102PS with 2 Turbo Failures - was re-map to blame?

It's an age old debate....

To map or not to map.

Me personally I don't map, and believe the advertised MPG gains are snake oil.... though have to agree that small BHP gains are possible and testable on a dyno.

I'm a firm believe that OEMs build engines for long term use and a long life.... and that running maps and driving hard pushes the engine outside its normal envelope which can lead to excessive wear and tear lead to component failure. Oil bearings in turbos are an obvious weak point from over heated oil, diesel washed oil, old oil, low oil etc etc.

Overheat the turbo and the bearing can run dry . . . . .

For me I think just go for the OEM bigger BHP in the first place... (which i have done for the last two vans).

But I do get the attractions of a map...... but hate the so called tuning boxes that just mess with the boost and rail pressure sensor input to the ECU.

These are obviously my own personal views and opinions and not those of T6F in any way.
 
I think a really friendly non-confrontational chat with Quantum is the first step,
I think they will want to get to the bottom of this; and if it's politely pointed out that other highly reputable mapping companies have pulled their maps for this engine; there may be a lot of goodwill, help. and support, fingers crossed.

Oh and also get all the details/warrantee offered by the manufactures of the new turbo
 
Last edited:
As an engineer working with Turbo pumps i've seen a fair few blow.... The main cause is always too much air intake resulting in an imbalance in the rotor and stators which will cause a catastrophic fail....

The vanes are that closely engineered that once one goes the whole thing self destructs..... The bearings are usually bomb proof...

This one blew itself apart due to excess air intake, resulting in imbalance and self destructed at 42,000 RPM.....

If you're going down the mapping route you must give it careful consideration and accept the associated risks involved....

T1.jpg

T2.jpg
 
I’ve seen a big marine Napier unit come apart after it swallowed half an exhaust valve, to this day I’m unsure if there was a fire but certainly enough smoke to mask the smell coming from my coveralls.
 
chriscroft said:
Revo, Quantum, etc, etc know all about this stuff I"m sure.
I would be very surprised if either of these companies would launch a map, that went outside the published working parameters of a given turbo.
Much more likely that the turbo couldn't sustain that which the turbo's manufactures claimed.
Click to expand...

It's all subjective. My opinion is that VW and Garrett have added that turbo to that engine because its designed to produce 102bhp and not 170bhp

It's kind of like choosing shoes. Clogs are perfect and look great at 2mph but if you want to get up to 6 or 7 you'll be wanting to upgrade the hardware to make it sustainable
 
Kev_ said:
It's all subjective. My opinion is that VW and Garrett have added that turbo to that engine because its designed to produce 102bhp and not 170bhp

It's kind of like choosing shoes. Clogs are perfect and look great at 2mph but if you want to get up to 6 or 7 you'll be wanting to upgrade the hardware to make it sustainable
Click to expand...
Oh not just gaffa tape the cloggs on then lol
 
Kev_ said:
It's all subjective. My opinion is that VW and Garrett have added that turbo to that engine because its designed to produce 102bhp and not 170bhp

It's kind of like choosing shoes. Clogs are perfect and look great at 2mph but if you want to get up to 6 or 7 you'll be wanting to upgrade the hardware to make it sustainable
Click to expand...
But these turbos must have published operating parameters and specifications. Aren't a lot of these turbos used in different applications/ engines with a choice of turbines and compressors?
 
In this application the manufacturer decided that the optimal power for performance and sustainability is 102 or they would have put 170 through it
 
Kev_ said:
In this application the manufacturer decided that the optimal power for performance and sustainability is 102 or they would have put 170 through it
Click to expand...
The engine output power doesn't go through the turbo???????
 
What is the soot level on the dpf increased back pressure obviously not helpful
 
Sorry, power production. As I said earlier, my view is that VW invest more and know more than me, you and the tuner about their product. That's not to say that the remaps aren't impressive. I had a Golf R running over 400bhp but it didn't get there by just flashing the ECU.
 
Kev_ said:
It's all subjective. My opinion is that VW and Garrett have added that turbo to that engine because its designed to produce 102bhp and not 170bhp

It's kind of like choosing shoes. Clogs are perfect and look great at 2mph but if you want to get up to 6 or 7 you'll be wanting to upgrade the hardware to make it sustainable
Click to expand...
That is my opinion too.

