Hi Sams,

I found myself much in the same boat as you around 5 weeks ago when I picked up a 2013 T5 84bhp with 5 gears.

The ability to get up a hill for a vehicle of this size is absolutely shocking, you literally have to drop a gear or two to get around and you are focusing constantly on which gear you should be in so I opted for a pendle performance remap courtesy of autocar(e) down Poole/Bournemouth way.

The resultant map is 170bhp/350lb of torque - it is absolutely brilliant and it is more than just a power boost but also a responsive throttle around what one would expect to provide a smooth ride going through the gears - in other words the map subtle increases the power at the right points as opposed to hitting you like a freight train (and destroying your drive train in the process).

However.. there is a flip side to this and I suspect it is more to do with the limitation of 5 gears. The flip side being is that the first gear is far too short - it can literally scream to 3000 revs in the space of a few heart beats if you are not careful and makes for a jerky ride if you are trying to get yourself about in a multistorey car park stuck in 1st gear etc etc. Yeah it is all minor stuff but it contributes to a small irritation factor.

I did originally aim for 140bhp so was surprised when it came out at 170 but thought what the hell - in for a penny, in for a pound. However, in retrospect i think a 130/140bhp threshold would suit the 5 gearbox better. Six gears I wouldn't hesitate to keep it at 170bhp.

On a further flip note, we also have a 1.6 Mini which is 6 gears - the bhp is so low in these buggers that you can literally stall the car going from 1 to 2nd gear in a lot of situations. The car would be better suited being a 5 gear.. I guess what I'm trying to say is that it is good to match the bhp/torque to the gearing otherwise it may compromise the ride.

 

On a further flip note, we also have a 1.6 Mini which is 6 gears - the bhp is so low in these buggers that you can literally stall the car going from 1 to 2nd gear in a lot of situations. The car would be better suited being a 5 gear.. I guess what I'm trying to say is that it is good to match the bhp/torque to the gearing otherwise it may compromise the ride.

I'm struggling to get my head around the logic of this observation. Having 6 gears instead of 5 should improve things for an underpowered vehicle, yet you seem to be saying the opposite. Please clarify.

 

Razor - im not a million miles away from poole ...would you recommend autocare?

Has the figure you quote been proved on the dyno? Assume they have a dyno in house?

I would definitely like more 'sparkle' in our (not so mighty) 102bhp bus J:

Lastly ...just how much of a kings ransom did you have to pay for them to work their magic on your motor?

 

I would definitely recommend autocare as I threw quite a few things at them to be done in a short space of time (service, cam belt, water pump, pads, discs, fit new B14 suspension, replace cv boots as they causing an issue etc) as well as the remap and they came out top trumps. Great price too! I also asked them to do the tyres but they argued saying there was plenty of tread so seems to me you are getting a real honest opinion on what is required and what is not.

Yes, they supply all over the rolling road figures and they have their own rolling onsite so the figures are legit (well as legit as how any tuner calibrates" their settings) from "to engine" -> "to wheel" so they have the full package.

If I recall their remap is around 350 but I went for a few more options on top of the remap.

 

Watching this with interest. My 102 LWB feels a bit underwhelming and I'm still (6 months later) not feeling the engine/change gear points added to which after researching on here for months before buying, I'm now completely paranoid about destroying my DMF so a smoother power output would be nice.

Keep up the good work A:

 

I am also in the same boat, I was given this piece of info yesterday from the mapping company I spoke to that for my (65 plate) 102 bhp van that I could go up to 170 bhp, this was due to the van having the same clutch unit as the 140 bhp vans and its just restricted at VW via the ecu, the 84 bhp vans have a smaller clutch so doesn't advice mapping these to more than about 120-130

all this work would not put any extra strain on the drive train etc

Simon

 

Thanks for the info razor T:

Your van must feel like a different motor after all that work T:

 

When I was searching for a van recently, the chap who is doing the conversion recommended that I look for the 140 6 speed as in his opinion the remapped 84/102 never drives as well as the stock 140. No idea if there's any truth in that, but with the 6 speed it definitely felt like relaxed cruising at 70mph, whereas the 5 speed obviously has gearing suited to the lower power and torque.

