g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
Fair chant Bubblevaux. 'Tis been fun. Go easy on the pussy, it needs to last. That and I hear the scratches can get infected. ;-) Good night lol 
|
The Fonz
Member
Registered: 9th Dec 05
Location: cumbria
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by g-man
Yes, I saw FSI. We're talking almost diesel technology here FFS. FSI is also NOT without it's issues. VW are trying to cover up a warehouse full of melted engines.
Now then sir. I dont know where your getting this utter crap from but ican tell you now i aint seen one brake yet. Me and the hoople work in a busy main dealership for audi, vw and seat all franchises using the same engines. Somehow i think we would have seen at least one fail. Aint seen any technical bullitins about them yet!!!
Supprisingly enough, the tfsi is a high compression turbocharged engine, and guess what, it runs low boost to produce more power and no lag!!
But from what some people are saying i best strip down the prelude, the crx and the type r im about to turbo and fit low comp pistons in turn boost up so they produce the same power and loads of lag???
|
Robin
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Jan 04
Location: Northants Drives: Clio 182 Cup
User status: Offline
|
apparently so Mr Fonz.
|
matt-the-hoople
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Member @ Muppetsport
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by g-man
If you had any idea of the costs involved in designing an engine so it's reliable for it's given output, you'd know Vauxhall wouldn't have put the finance into making it capable of 130% extra power without upgrade.
If this is the case why can a standard VAG 1.8 20VT produce over 150% more power than stock safely on stock internals.
This is possible with a good progressive map and big turbo, injectors, etc obviously.
I still like cheese.
|
g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
I'm not getting into a debate about the VAG FSI engine saga. I know of two people who have had failed engines because of the FSI setup. The reason there for lack of TSB's is the fact VAG are refusing to accept there was an initial problem with them.
As mentioned, FSI is a diesel like technology. It eliminates the potential problem of detonation by injecting fuel at the last milli-second using direct-to-chamber injection technology, thus reducing the time for it to gain enough heat to pre-ignite.
The 1.2 Z12XYZP whatever it's called uses the good old injector against the valve principal.
|
g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
Because a 1.8T is, from the outset, a turbo'd engine. It's a standard design used from the 150bhp thru 225bhp engines. Therefore the crank and varying components have higher tolerances when it comes to being subjected to higher boost levels.
Also, similar to the Honda argument, we'll not mention the fact the 1.8 20v engine is a proven strong forced induction lump.
The 1.2 Ecotec from Vauxhall, is not.
|
matt-the-hoople
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Member @ Muppetsport
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Fonz
quote:
Originally posted by g-man
Yes, I saw FSI. We're talking almost diesel technology here FFS. FSI is also NOT without it's issues. VW are trying to cover up a warehouse full of melted engines.
Now then sir. I dont know where your getting this utter crap from but ican tell you now i aint seen one brake yet. Me and the hoople work in a busy main dealership for audi, vw and seat all franchises using the same engines. Somehow i think we would have seen at least one fail. Aint seen any technical bullitins about them yet!!!
Supprisingly enough, the tfsi is a high compression turbocharged engine, and guess what, it runs low boost to produce more power and no lag!!
But from what some people are saying i best strip down the prelude, the crx and the type r im about to turbo and fit low comp pistons in turn boost up so they produce the same power and loads of lag???
Mister Fonz is quite correct here. TFSI engine's are very very good.
We would of heard from technical if there was a problem of this size with any part on any vehicle in the VAG range.
A good example of a high compression, low boost setup with good power and torque figures with zero lag.
But obvioulsy there will be a recall soon to fit low comp pistons and turbo boost upto 50 BAR to get the same results with a lagtastic feel. woohoo
Cheddar is best
|
Robin
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Jan 04
Location: Northants Drives: Clio 182 Cup
User status: Offline
|
I notice that the 1000bhp 1.5 litre Formula one engines from the 80s were high compression, low boost.
Same principle as the VTEC turbo setup, and indeed the 1.2 16v Dbilas kit.
|
matt-the-hoople
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Member @ Muppetsport
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by g-man
Because a 1.8T is, from the outset, a turbo'd engine. It's a standard design used from the 150bhp thru 225bhp engines. Therefore the crank and varying components have higher tolerances when it comes to being subjected to higher boost levels.
