# 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

Graph shows response when stomping gas pedal during a cruise. 60 to 120 km/h time in 4th gear drops from 6.8 seconds to 5.4 seconds. 2.0T FSI weighs 15 pounds more but engine is more efficient in part by the 10.5 CR. Engine consumes 2 % to 7% less gas for the same torque output.


----------



## SpDsTeR (Jul 2, 2003)

Is this the motor in the mark 5 gti?


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: (TrB0GTi)*

YES







Bob.G


----------



## 01 Wolfsburg (May 7, 2003)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*

Yeah but left up to VW it probably won't be here till 2019.


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 5, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*

Faster spooling and more of it ... nice!


----------



## Binary Star (Mar 27, 2001)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI ([email protected])*

are they still using the allmighty K03s?


----------



## Super1.8T (Apr 17, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*

10.5 CR? How far are they going to go?! And I thought the 1.8T's CR was high for a turbo car. I wonder how much the CR is going to limit tweaking, being more on the edge of detonation all the time?


----------



## JettaRed (Aug 14, 2000)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (Super1.8T)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Super1.8T* »_10.5 CR? How far are they going to go?! And I thought the 1.8T's CR was high for a turbo car. I wonder how much the CR is going to limit tweaking, being more on the edge of detonation all the time?

Yeah, you're not going to be pushing 20 psi on that ratio unless the new 2.0 is really a 1.9 TDI.


----------



## lawrencetaylor50 (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (JettaRed)*

how hard is going to be for companies like revo, apr, giac to chiptune this thing, it is direct injection i would think that would complicate things? Does anyone know the turbo?


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (JettaDude101)*









DV is electrically operated and attached directly to compressor stator, so no more DV diaphragm rupture BS or hose leak!


----------



## FrankiEBoneZ (Jun 4, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*

I would hope it would respond better... THE MOTOR IS .2L LARGER!!!!


----------



## G-Shock (Jun 14, 2002)

*Re: (TrB0GTi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TrB0GTi* »_Is this the motor in the mark 5 gti?

I wonder if the engine will fit in the MKIV? Now that be cool


----------



## Binary Star (Mar 27, 2001)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (JettaDude101)*


_Quote, originally posted by *JettaDude101* »_are they still using the allmighty K03s?

anybody know the answer to this?


----------



## GTINeon (Nov 11, 2003)

Compression can be much higher on a direct injection engine since the ECU can detect pre-ignition part way through the process and make adjustments.
The direct injection V6 in the Audis runs a compression ratio of 12:1 without a turbo and they recommend only 87 octane fuel.
I can't wait to see what the come up with once they have more experience with direct injection.


----------



## Mile High Assassin (Aug 28, 2002)

*Re: (G-Shock)*


_Quote, originally posted by *G-Shock* »_
I wonder if the engine will fit in the MKIV? Now that be cool








]
Why?
To put it in the heaviest car yet? That has a rear axle instead of independent?


----------



## barelyboosting1.8t (Nov 18, 2002)

*Re: (Mile High Assassin)*

Wow, looks like a great motor to mod.







http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif At least the 1.8t's will go down in price a little.







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

_Modified by barelyboosting1.8t at 8:42 AM 5-29-2004_


_Modified by barelyboosting1.8t at 8:43 AM 5-29-2004_


----------



## nerdhotrod (Sep 23, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (01 Wolfsburg)*


_Quote, originally posted by *01 Wolfsburg* »_Yeah but left up to VW it probably won't be here till 2019.









I just saw the cut away of this motor in Germany last week......who knows when it will realy be avalible. BTW mk5's are everywhere here!
ÜÖÄ


----------



## Super1.8T (Apr 17, 2002)

*Re: (GTINeon)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GTINeon* »_Compression can be much higher on a direct injection engine since the ECU can detect pre-ignition part way through the process and make adjustments.
The direct injection V6 in the Audis runs a compression ratio of 12:1 without a turbo and they recommend only 87 octane fuel.
I can't wait to see what the come up with once they have more experience with direct injection.

Wowzers!


----------



## Black Magic VW (Dec 12, 2003)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (JettaDude101)*


_Quote, originally posted by *JettaDude101* »_are they still using the allmighty K03s?


