# US engine in Audi S3 and mk7 Golf R will NOT feature dual injection (mpi) as seen with the Euro model



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

This is very important information, but it's buried in two key threads. If you're not in those threads, perhaps you missed it. I want everyone to let their friends at Audi and VW know that you're unhappy. The enthusiasts are obviously a small minority of VAG's sales numbers. But still, we're important. And knowing Vortex/Fourtitude, and it's members, you/we know some of the "right" people to voice our complaints to.


This is completely ridiculous. Audi boasted that the new A3/S3 is uncompromised. But that's obviously not the case. 

Advantages of Multi Port Injection:
-provides a more even distribution of fuel improving efficiency and therefore fuel economy
-vehicle emissions are also decreased with a more thorough burn of all the fuel introduced
-no carbon build up
-more power (20+ HP loss for the S3 now, in the US)




[email protected] said:


> A dealer contact of ours (I won't reveal who) reached out to me today about this story. The US engine will NOT feature dual injection as seen with the Euro model. As a result, the EPA hasn't yet given finalized hp and consumption figures and thus their absence from that table. Also, he suggested the US-spec engine will be about 280 hp due to the differences.


I have direct contact with someone from VOA, who confirmed the mk7 Golf R will not have mpi.




add:

Arin from APR has confirmed the news as well. He is not as disappointed as we consumers are. I like Arin, but he obviously wins when all of us get excited to sell our cars and get a "new" golf R or the S3. So I'm not sure if his replies help diffuse my frustrations. At any rate, he has pointed out the following:

Can MPI be added?: "Yes, easily. : )"

Power: "The R has the CJX engine. This engine already has factory power ratings of 265, 280, 290, and 300. That's in PS, which is higher than US horsepower (IE, 300PS = 296 HP). It's the same engine, different outputs, purely from ECU calibrations from the factory. This is getting more and more common. Even the GTI in german has a low and high output version. Same identical engine, 10 HP more from the ECU. You're not fuel limited on these engines and all the important bits can be updated."

I asked about carbon build up. And his response was: "The new engine has the most sophisticated oil separation system we've seen to date. I'm not exactly worried about buildup."


----------



## v6er (Dec 18, 2000)

Very disappointed to say the least. Because of this I will NOT be purchasing an S3 this year, and instead will be waiting until Audi comes to their senses and gives us the motor we SHOULD have. I had to deal with carbon build up once in my Q5 - I do not want to have to worry about that on a brand spanking new 50K S3.

I'm anxious to hear what their reasoning is for not bringing the motor here.


----------



## .:Ru4dubn¿ (Mar 14, 2012)

I've registered my dissappointment with Audi.

Not much more we can do. As someone succinctly put in another thread, VW/Audi doesn't owe us anything; nor we them.

If you want, send them a similar note, but I will let my wallet do the real talking.


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

v6er said:


> I'm anxious to hear what their reasoning is for not bringing the motor here.


Arin is commenting on it on the Golf R fb group page, so I'll be back with more info asap.
updated the op above.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

RyanA3 said:


> This is very important information, but it's buried in two key threads. If you're not in those threads, perhaps you missed it. I want everyone to let their friends at Audi and VW know that you're unhappy. The enthusiasts are obviously a small minority of VAG's sales numbers. But still, we're important. And knowing Vortex/Fourtitude, and it's members, you/we know some of the "right" people to voice our complaints to.
> 
> 
> This is completely ridiculous. Audi boasted that the new A3/S3 is uncompromised. But that's obviously not the case.
> ...


This is a bit presumptuous, is it not? 

For the first one, isn't VW's use of the technology too new to know for sure? A catch can is also supposed to alleviate the issue, but it doesn't.

On the second point, it's unlikely that we'll have a sound control subject by which we can form our conclusions. North American VWs and Audis have historically been down on power (on paper, at least) from European counterparts. It's unlikely that we'll see the non-MPI motor in a European application, so we'd not have a good unit for comparison of actual power degradation resulting solely from the omission of MPI. This alleged 20HP loss should be attributable to more than simply the omission of MPI. 

I'll give you the first two as those are both "talking points" of the benefits of MPI.