Also, similar to the Honda argument, we'll not mention the fact the 1.8 20v engine is a proven strong forced induction lump.
The 1.2 Ecotec from Vauxhall, is not.
You are correct in what you saying, but originally this thread started out as its not possible that car runs 160 BHP.
This is utter bollocks, of course it can.
Its not power that kills internals its a sudden increase in torque and heat, thats what snaps rods, cranks etc not BHP
Look at the graph, it doesn't produce a lot of torque and it comes in progressivly peaking at 125 IBS FT.
|
g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
We're talking FSI here!!! It's not the same technology as standard injection engines!!!!!! I'm not denying FSI engines are good. They do a good job, but there have been issues with them. Fixed or not, I'm not sure.
You *cannot* compare an FSI engine against a standard 1.2 Ecotec. It's like comparing a diesel engine against a petrol, seriously! Injection methods are completely different.
|
matt-the-hoople
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Member @ Muppetsport
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robin
I notice that the 1000bhp 1.5 litre Formula one engines from the 80s were high compression, low boost.
Same principle as the VTEC turbo setup, and indeed the 1.2 16v Dbilas kit.
I like you
|
g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
Matt, you're either misinterpreting what I've wrote, or twisting my words. I'm perfectly aware that a 1.2 *can* produce 160bhp. What I'm disputing is that it's producing 158bhp reliably, on standard internals, at 0.6 bar.
|
matt-the-hoople
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Member @ Muppetsport
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by g-man
We're talking FSI here!!! It's not the same technology as standard injection engines!!!!!! I'm not denying FSI engines are good. They do a good job, but there have been issues with them. Fixed or not, I'm not sure.
You *cannot* compare an FSI engine against a standard 1.2 Ecotec. It's like comparing a diesel engine against a petrol, seriously! Injection methods are completely different.
We are not comparing FSI to ecotec
What we are comparing is high comp low boost to low comp tornado gale force 7 boost.
FSI works exactly the same as a normal injection engine. Just runs higher fuel pressures, also direct injection. FSI is only for economy and is practically in this country due to our shitty low octane fuels and roads.
I dont like bogey cheese
|
g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robin
I notice that the 1000bhp 1.5 litre Formula one engines from the 80s were high compression, low boost.
Same principle as the VTEC turbo setup, and indeed the 1.2 16v Dbilas kit.
Did the F1 crews buy bolt on kits from Dbilas to strap on their otherwise standard 1.5 engines???????? This is the point I'm making!
My God, people, read before you reply! I'm not disputing that small engines can make high power. I am, however, disputing that an otherwise standard 1.2 will produce a reliable 158bhp @ 0.6bar!
Do you think these 1.5 F1 engines could be ran every day @ 1000bhp?!?!
|
Robin
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Jan 04
Location: Northants Drives: Clio 182 Cup
User status: Offline
|
No, but I'm arguing that the PRINCIPLE is the same. Low boost, High compression.
This is how the 1.2 works in this case. There are many engines to illustrate this, like the 1.6 vtec with 6psi and 100 EXTRA horsepower...
oh, btw
quote:
Originally posted by vibrio on MSN
tell G-Man the 158 is down to a boost spike. reality is that its making 145-150hp, and its 0.5 bar, not 0.6
[Edited on 31-12-2006 by Robin]
|
Robin
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Jan 04
Location: Northants Drives: Clio 182 Cup
User status: Offline
|
It could be reliable, you are guessing that it wouldn't be, without knowing for sure.
Some engines are good, some are bad.
|
jay kay
Member
Registered: 22nd Jan 06
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
F1 teams also used synthetic fuel iirc in order to stop the engines from blowing up but i think its poss that the 1.2 could do it.
[Edited on 31-12-2006 by jay kay]
|
matt-the-hoople
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Member @ Muppetsport
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by g-man
Matt, you're either misinterpreting what I've wrote, or twisting my words. I'm perfectly aware that a 1.2 *can* produce 160bhp. What I'm disputing is that it's producing 158bhp reliably, on standard internals, at 0.6 bar.
Not twisting your words at all.
But where does it say that engine isnt capable of this and where does it say it is running 0.6 BAR. It could be running 30000000 BAR for all i care.