I'm interest to hear about Autocar in Poole as I'm often down that way. It would be helpful to have 170bhp and that extra torque when it's all converted.

 

the 5 speed obviously has gearing suited to the lower power and torque.

The gearing is virtually the same - the 6th gear is actually an "overdrive" gear.

 

Ive been meaning to do this since I bought the van, the 84bhp wasn't a problem to start with but now with the rear sorted and the extra weight I have lost 10mph up my morning hill and sometimes have to use third lol. Not keen on the idea of 170bhp though. I carried out a conversion on my old car with less increase in HP (175 to 230BHP/240Ts ) and fitted bigger brakes, better suspension, stiffer ARBs etc.

Do the 140 vans run the same clutch, brakes, drive shafts etc as the 84?

 

Surely a lot also depends on how tall or short the final drive is :*

 

yes - i'm assuming the 1sts are the same gear ratios on both the 5 speed and 6 speed gearboxes, and that the top gears are roughly the same on both too. If this is the case, the gear ratio differentials between any two successive gears is smaller for the 6 speed gearbox than it is for the 5 speed gearbox, so changes should be easier on the engine.

 

Regarding gearbox's the 6 speed is so much stronger than the 5 speed, 5 speed is rated at 350nm and the 6 is rated st 500nm.
Also the 6 speeds in general have a different clutch, clutch cover and DMF has more pre-load also.

 

T:hi all,I had my 102 11 plate transporter done at pendle hq by Martin around 2 years ago and can honestly say it was the best thing that I ever did to the van,what a difference,before I had it done I was a bit worried about whether the van could cope,but 30000 miles down the line no worries,van pulls through all gears smooth and loads of grunt,no more worries about being in the right hand lane at the roundabout with some clever dick in his corsa on your left pulling away laughing and you have to wait and limp back in the left when he's disappeared,I think my stats are 161 bhp after remap,worth every penny,at the end of the day it is after all just a van and not a gti but still loads more drivable in every way.T:T:T:

 

I bought my 12 plate 84bhp van last October and thought my goodness that's a small amount of horses for a Medium sized van....however 6 months and 5500 miles later I'm happy with the power output.

I suppose it depends on what you want the van to do really mine is used for parcel deliveries so up to 100 tiny start stops per day with no more than probably 15 miles traveled in total and not too much weight involved...also despite advice to the contrary no trouble from the dpf yet as I've been using Shell V power from the start.

She does have to pull two euro pallets with 600kg on them 2 to 3 times a month too and handles that without difficulty.

Just not sure now that after 90000 miles covered she needs messing about with I just think I'd be opening a can of worms that's not required.

The 75 mph speed limiter however is another matter sheesh on the motorway what a nightmare

 

Most of the 5.1's when mapped have a torque curve that come's in very low and is done/dusted by around 2300rpm. The down side is the poor dmf can't take it and can cause damage. For the six speed box to work correctly it needs torque from the engine to be able to drive it and still maintain torque.
Just remember that torque destroys things not bhp

 

Well, lots of interesting info there. My local guys reckon 130 HP and 250 NM out of the 84 PS engine (three different tuners give the same info so it's probably right. I have to say that 170/350 sounds a bit optimistic but given I claim no prior knowledge of T5s or remapping diesel ECUs WTF do I know). Also I have no clue if the clutch is the same across the board but I believe the 09 and earlier 84PS does not haver a DPF.

A few people have said how happy they are with their re-maps but nobody has actually answered the question, has nobody discovered any downsides to re-mapping? I'm a little concerned that I will have much worse fuel consumption or will be reducing the life of my engine and gearbox if I re-map?

 

I have a 2006 sportline, one of the last models without dpf. It is 174bhp stock, I found that after conversion to camper I was changing gear a lot on the roads in wales and Isle of skye. Most of these are narrow so speed was not an issue but the climbing was. I had a revo remap and now I negotiate most hills without having to change gear so much (im talking 12% in 4th/5th). I have not noticed any problems in the past two years. It is a 6 gear box but still have to watch it in 1st gear as the abs kicks in fairly quick if you are a little heavy on the pedal. Very smooth and overtaking is a lot quicker and safer.