The more I think about it, the less I care. I know what others are attempting to convey when they say they've "cooled" on this car. I can relate, though not to the degree of some others. I'm so tired of getting worked up or excited over this car that I just about don't care anymore. They're going to have to really screw this thing up to move me to get angered or annoyed. And as nice as MPI would be to have, it's not that thing which will push me over the edge. If they put the "BPY v2" motor from the MkVI Golf R in this car, that'll do it. But to just exclude MPI from the "otherwise-the-same" European S3 motor? I'm having a hard time getting bothered. I really believe that there are compelling reasons other than "because we want to smite our US buyers" for the omission. If any single one of the reasons for omission points toward being in favor of reliability, I support their decision. I highly doubt that this car is going to go from 4.7s-4.9s (I've seen both mentioned) to 60mph up to something asinine like 5.5s to 60mph as a result of this change. While I don't live my life in "to-60" increments, I think it's fair to say that a change of more than a tenth of a second or two for the US car is fundamentally changing the car. 

*This* came in though Google Alerts earlier today. It's a bit odd to me, but it does show US-spec headlamps and a US license plate mount, with Florida registration, in the photos. Perhaps we're getting closer to some impressions of US spec cars? Sure as hell hope so. That's the biggest wildcard for me right now- the driving impressions of the car we'll actually get.


----------



## v6er (Dec 18, 2000)

.:Ru4dubn¿ said:


> I've registered my dissappointment with Audi.
> 
> Not much more we can do. As someone succinctly put in another thread, VW/Audi doesn't owe us anything; nor we them.
> 
> If you want, send them a similar note, but I will let my wallet do the real talking.


I will definitely do so. And for those who think they don't 'listen' - when my Q5 was hit with the carbon build up issue - I complained to Audi USA who in turn responded with an extended power train warranty, and complimentary Audi Care.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

... aaand, with your update in the first post with Arin's insight, I stand by my opinions even more.

I'm intrigued about the "adding MPI is easy" part. I know there were a couple guys way back in the BPY days who worked to add what was essentially MPI to that motor. I'm sure it was half-baked, and I don't play with fuel- especially in that manner- but I was fascinated by their desire to "fix" the issue... as well as the requisite growth of stones required to willingly try that.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

v6er said:


> I will definitely do so. And for those who think they don't 'listen' - when my Q5 was hit with the carbon build up issue - I complained to Audi USA who in turn responded with an extended power train warranty, and complimentary Audi Care.


Let's keep it in perspective, though. I'm sure you weren't the first one they'd heard from.


----------



## v6er (Dec 18, 2000)

Dan Halen said:


> Let's keep it in perspective, though. I'm sure you weren't the first one they'd heard from.


Definitely was not the first - a loud squeaky wheel definitely helps


----------



## v6er (Dec 18, 2000)

> I asked about carbon build up. And his response was: "The new engine has the most sophisticated oil separation system we've seen to date. I'm not exactly worried about buildup."


There will be no way to tell if that will help with Carbon build up except by waiting and seeing. If there are no reported carbon issues on the new motor in the next 2 years - then I would be confident in their changes and would be happy to change my mind and get myself into an S3 

Those saying that build up is not a huge deal - I don't know about you, but I'd prefer to not have to take my motor apart every few years to have it cleaned. At the very least I hope the engineers at audi have designed the motor in a way so that if carbon cleaning is required - the motor won't need to be pull out of the vehicle completely, like on the 3.2's in the Q5.


----------



## Dennis M (Jan 26, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> ... aaand, with your update in the first post with Arin's insight, I stand by my opinions even more.
> 
> I'm intrigued about the "adding MPI is easy" part. I know there were a couple guys way back in the BPY days who worked to add what was essentially MPI to that motor. I'm sure it was half-baked, and I don't play with fuel- especially in that manner- but I was fascinated by their desire to "fix" the issue... as well as the requisite growth of stones required to willingly try that.


Of course, if you monkey around with anything like that you have a good chance of interfering with the Powertrain warranty. A 3.2 Q5 owner at audiworld was not able to get carbon build-up covered under warranty because he had installed an oil catch can.

Are the existing 2.0T's even still prone to carbon build up like they were a few years ago?