The same goes for the rest of the induction, cooling, lube, fuel system and the transmission! So much to go pear shaped!

In my opinion, remapping can be great in that it is a cheap way of getting more out. It could work out fine but it’s a massive punt!

I know next to nothing on the ins and outs of T6’s but engines are my profession.

If people saw the damage that results from an injector hosing as a result of a fuel pump giving up, they’d never buy a remap.

There’s loads more to go wrong than the turbo and taking an engine out of an OEM’s spec is fine if you’re happy with the fact that you are taking the responsibility if things go bang!

If you’re looking to tune an engine for competition purposes, then you have a massive bank balance and are aware that there’s lots of things that need to be done in addition to chucking more air and fuel in!

In performance tuning, highly tuned engines still frequently go bang despite being rebuilt every 20 hours...... so why would you think of doing half of the retune job on a van and expecting it to be fine!

The company that sold me the remap said it would be fine..... but like my mate down the pub had a dead cert on “Shep”!

I hope this isn’t too blunt for this forum.
 
Samro said:
That is my opinion too.

The same goes for the rest of the induction, cooling, lube, fuel system and the transmission! So much to go pear shaped!

In my opinion, remapping can be great in that it is a cheap way of getting more out. It could work out fine but it’s a massive punt!

I know next to nothing on the ins and outs of T6’s but engines are my profession.

If people saw the damage that results from an injector hosing as a result of a fuel pump giving up, they’d never buy a remap.

There’s loads more to go wrong than the turbo and taking an engine out of an OEM’s spec is fine if you’re happy with the fact that you are taking the responsibility if things go bang!

If you’re looking to tune an engine for competition purposes, then you have a massive bank balance and are aware that there’s lots of things that need to be done in addition to chucking more air and fuel in!

In performance tuning, highly tuned engines go bang despite being rebuilt every 20 hours...... so why would you think of doing half of the retune job on a van and expecting it to be fine!

The company that sold me the remap said it would be fine..... but like my mate down the pub had a dead cert on “Shep”!

I hope this isn’t too blunt for this forum.
Click to expand...
Nope spot on in my eyes mate,
 
The majority of people that want a commercial remap are after more power for draggy times and traffic light grand prix. They understand the risks involved and fix it when it breaks.

The T6 world has lots of companies advertising remaps for underpowered engines without fully explaining the implications of what you're doing to people who arent from the performance world and may not be interested. They assume they're being sold an easy solution.

You only buy the bigger power engine if you know what you're looking for. I went 150 with no intention of mapping it because it's a solid engine that has enough power for a van and has been around for long enough to be trusted. The 204 twin turbo has it's issues or I would have gone there. After lots of tuning and breaking in the past the engine is one thing I don't want to touch. You should be more concerned with cutting the roof off
 
Kev_ said:
The majority of people that want a commercial remap are after more power for draggy times and traffic light grand prix. They understand the risks involved and fix it when it breaks.

The T6 world has lots of companies advertising remaps for underpowered engines without fully explaining the implications of what you're doing to people who arent from the performance world and may not be interested. They assume they're being sold an easy solution.

You only buy the bigger power engine if you know what you're looking for. I went 150 with no intention of mapping it because it's a solid engine that has enough power for a van and has been around for long enough to be trusted. The 204 twin turbo has it's issues or I would have gone there. After lots of tuning and breaking in the past the engine is one thing I don't want to touch. You should be more concerned with cutting the roof off
Click to expand...
Apart from egr pipe I don't know of any issues with the 204 engine.
 
And of course Revo and Quantum know nothing about turbos !?!? really ?!?!

(edited by me) :laugh: it reads a bit better now.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Bi turbo failure
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Crazymind
Crazymind
D
Dead turbo at 46k miles :-(
Replies
17
Views
1K
DXX
D
W
VW T6 204 Bi-Turbo - Engine replacement - £12k-17k What are my options?
Replies
10
Views
1K
Mark62
M
KiwiT6CFCA
Low oil pressure after Engine Recondition
Replies
16
Views
1K
peterramsden
P
Ashok2429
2018 204ps Turbo gone @96K -To be expected, early or just unlucky?
Replies
2
Views
1K
RunDSG
RunDSG
Back
Top