It is well capable of produce half the power my 1.8 produces and it has more than half the capacity.
Its also not all about boost pressure. My car runs 1.3 bar @ 300 BHP previously running 1.5 BAR @ 207 BHP all down to bigger turbo.
Less boost but more airflow.
Who actually knows what turbo it has on. (maybe a T88)
Wensleydale is little dry for my tastes.
|
g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
No, Matt, it doesn't. I entered this debate with Muppetsport on a serious note. However, he has appeared to have buggered off and left me with you.
I'll leave you with the final statement (unless I get bored and come back):...
Small engines (i.e 1.2's) can produce high power. I accept this. They cannot, however, do so reliably on low boost, high compression and standard internals (i.e Z12etc and 0.6bar...ignoring FSI!).
FSI engines work on the same principle as diesel engines. The fuel is injected, at high pressure, closer to the TDC point of the compression stroke, drastically reducing the potential for pre-ignition. This allows low boost, high compression, lag free engines. Fantastic technology, brilliant idea, and very functional. There have, however, been noted failures with early implementations.
|
Robin
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Jan 04
Location: Northants Drives: Clio 182 Cup
User status: Offline
|
the boost is on the graph, it NEVER gets above 0.5bar. but like you say, no-one knows the amount of air at that pressure.
we need a compressor map, to confuse people even more with lines and stuff 
|
matt-the-hoople
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Member @ Muppetsport
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by g-man
quote:
Originally posted by Robin
I notice that the 1000bhp 1.5 litre Formula one engines from the 80s were high compression, low boost.
Same principle as the VTEC turbo setup, and indeed the 1.2 16v Dbilas kit.
My God, people, read before you reply! I'm not disputing that small engines can make high power. I am, however, disputing that an otherwise standard 1.2 will produce a reliable 158bhp @ 0.6bar!
A progressive map on a decent turbo setup will easily see that power relaibly. Its all the mapping. If you get a huge chunk of torque suddenly then yes it may not last that long, but who cares, iam not paying for the repairs.
Personally i think it is a cool little conversion. Why do we all need 10 Litre V67's when a little 1.2 turbo will do the same job, turn the wheels round and round and round and round and so forth and so on.
My gran likes the cheese with snot in it.,
|
g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
Unfortunately proving this will be hard, other than by getting an independent with the same engine to fit said kit, then have it RR'd (again, independently).
|
Robin
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Jan 04
Location: Northants Drives: Clio 182 Cup
User status: Offline
|
why get an independent place to fit the kit? 
|
g-man
Member
Registered: 26th Feb 06
Location: East Kilbride
User status: Offline
|
Matt, don't get me wrong. I like small engines putting out big power. I don't like over enthusiastic claims, though.
Progressive helps, but only delays the inevitable. Someone with such power will be running high revs often, at which point the engine will be subjected to 130% extra strain than standard manufacturer designs. These strains are probably a good deal outwith tolerances. I say the 1.2 would be good for 135bhp. Any more than that, and you're pushing it.
|
matt-the-hoople
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Member @ Muppetsport
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by g-man
No, Matt, it doesn't. I entered this debate with Muppetsport on a serious note. However, he has appeared to have buggered off and left me with you.
I'll leave you with the final statement (unless I get bored and come back):...
Small engines (i.e 1.2's) can produce high power. I accept this. They cannot, however, do so reliably on low boost, high compression and standard internals (i.e Z12etc and 0.6bar...ignoring FSI!).
FSI engines work on the same principle as diesel engines. The fuel is injected, at high pressure, closer to the TDC point of the compression stroke, drastically reducing the potential for pre-ignition. This allows low boost, high compression, lag free engines. Fantastic technology, brilliant idea, and very functional. There have, however, been noted failures with early implementations.
Thanks for teaching me how FSI works i never knew after being a VAG tech for 7 Years.
Muppetsport hasn't buggered of, he is right here as is the fonz, TEAM MUPPETSPORT on the case here. It was just my turn on the keyboard while they sliced me some cheddar cheese.
All joking aside, iam not too fussed if it makes 158 BHP or 58 BHP, but it is easily capable of making that power @ 0.6 BAR being reliable with the right turbo and map.
Can we leave it at that cause i good be getting a tit wank off the wife rather than arquing on here.
|