-Dennis


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Dennis M said:


> Of course, if you monkey around with anything like that you have a good chance of interfering with the Powertrain warranty. A 3.2 Q5 owner at audiworld was not able to get carbon build-up covered under warranty because he had installed an oil catch can.
> 
> Are the existing 2.0T's even still prone to carbon build up like they were a few years ago?
> 
> -Dennis


Yep. I installed one in my car in conjunction with the carbon buildup cleaning I performed a couple years ago. I know it doesn't help the buildup issue much (if at all), but I also know it's catching some crap that would otherwise go back into my motor, so... maybe it's at least somewhat worthwhile for something. :laugh:

I don't intend to mess with the motor in my S3 until it's outside of warranty, so it's not a big concern for me. My GLI made it to nearly 65,000 miles before I did the carbon removal, and it wasn't awful. If they've done _anything_​ to minimize the buildup occurrence since the BPY days, I'm confident I won't have anything to worry about.

I'm uncertain about the newer EA888 motors and their propensity to host carbon colonies.


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

Dan Halen said:


> This alleged 20HP loss should be attributable to more than simply the omission of MPI.


George is the one who said the power drop to 280 is a result of the missing MPI in the States. His contact, who is a US dealer, "suggested the US-spec engine will be about 280 hp due to the differences". 

I realize you're very excited about the S3 and wish this "bad news" wasn't true, I'm in the same boat. 

I believe the US will get the 280hp version of the motor. Arin did mention 265, 280, 290, and 300 were all possible from the factory. So a tune will bring us to 300 or +, no problem. It's just disappointing, they have the ability to give us a special motor, more power, carbon addressed, more mpgs. But they'll leave that version of the motor in EUR.


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

Dan Halen said:


> ... aaand, with your update in the first post with Arin's insight, I stand by my opinions even more.
> 
> I'm intrigued about the "adding MPI is easy" part. I know there were a couple guys way back in the BPY days who worked to add what was essentially MPI to that motor. I'm sure it was half-baked, and I don't play with fuel- especially in that manner- but I was fascinated by their desire to "fix" the issue... as well as the requisite growth of stones required to willingly try that.


I hear ya. I tune. But I don't see myself having someone add MPI to my car, before warranty time is up. & I usually don't own cars that long.


----------



## davewg (Jul 30, 2001)

Dan Halen said:


> This is a bit presumptuous, is it not?
> 
> For the first one, isn't VW's use of the technology too new to know for sure? A catch can is also supposed to alleviate the issue, but it doesn't.
> 
> ...


Well, Brian, I'll go out and join you on the limb. Originally, I thought, no MPI, no sale. I've started to back-pedal on this in my head even though I too tend to be a "wait for the latest/greatest type."

I sort of forced the issue with our recent Durango purchase by delaying long enough to ensure that we'd have to order a 2014, rather than search for a leftover 2013 that didn't 100% meet our needs. It was definitely worth the wait, and way better than my wife's first among equals choice the the Acadia. I digress, but...

...the point is, I still believe the A3/S3 (and the Golf GTI/R) will be a stellar auto regardless of whether it's 100% the exact, damn same as the Euro version. It'll be MQB, and assuming its EA888 and all the other stuff we assume it will be, I could, pending a sit in/long test drive, safely purchase and not look back for a long time. We've all been buying VAG products not exactly the same as the Euro version for years and all been (mostly) thrilled with the product.

I do take one issue with your statement, though I wonder if you mis-stated your thought. You said, _"While I don't live my life in "to-60" increments, I think it's fair to say that a change of more than a tenth of a second or two for the US car is fundamentally changing the car."_ I find it hard to imagine that a difference between 4.7 and 4.9 would break it for you. A change to 5.5 seconds, well, maybe that I could see. Did you mean to say "...*isn't* fundamentally changing the car?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

davewg said:


> I do take one issue with your statement, though I wonder if you mis-stated your thought. You said, _"While I don't live my life in "to-60" increments, I think it's fair to say that a change of more than a tenth of a second or two for the US car is fundamentally changing the car."_ I find it hard to imagine that a difference between 4.7 and 4.9 would break it for you. A change to 5.5 seconds, well, maybe that I could see. Did you mean to say "...*isn't* fundamentally changing the car?


