ton.
He should note that many HGVs have a ratio of as little as 10bhp/ton and they can cover long distances at reasonable speeds.
The old adage ‘Leave well enough alone’………. springs to mind!
He should note that many HGVs have a ratio of as little as 10bhp/ton and they can cover long distances at reasonable speeds.
The old adage ‘Leave well enough alone’………. springs to mind!
GafferBill quite right,i remember the days of 6bhp per tonne and that was seen as ok,but cars dont have 16 gears and things have moved on a bit.
Hello Jonny,
Whether I have any on hand experience to how what and why, happens when a car is remapped, is not in part of this debate. I have pointed out some of the many pitfalls that can occur when cars are remapped or have performance boosters fitted. I note you have not dismssed the issues.
It is only fair to point out to the OP there are potential problems when such procedures are carried out. based on the evidence I have seen and gathered I do not find in favour of such devices unless fully endorsed and used by the car manufacturer, and then only used with ALL the equiepment specified by the manufacture.
Like wise in the OP's case I can see no distinct benefit in remapping, he allready has enough power to haul his outfit. The cost of remapping (or using a plug in device) and the potential pitfalls makes little economic sense to me.
Whether I have any on hand experience to how what and why, happens when a car is remapped, is not in part of this debate. I have pointed out some of the many pitfalls that can occur when cars are remapped or have performance boosters fitted. I note you have not dismssed the issues.
It is only fair to point out to the OP there are potential problems when such procedures are carried out. based on the evidence I have seen and gathered I do not find in favour of such devices unless fully endorsed and used by the car manufacturer, and then only used with ALL the equiepment specified by the manufacture.
Like wise in the OP's case I can see no distinct benefit in remapping, he allready has enough power to haul his outfit. The cost of remapping (or using a plug in device) and the potential pitfalls makes little economic sense to me.
Hi Billy
I have two experiences of re mapping, one not really relevant, but I`ll say anyway, that being a 500 BHP Mercedes Benz Actros tractor unit, it was `chipped` to just under 600 BHP. We ran it on Scotland to south of England every day, better fuel consumption by about 15% and once on the motorway and in top gear, didn`t touch the gearstick again untill stopping. (night runs, no congestion).
I `chipped` my 2003 TD5 Discovery about 2 years ago, proper download not the `box`, the difference is amazing, it`s a lot more responsive the turbo comes in a lot earlier so there is no lag, it isn`t a lot quicker from a standing start to cruising speed, but if you are doing around the 50 MPH, and want to pass something, it takes off like a wee rocket.
The only way I can put it is, I would certainly get any future vehicles `chipped`, I`m very happy with mine.
Phil
I have two experiences of re mapping, one not really relevant, but I`ll say anyway, that being a 500 BHP Mercedes Benz Actros tractor unit, it was `chipped` to just under 600 BHP. We ran it on Scotland to south of England every day, better fuel consumption by about 15% and once on the motorway and in top gear, didn`t touch the gearstick again untill stopping. (night runs, no congestion).
I `chipped` my 2003 TD5 Discovery about 2 years ago, proper download not the `box`, the difference is amazing, it`s a lot more responsive the turbo comes in a lot earlier so there is no lag, it isn`t a lot quicker from a standing start to cruising speed, but if you are doing around the 50 MPH, and want to pass something, it takes off like a wee rocket.
The only way I can put it is, I would certainly get any future vehicles `chipped`, I`m very happy with mine.
Phil
I'm a bit surprised at the number of owners who have their cars remapped apparently without any concern. To my mind it would seem reasonable to assume that if the performance can be raised without the need to do anything else other than remapping, then the car manufacturer would have already done it. Why should he artificially restrict performance if there's not a catch in it somewhere?
Thank you very much for all the advice and comments. I have decided to leave well alone. As the other half commented, we had extra load last time out and would not be in that situation again. Also, with some redistribution i.e. putting the awning in the car boot could be advantageous.
Again, thank you all.
Bill
Again, thank you all.