 

My fuel consumption is better with 140bhp than it was with 105
Downside my insurance is up
Been mapped for nearly 5 years no dramatic extra wear to report so farT:

 

I don't see any downsides have mapped by 102 5 speed have mapped previous VW cars with great results

 

I would say the downsides are you are putting extra pressure on the engine , drivetrain and ancillaries. Standard maps are generally all about emissions so getting a custom map to give smoother and more responsive increase does make sense in some ways .
But doubling output of the engine , as in 170bhp , is a recipe for disaster in my opinion . Start using anywhere near that power output and parts will wear and break on a regular basis , reliability is highly likely to be compromised .
I know a few guys who do remaps on VW's and they just bang the most powerful map on the ecu and lo and behold the turbo goes bang within a few months , or the head gasket blows and the engine spews the water out .
You don't get anything for nothing , it's a ying and yang thing

 

The 84 engine and all its components are the same as 102 and 130...all combined to 5 speed box..
My 84 is running at 130 with do did to fuel consumption
3 years in and nothing to report...
[emoji106][emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I have had about 10 of our vehicles remapped over the years, I just try and look after them the best I can and service them well.
Increasing the power of an engine does put extra strain and wear through it but most modern engines are over engineered and if you look after them you shouldn't have much of an issue.

 

I have always had our diesel cars and my van remapped. Never had any issues relating to the map. Mapping totally transform a vehicle for the better. Go for it

 

Thanks for that. I feel that increasing the power and torque must create more engine wear but VW engines are pretty well built. If the 104 and 130 1.9's share all the same components then running my 84 remapped to 130 HP should be no more harmful than running a factory 130HP motor in standard trim?

 

If you want to get really technical a factory 130 will be less stressed as it has different components such as turbo/ injectors etc but in the real world a good quality remap on a 104 shouldn't give any issues.

 

Is a stage 1 map on a 130 BNZ worth the trouble?

I keep thinking about it but spend the pennies on others stuff for the bus.

One day I'm sure I will go for it?

 

There are pros and cons.

I had a 2009 102bhp BRS engine done in 2013 by Martin at Pendle.
I still have the printout, 142BHP / 346Nm @ 1925rpm
Makes it a pleasant drive, goes up hills and it does >100mph (on the Autobahn in Germany).

But it does put more stress on things
(I tend to drive it at the max torque rather than the max revs.)

So far

-I've knocked two teeth off 4th gear. (Metallurgist said it was a manufacturing fault aggravated by higher torque).
-Blown a rubber turbo intercooler pipe.
-Blown the intercooler (restraining straps rusted thru, fell off and the intercooler expanded like a concertina).
-Worn input shaft bearings.

Gearbox has been out twice. Nearly £2000 in total.
But I have had 60K pleasant miles out of it so far and would do it again if I had the chance.
Let's just hope I have better luck next time.


.

 

I had my 102 2.0tdi remapped on a dyno today

Wow what a difference, it’s developing 165bhp now and is absolutely insane. Only time will tell on long term reliability...

 

One thing to ask for when looking for a good mapping specialist are examples of the power and torque curves. One thing you do not want to see is a sharp spike in power as that is a recipe for a blown turbo or failing drive train even at more conservative power outputs. Granted, higher bhp/torque will strain your components but a bad mapping curve will shock those components into a much earlier failure situation.

I will try and post my power curves as an example (of what I believe) of a good smooth power increase to mitigate the strain on my engine/drivetrain components.

I know there is some concern over the power outputs I am running at but a bad map curve on a lower power output is a lot worse than a higher power output with a smooth transitional increase in power.

 

Hi, I've got a t5.1 84bhp bluemotion panel van and I've had it re mapped and the speed limiter taken off at sp tuning in Hinckley. I think it runs fantastic now and I'm getting 40 - 42mpg on my drive to work which is 18 miles on A and B roads an improvement of about 5mpg not bad for 130bhp and 320 nm to torqueT: best money I've spent on a car / van. I thought SP Tuning were really good I went for economy and longevity rather than all out power.