I'm a bit sluggish today, but after re-reading it a few more times, I still think I wrote it properly. :laugh:

... but yes, regardless of what I may or may not have clearly conveyed, your interpretation of my point is precisely the point I was trying to make. :thumbup:


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

I have the current Golf R. It's obviously 2.0TFSI.
I love the car. But i def would have ordered a sweet S3, later this year, or the Golf R (leaning Audi).
this news is just weird to me. there is better technology out there. give it to US.
since I don't NEED to get a new car, I'll just wait. 

I think I speak for most enthusiasts...

Sure, the new A3/S3 platform looks very nice.
It will prolly hurt A4/S4 sales. And possibly TT/TTS.
It's appealing, easily tuneable to 330hp or so, not horrible mpg...
Perfect size. The right tech. 
but with this simple engine b.s.
*it's no longer a slam dunk *


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

davewg said:


> Well, Brian, I'll go out and join you on the limb. Originally, I thought, no MPI, no sale. I've started to back-pedal on this in my head even though I too tend to be a "wait for the latest/greatest type."


I'm kind of with you. However the difference is when learning about the car, in the excitement of some of these new features, I thought YES! I'll pay upwards of 40k for that. Now I am finding out later, that some of these features will not be available. I am now finding myself asking the question - am I willing to pay upwards of 40k for a car that no longer has some of the features that got me excited about it in the first place? I don't know that I am. They HAD me as a sure sale. Now I'm 50% or less. 

Before the latest round of informational disappointments rose up I was very eager for it to release. Now... I'm left managing my expectations. I'm sure it will still be either a really good/great car. I'm sure it will still be rather quick. I might have moved on before I find out for myself. 

I'm increasingly thinking about getting into something at a lower price range that is more fun (and probably not german) than my mk6 gti and drive that for a year or 2 and see what happens with the S3.


----------



## VR6 NRG (Apr 23, 1999)

i dont understand why this is such a big deal for people to either buy or not buy a car. 99% of consumers will have zero clue what MPI is nor will they care. If its not offered in the US it is for a good reason from VW and Audi and i dont see why that has to be questioned.

I also believe that if a person keeps waiting for the "next" thing then they'll have spent a lot of time just waiting and never getting anything. will the MPI change how the car drives? probably not at all if the HP and TQ are the same. I dont keep my cars (lately) past a year of ownership so i'm in the small percentage who dont care about how it'll be at 50k+ miles, 

but i dont see why some of you all are so dead set on hating the A3/S3 or MK7 because it doesnt have this technology. if they had it then took it away then i could understand, but it boils down to tech we havent had nor driven so what's the big deal?

aka ProjectA3


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

What's up Brian. Been a while.
I understand you sell Audis... and you have an A3 on order. So I'm not surprised you're ok with this.
But if you read the incredible reviews about the car that the US will get, it talks about the port injection. 
It talks about 34mpg combined.
And it talks about 300hp.
All of that got wacked.

99% doesn't include anyone on vortex. 

I'm on the fence. I do love the S3, it's so perfect for me. So we'll see. 
Cheers.


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

Actually, since we're being real. VR6 NRG, I'm really surprised you ordered an (msrp $45k) A3, and are not waiting to order an S3.
Shocked.
What is your reasoning?
I know you...
For someone who gets a new car every year or so, or when you just fall in love with something special.... It just doesn't make sense to me.

Cheers


----------



## v6er (Dec 18, 2000)

The folks over at jalopnik are trying to get more solid info out of audi:

http://jalopnik.com/will-the-2015-audi-s3-and-volkswagen-golf-r-lose-power-1529975612


----------



## FractureCritical (Nov 24, 2009)

VR6 NRG said:


> i dont understand why this is such a big deal for people to either buy or not buy a car. 99% of consumers will have zero clue what MPI is nor will they care. If its not offered in the US it is for a good reason from VW and Audi and i dont see why that has to be questioned.
> 
> I also believe that if a person keeps waiting for the "next" thing then they'll have spent a lot of time just waiting and never getting anything. will the MPI change how the car drives? probably not at all if the HP and TQ are the same. I dont keep my cars (lately) past a year of ownership so i'm in the small percentage who dont care about how it'll be at 50k+ miles,
> 
> ...


problem is that no one wants to fork out $400-$1200 to have the carbon scraped off of their valves becuase Audi couldn't be bothered to install an already-done fix for a known problem they know they've had for about the past decade or so. Taglines for the new A3 ads should read like this:

"Audi: giving you obsoleted technology and charging you a premium for it."

bascially, VAG finally got around to treating us like China. Maybe next they'll sell us a brandy-new VW Fox!