Bill
If you have a spare £100 or so, i would suggest you might like to invest in a new MAF sensor. The passat is a good tow horse and really shouldn't be lacking in the grunt area.The MAF is an Air sensor measuring in grammes to work out volume of air going into the engine. Their performance will with mileage and age deteriorate and therefore so will your cars pulling power.billyboybrad said:Thank you very much for all the advice and comments. I have decided to leave well alone. As the other half commented, we had extra load last time out and would not be in that situation again. Also, with some redistribution i.e. putting the awning in the car boot could be advantageous.
Again, thank you all.
Bill
Problem with this sensor is as it will be still working it will not throw up any fault codes, although a decent mechanic using Vag com should be able to see if its still registering accurate values in accordance with Vag coms basis line values.Not saying this is definitely a problem but it still something that happens too often and is over looked until the performance becomes so bad or the MAF packs in completely,and throughs up a fault code.
There is a test you can do that might help,if you unplug the MAF, the car will still run although tick over might be poor dont worry,if you then drive around for a mile or 2 on open roads and the performance is no worse or is indeed better,your maf is no good for sure.
I agree with you about Diesels, where all the remapping or 'Synergy' type of boxes do is increase the fuel rail pressure, although there have been proven cases where exactly the same engine & power train is offered at different powers as a marketing ploy.Lutz said:
However with the case of Petrol engined turbo cars it's slightly different, some years ago I had a Rover 800 Vitesse re-mapped to give about 50 bhp extra but it meant that I could only use 98 octane petrol, it was explained to me that the factory mapping has to cover a wide range of fuel, so by narrowing that range, power could be increased.
if anything you have got that the wrong way around,as the Only way to increase the performance of a turbo petrol engine especially one from decades ago, was to boost turbo pressure,[more air]and add more fuel.and factory setting didn't give anything like the 25 to 30% safety margin you would need as is the case of your 50 bhp gain. Wife tales concerning fuel quality ect ect,was just that!Nick in France said:
One other mis conception . Yes turbo diesels do raise fuel pressure, but it should be still within the tolerances of what the injectors can handle. case of piont, Renault used standard meganes coupes to do a 24 hour race.[pulicity stunt] power was raised by 30% merely by remapping [raising fuel pressure!.] how else do you get more fuel in within the squarting time confines ? and how do people think petrol engines are able to get more fuel without following the same principles?
You dont get more fuel into a diesel by increasing the injection pressure,yes you get more power by a pressure increase this is how modern diesel compression ratios are now decreased as the injection pressure is upped instead.Also now fuel injection timing is ******** compared to yesteryears.The fuel quantity is adjustable on all types of diesel fuel systems even common rail,except on common rail its metering is done on the injectors by way of pulse width modulation (pwm)
I know that it is a bit late in this debate but I can recall two manufacturers who have remapped engines. Nissans first generation X trail came out at around 110/112bhp and was deemed to be underpowered so Nisssan quite quickly remapped the engines to 138bhp with no other mods. It also was a dealer option on diesel Nissan Notes to go from 86bhp to above 100bhp without any other changes. Kia had a similar issue with the last geneation Sportage which came out at 112 bhp and then was boosted to 138 ,and was one of the reasons we went for the Sorento. On my current car Volvo have a remap that boosts power from 205 to 225 with an increase in torque at lower revs. It keeps the V5 emissions identical to the standard cars set up and the car maintains full warranty. The development was carried out by Polestarand installation is by your dealer. Cost £625. I think I'll stick with the 'measly' 205 ps which rarely gets bought out of the box!
Clive the oringinal x trail 2.2 Di develoeved 112 bhp, that is true but nissan replaced the engine to a 2.2 dci 138bhp.. a more modern engine not a remap.And i am also willing to bet the KIA for sure was not just a remap to take power up from 112 to 138bhp either.otherclive said:
Sorry Clive but the increase to 134bhp was achieved by boosting the fuel pump pressure considerably higher, along with a variable vane turbo, and i think something else, but can't recall what.otherclive said:
Source, diesel magazine.
Just remembered, a intercooler was fitted.
Facebook
Twitter