1.9Tdi Remap?

[MooLard]

Mountain_Man, yes you buy your own lead of which ever type you fancy, they do not recommend or promote non-genuine leads but they do work fine.

 

[dale86]

When I was just toying with the idea of a hybrid last year and my other mods and front mount and egr delete full turbo back stainless I messaged blacksmoke and he was very helpfull. Let me know what the outcome is bud.

 

[mountain_man]

will do

 

[Damon Smith]

I've got a 2003 mk1 Audi A3 Sport (130). Really pulls like a train considering its hit 160k miles but saying that it has got full service history and under the bonnet the condition of the engine looks like Audi themselves have put a new one in. Anyways thinking of having it remapped which I know will add 30-35bhp. My only query was with the mileage getting high and also does the increase in torque affect driveshafts, clutch and engine mounts. Don't want to spend £175 getting it remapped then having to spend loads more money on other parts to make sure it can withstand all the power and torque. I would rather stick to it being standard if that was the case because I'm happy with it as it is.

 

[Gazwould]

Choose a higher bhp reduced torque map file.

Torque at 290 ftlb + and a used clutch won't like it .

255-275 with no spikes all good.

 

[Paul @ Unit 9 Remaps]

its really just the same any other car. a remap will highlight any weakness be it a clutch hose or a sensor. the component would need changing regardless but the remap would just speed up that process. to be honest if you not planning on going crazy' dont waste your money on hardware etc and a remap is best bang for buck

 

[Denispearl]

what is the best remap for the audi a4 b6 1.9tdi 2003 108k miles and I dont want to lose my MPG, but gain them?
Where are those guys, better around London, reading area, but i dont mid driving further if its worth it.

Cheers

 

[BahnStormer77]

Hi..had mine done by AMD few weeks ago..its a 1.9 130....now producing 180 and 300 lb ft..goes lovely with broader spread of power and torque across rev range.Interestingly though before it was mapped the read out said it was producing 149 bhp...the guys said thats not unsual ?..dont know if anyone else thinks thats right? Anyway really glad i did it

It's been a few years since I've gone to them, but I found the AMD rolling road outputs were consistently over-stating the "at the flywheel" bhp... not sure what they do to the calibration numbers, but they seem to "adjust" for very high transmission losses, so the "at the wheels" number is probably about right, but the big graph and headline numbers that they print out for you always look over-inflated by 10-20%: before I started mucking around with it, they dyno'd my old Golf GTI (2.0 8V) and said that it was pulling around 140bhp (it wasn't!).... I drove it back home, took it down to another RR and they said 115bhp.... which was a far closer reflection of the car at that time. I should have seen the warning signs, but AMD were one of the few big names offering decent upgrades for that car, so I got them to do a LOT of work on that car - but every time I took it to another RR afterwards it gave a much lower reading - final straw was when they didn't bother RR'ing it after some work but pretended that they did - they just gave me a stock RR read-out that was definitely* NOT from my car, even though I pointed out that it wasn't, they just weren't bothered - and becuse of that, they missed some pretty big problems (FPR was split and unable to deliver fuel properly).

*With the high lift cams (amongst other things), my car was still pulling hard to the limiter @ 6700rpm (peak power ~6200rpm), but it was running very lean over 4500rpm, so the power just plateaud all the way from ~4500rpm to 6700rpm. The graph they gave me had the standard torque curve- higher torue at low revs and the 5500rpm drop-off - I'll see if I can dig out the joke-graph they gave me, the decent RR graph that highlighted the lean-fueling and the REAL "after" once the FPR was replaced.

 

[BahnStormer77]

what is the best remap for the audi a4 b6 1.9tdi 2003 108k miles and I dont want to lose my MPG, but gain them?
Where are those guys, better around London, reading area, but i dont mid driving further if its worth it.

Cheers

find out which 1.9 TDI - you have, most likely 115 or 130bhp... that will determine the clutch that is installed, so you'll have an idea of what to aim for.

Chip'N'Spin out in Bromsgrove used to do pretty decent RR days where they would do a "before" RR, then remap it, "after" RR and let you drive it before you paid (and it was only £200 - admittedly that a few years ago though!).

 

[Denispearl]

ok guys, remapping is great. Main question - how much mpg gain will have the 1.9tdi 130bhp engine, after remapped to 150bhp?
cheers

 

[BahnStormer77]

ok guys, remapping is great. Main question - how much mpg gain will have the 1.9tdi 130bhp engine, after remapped to 150bhp?
cheers

always a tough one.... if you go for a conservative map (150-160bhp for a 130TDI is pretty conservative), then you should get better fuel economy on average, but it will also feel a lot more rewarding to drive the car with a bit more "spirit", so there is also the chance of lower fuel economy.... if you do a lot of 40-60mph / hills / any situation where you would be working up and down the gears.... the remap will essentially just give you a "beefier" (higher, wider, smoother) torque curve, so you can hang onto higher gears for longer: I found that I was suddenly able to do some of my local "50mph" A-roads that go up and down between 40-50mph and I was just leaving it in 6th the whole time and still able to accelerate from 40 to 50mph without any stress.... on a long 50mph hill, fully loaded, I would previously have to shift down, but with the remap, I could just cruise it in 6th and the car never felt like it was begging me to shift down.... likewise for motorway cruising / overtaking.

In my old TDI (2.5 v6 quattro), on a long drive, before the remap, I would get a pretty consistent 30-40mpg.... after a mild remap, it would be anything between 25mpg and 65mpg.... I seldom saw either of those extremes, but the point I'm trying to make is that that the remap probably improved the fuel economy by ~5%, but by driving more gently, I could improve it by 25%+ very easilly...

These days (new car), I'd have to drive like a saint to see anythign over 35mpg.... and it's so much fun to boot it, <25mpg is more likely And a remap will NOT help me since that would probably be up to ~400bhp, possibly >500bhp ifI can be bothered to take it across to the Netherlands....

 

[Denispearl]

yeah. Seem like it does make a sense tk remap after all. Very massive input from you, thank you very much. In regards to the costs - you have to tell your insurers, right?

 

[Gazwould]

The best maps are higher bhp - up to 180 bhp with conservative torque up to 275 lbft.

Limiting the torque looks after the clutch and tyres + to truly improve a cars drive you must give more of what it lacks.

In the case of a torque monster tdi it's bhp and a Honda Civic Type R well it's torque is flat as a pancake , being na its not a cheap solution.

 

[BahnStormer77]

e

yeah. Seem like it does make a sense tk remap after all. Very massive input from you, thank you very much. In regards to the costs - you have to tell your insurers, right?

yes, you need to tell the insurers that it is remapped...