----------



## DaLeadBull (Feb 15, 2011)

I understand that people tend to overreact when news like this comes out and I'm guilty of it too sometimes I guess. But its more of a principle issue for me, why are we not getting the same engine that everyone else apparently is? I'm sorry but cost-cutting is not a valid excuse especially when your competitors don't seem to do the same. 

It's like dangling the best version of a car in front of us and let all the US journalist drive that and hype us up even more. Then, turn around and offer us something less than what we've been shown with some BS line like "this could be available at a later date" which is basically them giving us hope so they don't lose our sale.

I as a customer don't like playing these games. The only reason I'm not pissed is because I was not planning on getting the S3 or Golf R (I'm waiting to see if the RS3 or Golf RS show up). Although who's to say Audi or VW won't gimp those models as well.


----------



## jrwamp (Mar 25, 2011)

v6er said:


> The folks over at jalopnik are trying to get more solid info out of audi:
> 
> http://jalopnik.com/will-the-2015-audi-s3-and-volkswagen-golf-r-lose-power-1529975612



The article was just updated with this:

"Updated: I just talked to a spokesman from VW, and he also said the specs on the U.S. Golf R are not final, but that the car will have at least 290 horsepower here. No word yet on the dual injection system, which he said is primarily done for EU emissions reasons. P

He also claims the company has received no reports of carbon buildup on unmodified engines. A ton of owners say otherwise, though. (He later clarified to say he was specifically referring to reports of carbon buildup in Volkswagen's four-cylinder turbo direct injection engines.) "


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

VR6 NRG said:


> i dont understand why this is such a big deal for people to either buy or not buy a car. 99% of consumers will have zero clue what MPI is nor will they care. If its not offered in the US it is for a good reason from VW and Audi and i dont see why that has to be questioned.
> 
> I also believe that if a person keeps waiting for the "next" thing then they'll have spent a lot of time just waiting and never getting anything. will the MPI change how the car drives? probably not at all if the HP and TQ are the same. I dont keep my cars (lately) past a year of ownership so i'm in the small percentage who dont care about how it'll be at 50k+ miles,
> 
> ...


It boils down to getting "hooked" by marketing. Then, on the cusp of delivereth, many of the touted "hooks" really aren't there. It's essentially false advertising, but isn't. Technically I guess it's on us for not thinking Audi would not bring the same thing to the US as what europe gets. I'm obviously a huge vw/audi fan. Which is why it kind of pains me more. "One" thing missing doesnt break the camels back. It's several things in combination, the compromises, that breaks it. I'm not 100% out yet. I'm just dissappointed.



jrwamp said:


> The article was just updated with this:
> 
> "Updated: I just talked to a spokesman from VW, and he also said the specs on the U.S. Golf R are not final, but that the car will have at least 290 horsepower here. No word yet on the dual injection system, which he said is primarily done for EU emissions reasons. P
> 
> He also claims the company has received no reports of carbon buildup on unmodified engines. A ton of owners say otherwise, though. (He later clarified to say he was specifically referring to reports of carbon buildup in Volkswagen's four-cylinder turbo direct injection engines.) "


Probably because it doesn't become an issue until the cars are out of warranty. Who takes their car to the dealership if it's not for warranty work? It's real, and it sucks. I was very excited about not having to worry about carbon build up on the S3.


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

jrwamp said:


> The article was just updated with this:
> 
> "Updated: I just talked to a spokesman from VW, and he also said the specs on the U.S. Golf R are not final, but that the car will have at least 290 horsepower here. No word yet on the dual injection system, which he said is primarily done for EU emissions reasons.