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: (G-Shock)*


_Quote, originally posted by *G-Shock* »_
I wonder if the engine will fit in the MKIV? Now that be cool


















Same block size including bore spacing with fitments both for longitudinal and transverse applications, so let the modding begin










_Quote, originally posted by *01 Wolfsburg* »_Yeah but left up to VW it probably won't be here till 2019.









Engine will be available on European A3s any day now (this is not the same as APR 2-weeks) followed quickly by A4. Engine meets both EU-4 and EPA ULEV-2 as well as upcoming advanced OBD diagnostics. So USA bound VWs should see it sometime before 2020










_Quote, originally posted by *GTINeon* »_The direct injection V6 in the Audis runs a compression ratio of 12:1 without a turbo and they recommend only 87 octane fuel.

200 hp rating is with super-premium (93 AKI) gas but engine is certified to run on 87 AKI regular (no hp number given when running regular).



_Modified by john s at 8:42 AM 5-29-2004_


----------



## turbo02gti (Feb 5, 2002)

*Re: (john s)*

Glad to see they are keeping the almighty Coilpacks


----------



## roly (Feb 2, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*

can't wait to get a 2.0 5v!!!


----------



## Junk T.I. (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (roly)*


_Quote, originally posted by *roly* »_can't wait to get a 2.0 5v!!!
















ummmmm its not a 5v anymore


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

I wonder how modable this new motor is if mechanisms are more electronically involved?


----------



## Junk T.I. (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: (Don R)*

looks scary


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: (turbo02gti)*


_Quote, originally posted by *turbo02gti* »_Glad to see they are keeping the almighty Coilpacks









Also still using that wonderful timing belt for valve smacking around 60K, diff is only 4 valves per cylinder get bent and drive pulley is no long made round. V6 gets timing chain and V10 gets timing gears, guess I4 owners are expected to take better care of maintenance,


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

*Re: (john s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *john s* »_










Now why would they make the crank pulley torispherical?...


----------



## roly (Feb 2, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (Junk T.I.)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Junk T.I.* »_
ummmmm its not a 5v anymore

ummmmm, my present 1.8T 20v is and when it goes 2.0.....


----------



## Wolk's Wagon (Sep 27, 2000)

*Re: (Don R)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Don R* »_
Now why would they make the crank pulley torispherical?...










Reminds me of the old Shimano Bio-Pace chainrings of circa 1987 MTB days.


----------



## GRB (Aug 24, 2003)

*Re: (Mile High Assassin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mile High Assassin* »_]
Why?
To put it in the heaviest car yet? That has a rear axle instead of independent?









Actually the MK 5 is going to weigh more than the current MK 4's.


----------



## WindnWar (Jan 25, 2002)

*Re: (Wolk's Wagon)*

I remember those Shimano bio pace gears, they sucked majorly. Glad that fad didn't last long.


----------



## M this 1! (May 17, 2000)

*Re: (UncannySkill)*

i think he's saying it's heavier. i don't understand the rear axle thing thought. it is independant though, and that is a very, very good thing. i doubt it's a ko3. if anything, it's a ko4 due to pushing more displacement and increased reliability of the unit. lets pray it's k16 or something with a similar bolt pattern as what porche gets.
VW/Audi has already tweaked to 280hp themselves, so it's obviously tunable. the S3 has been in a holding pattern of whether it's getting the 3.2 VR6 or 2.0t with 280hp. 


_Modified by M this 1! at 11:53 AM 5-29-2004_


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (Wolk's Wagon)*


_Quote »_Reminds me of the old Shimano Bio-Pace chainrings of circa 1987 MTB days

THey had those much later then 87 too.. man talk about messing up peoples knees with those things...

THe manifold/turbo combo looks to resemble how they do it on the SRt4, one piece manifold turbo DV and wastegate... expensive to replace and when you upgrade it all must go, which is gonna make upgrading interesting.. the real kicker for upgrade is gonna be the injectors, no more tossing in some green tops off ebay.
still I plan to get one the day they come out.


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: (chris86vw)*









Exhaust manifold is very sweet, flows 30% more than 180hp 1.8T. Notice the separation rib to keep cylinders 2 & 3 from interfering with 1 & 4. With 4-cylinder turbos it’s very easy to get backflow at high loads that both reduce power and causes misfire. Twin scroll turbines can prevent this but the additional surface area and material slows warm up causing higher cold start emissions. New manifold gives much the same benefit as twin scroll, but with faster warm-up. Notice also the nice clamping arrangement so that aluminum head temperature cycling doesn’t strain gray iron exhaust manifold.