Dont put too much water into what you read from Patrick on Jalopnik, I had to basically stick his nose right in the S3 pricing document, and then he wasnt even aware of the newly leaked Audi A3 Sales material. He has been last to the party on a lot of things related to MQB.


----------



## cyberpmg (Nov 27, 2001)

I'll take this news with a grain of salt. I still have an interest in the S3. I learned from my mistake when getting the first release of a B6 A4 to now wait a year or two to see what early issues get flushed out.

I would like to know why Audi AG (or AoA) decided to pull the MPI technology from the model lineup (and in other cars like the Mk 3 TT). Why promote it and then not offer it in a large market like North America? If it's true that MPI can improve fuel efficiency and lower emissions, there are many eco-conscious people who would want it.

I can understand a delay in releasing important technology due to ensuring high quality or some other reason (resource availability, manufacture production run schedules, federal testing, etc.), but not if it's something that would be of benefit to all drivers. Maybe Audi found something they need to correct and test before making it available to the US market?

If it comes down to bean counters trying to find ways to cut costs to keep the price point down, they should look at cutting accessories and not core technologies.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

RyanA3 said:


> George is the one who said the power drop to 280 is a result of the missing MPI in the States. His contact, who is a US dealer, "suggested the US-spec engine will be about 280 hp due to the differences".
> 
> I realize you're very excited about the S3 and wish this "bad news" wasn't true, I'm in the same boat.
> 
> I believe the US will get the 280hp version of the motor. Arin did mention 265, 280, 290, and 300 were all possible from the factory. So a tune will bring us to 300 or +, no problem. It's just disappointing, they have the ability to give us a special motor, more power, carbon addressed, more mpgs. But they'll leave that version of the motor in EUR.


George is mistaken. The US-hp drop is the ersult of tuning for lower octane gas (91) and 'generally warmer environment'. MPI is for emissions and valve-washing.


----------



## RyanA3 (May 11, 2005)

Waterfan said:


> George is mistaken. The US-hp drop is the ersult of tuning for lower octane gas (91) and 'generally warmer environment'. MPI is for emissions and valve-washing.


right. it's just the typical HP squeeze.
not sure why ALL of the press was promoting that the US will get 296/300hp.


----------



## 02GOLFGTI1.8T (Feb 13, 2002)

Can someone confirm whether the regular 2.0T in the A3 has dual injection? I could have sworn that the 2014 A4 has it.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

02GOLFGTI1.8T said:


> Can someone confirm whether the regular 2.0T in the A3 has dual injection? I could have sworn that the 2014 A4 has it.


I figure the only safe thing to say with certainty is that the 2.0T A3 is even more unlikely to have it than the S3. I know that doesn't give you the answer you're looking for, so I'd just offer this: form an opinion on the level of validity you see in the information here regarding the S3, and then get a bit more pessimistic and you have your answer for the A3.


----------



## 02GOLFGTI1.8T (Feb 13, 2002)

Ok but do a4/q5... Have it?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## DaLeadBull (Feb 15, 2011)

RyanA3 said:


> right. it's just the typical HP squeeze.
> not sure why ALL of the press was promoting that the US will get 296/300hp.


Well, my understanding is that this typical hp downgrade was when they said the US would get 290 hp compared to 300 ps or 296 hp in ROW which is right in line with what they've done in the past. 

The 280 hp number is even lower than that tho, that's almost a 20 hp difference. The difference is usually around 10.


----------



## 02GOLFGTI1.8T (Feb 13, 2002)

here is my theory regarding dual port injection. It is available on the longitudinal platforms. Not available for transverse platforms for the following reasons: MKVII is not ready (mexico is not ready), so instead of federalizing 2 engines, they rather save the dough until every transverse platform is ready to move to dual port.

thoughts?


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

No, the current 2.0 TFSI on the A4/A5/Q5 does not have dual injection.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

02GOLFGTI1.8T said:


> here is my theory regarding dual port injection. It is available on the longitudinal platforms. Not available for transverse platforms for the following reasons: MKVII is not ready (mexico is not ready), so instead of federalizing 2 engines, they rather save the dough until every transverse platform is ready to move to dual port.
> 
> thoughts?


... but the European A3 currently gets MPI, doesn't it? Isn't that what this whole uproar is about, at least?


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> ... but the European A3 currently gets MPI, doesn't it? Isn't that what this whole uproar is about, at least?


The shocking thing is that Audi, for whatever reason, felt that MPI is necessary on the EDM (even 1.8) cars but not USDM.

Now, the current generation non-MPI USDM 2.0 TFSI engines have all but eliminated the old carbon buildup issues due to changes in the PCV+EGR+oil circulation systems. If this were sufficient to solve that issue, then why include MPI on the next iteration, even on the EDM engines?


----------



## The DarkSide (Aug 4, 2000)

ChrisFu said:


> The shocking thing is that Audi, for whatever reason, felt that MPI is necessary on the EDM (even 1.8) cars but not USDM.
> 
> *Now, the current generation non-MPI USDM 2.0 TFSI engines have all but eliminated the old carbon buildup issues due to changes in the PCV+EGR+oil circulation systems*. If this were sufficient to solve that issue, then why include MPI on the next iteration, even on the EDM engines?


What year is considered "current generation" ?


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

02GOLFGTI1.8T said:


> here is my theory regarding dual port injection. It is available on the longitudinal platforms. Not available for transverse platforms for the following reasons: MKVII is not ready (mexico is not ready), so instead of federalizing 2 engines, they rather save the dough until every transverse platform is ready to move to dual port.
> 
> thoughts?


They already have to federalize 2 engines: the 220hp 2.0T (GTI and A3 Quattro) and the 280-300hp 2.0T (S3 and Golf R). All of the 280-300 engines (and cars) for North America are being made in Europe for now (S3 from Hungary, Golf R from Germany).

At this point only the GTI engine is being made in North America (Silao, MX).

Decent theory, but I don't think reducing federalizations costs is the limiting factor. I believe US emissions standards are simply not punative enough to customers to warrant the addition of an expensive(?)/complex(?) fueling subsystem. If there were significant tax savings for lower emissions, it would be worth it. But US is pretty friendly/cheap in this regard, at least compared to EU.

And unfortunately, by my logic, we will NEVER see MPI on these cars. (and stealerships will be able to charge an additional 400-800 over the life of ownership for carbon cleanings)


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

The DarkSide said:


> What year is considered "current generation" ?


From Arin at APR:



> There are a lot of EA888 Engines.
> 
> Gen 1 Trans Version 1 - Bosch HPFP (US A3 platform vehicles)
> Gen 1 Trans Version 2 - Hitachi HPFP (ROW A3 Platform Vehicles)
> ...


CPMA - 210 HP A4, A5 & Q5
CPMB - 220 HP A4, A5 & Q5

Gen 2 long Version 2 (CPMB) is the facelift B8.5 cars, I believe. Seems the 5th injector may help with things perhaps.


Something else I just rediscovered....note below, this is "our" EA888 gen3 A3 engine. No MPI. Kinda funny I missed this from so long ago. Hooray!:facepalm:










And this is the ROW version


----------



## dmorrow (Jun 9, 2000)

ChrisFu said:


> The shocking thing is that Audi, for whatever reason, felt that MPI is necessary on the EDM (even 1.8) cars but not USDM.
> 
> Now, the current generation non-MPI USDM 2.0 TFSI engines have all but eliminated the old carbon buildup issues due to changes in the PCV+EGR+oil circulation systems. If this were sufficient to solve that issue, then why include MPI on the next iteration, even on the EDM engines?


I thought it was for emission and fuel economy reasons. If so makes sense that they get it in Europe since they care more about fuel economy because of the price of fuel.


----------



## 02GOLFGTI1.8T (Feb 13, 2002)

Thx very informative

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

ChrisFu said:


> From Arin at APR:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So... remove non-MPI intake manifold, install MPI intake manifold? Surely there's more to it than that.

Our motors will be Gen III, right? So... no MAF. Interesting.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

I want so badly to find the SSPs for the S3, specifically the drivetrain.


----------



## qtroCUB (Mar 22, 2005)

Dan Halen said:


> So... remove non-MPI intake manifold, install MPI intake manifold? Surely there's more to it than that.
> 
> Our motors will be Gen III, right? So... no MAF. Interesting.


Doesn't look all that different of a manifold... From the Detroit GTI. 

Thread


----------



## Bamm1 (Oct 17, 2013)

ChrisFu said:


> From Arin at APR:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Great Find!!!!

It also added more disappointing news to go along with the absence of MPI. It appears the US version has a regular thermostat instead of the thermo-management rotary valve. So the following items from the press release don't apply here either:

- With the 2.0 TFSI's innovative thermal management system, two rotary slide valves consolidated in a single module regulate the flow of coolant. They ensure that after ignition the engine oil quickly reaches operating temperature. This way they always achieve the best relationship between minimal friction and high thermodynamic efficiency.

Audi/VW not "all in" for the US market again.......more cutting edge engine tech missing......


----------



## John Y (Apr 27, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> ... but the European A3 currently gets MPI, doesn't it? Isn't that what this whole uproar is about, at least?


The 1.8TFSI does, and valvelift too; remember there's no 2.0T offered here yet below the S3.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

John Y said:


> The 1.8TFSI does, and valvelift too; remember there's no 2.0T offered here yet below the S3.


:thumbup:

I think we still believe we will get valvelift as well. If they gimp that from the motor, even I will be disappointed as that's been on prior US Audi motors.


----------



## John Y (Apr 27, 1999)

Dan Halen said:


> :thumbup:
> 
> I think we still believe we will get valvelift as well. If they gimp that from the motor, even I will be disappointed as that's been on prior US Audi motors.


Oh yes, without a doubt the US cars will feature Valvelift - without it, it just ain't the same engine in many ways, including performance. I only mentioned it in this context because before I drove/read up on the new 1.8TFSI, I wasn't consciously aware that it had Valvelift too - but the super broad torque band it has makes it pretty apparent in practice, too.


----------



## jsausley (Dec 2, 2011)

John Y said:


> Oh yes, without a doubt the US cars will feature Valvelift - without it, it just ain't the same engine in many ways, including performance. I only mentioned it in this context because before I drove/read up on the new 1.8TFSI, I wasn't consciously aware that it had Valvelift too - but the super broad torque band it has makes it pretty apparent in practice, too.


From Audi dealer booklet:

"2.0L TFSI engine shown. The 1.8L TFSI does not have continuously adjustable exhaust camshaft timing."

So, Valvelift for 2.0L but not the 1.8L.


----------



## Jatmobil (Mar 11, 2002)

qtroCUB said:


> Doesn't look all that different of a manifold... From the Detroit GTI.
> 
> Thread


Yea! I don't see the MPI fuel rail, which would be right on top, running along the intake manifold, with an injector in each of the intake port areas!!!:banghead:


----------



## ProjectA3 (Aug 12, 2005)

RyanA3 said:


> Actually, since we're being real. VR6 NRG, I'm really surprised you ordered an (msrp $45k) A3, and are not waiting to order an S3.
> Shocked.
> What is your reasoning?
> I know you...
> ...


hey man, how's it been

Like last time, i wanted to be on the front edge of the new A3 and to work some magic like was done before. plans are already in the works. plus with Audi employee leases, i can keep the car for 12 months at a good price, and decide after that if i want something else (normal +/- situations apply to car value etc..) i also figured i would wait to see what else Audi would release S3 options next year, or if the TT or maybe even e-tron would be a cool switch.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

Dan Halen said:


> So... remove non-MPI intake manifold, install MPI intake manifold? Surely there's more to it than that.


yes a lot more:
injectors
fuel rail
separate or different fuel pump
replace/retrofit wiring harness
new ecu or at least different software
additional sensors?


----------



## .:Ru4dubn¿ (Mar 14, 2012)

Waterfan said:


> yes a lot more:
> injectors
> fuel rail
> separate or different fuel pump
> ...


Thx, good info. This is still mind-boggling to me that its somehow _LESS_ trouble/expense to replace all of this stuff than to have it certified. We need to mount some beaurocrat heads on pikes.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

I did injectors and rails on my GLI.

#aintskeered

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------