----------



## VolksDude (Jun 9, 1999)

That's awesome info!!


----------



## M this 1! (May 17, 2000)

*Re: (VolksDude)*

yep, Biopace was out '87-88. In '89 Biopace II came out. all was gone by '90, when the first under the bar, double push XT came out. it didn't actually hurt people's knees but sure gave the crappiest spin ever!


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Steady-state power & torque*


----------



## phiphi (May 30, 2004)

*Re: (john s)*

Are they using roller rocker arms for the valves now? What are the advantage of this design compare to the old 1.8T head?


----------



## barelyboosting1.8t (Nov 18, 2002)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (john s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *john s* »_









Good lord! Power drops off even sooner than the 1.8t. That's pretty gay.


----------



## Spooled_AWP (May 29, 2004)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (barelyboosting1.8t)*


_Quote, originally posted by *barelyboosting1.8t* »_
Good lord! Power drops off even sooner than the 1.8t. That's pretty gay.









sooner then the 1.8T 225 i think is what thats showing


----------



## barelyboosting1.8t (Nov 18, 2002)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (Spooled_AWP)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Spooled_AWP* »_
sooner then the 1.8T 225 i think is what thats showing

If you look at where it starts to dive, it's even before the 180.


----------



## FrankiEBoneZ (Jun 4, 2002)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (barelyboosting1.8t)*

Nice engine, but this is the last and only VW I will ever personally own.


----------



## barelyboosting1.8t (Nov 18, 2002)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (FrankiEBoneZ)*


_Quote, originally posted by *FrankiEBoneZ* »_Nice engine, but this is the last and only VW I will ever personally own. 

Hate to say it but I'm with you on that one. After I'm done having my fun with this car, it's on to a used 03 Cobra.


----------



## Seanathan (May 1, 2002)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (barelyboosting1.8t)*

Nope, I think I'll try this engine later on down the line.. 
As for all these damn pictures.. you keep pulling them out of nowhere! Just show them ALL!!


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (Seanathan)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Seanathan* »_As for all these damn pictures.. you keep pulling them out of nowhere! Just show them ALL!!

















Okay, but I'll need time to put them up.
P.S. No more wimpy intercoolers!


_Modified by john s at 11:33 AM 5-30-2004_


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: (Don R)*


















_Quote, originally posted by *Don R* »_
Now why would they make the crank pulley torispherical?...









To induce a vibration that will partially cancel a natural 2nd order harmonic. Unlike the 1.8T PFI a high-pressure fuel pump delivers gas to the injectors at 30 to 110 bar depending on engine load. Power for this pump comes through the timing belt. Also higher valve spring pressures on the turbo motor put a great load on the belt than the non-turbo FSI motor. A hydraulic belt tensioner was considered but the elliptical pulley was found to effectively reduce vibration without causing problems in other speed ranges. Both initial cost and maintenance cost are lower than compared with the hydraulic tensioner,


----------



## Spooled_AWP (May 29, 2004)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (john s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *john s* »_








Okay, but I'll need time to put them up.
P.S. No more wimpy intercoolers!

_Modified by john s at 11:33 AM 5-30-2004_

holy sh!t....we go from wimpy intercoolers to maybe a little overkill


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (Spooled_AWP)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Spooled_AWP* »_
holy sh!t....we go from wimpy intercoolers to maybe a little overkill

Looks like cold air intake is also stock! Mini ram above the radiator?


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 5, 2002)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (john s)*

With the same torque as a TT225, starting at even lower RPM, that 2.0FSI looks like a very enjoyable engine for street driving. Granted, gearing still allows the TT225 to go faster when wound out.


----------



## gt2437 (Jul 29, 2000)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque*

nice pics and good info! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## jettasin00 (May 7, 2003)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (gt2437)*

when will the first engine swaps be starting. there has to a mk2 ready for it.


----------



## ALEX_GTI_1.8T_2003 (Mar 28, 2003)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*

Nice thread.....
a lot of info


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (balancer)*

































To reduce vibration of the larger engine, counter rotating balancing shafts were employed. The unit is in an aluminum housing located under the crankshaft and driven by chain from the crank. Issues with dynamic chain tension were addressed by decoupling the instantaneous speed variations of the balancer shafts from the chain drive. A special coupling with rotational compliance and friction damping was devised. Also note in the picture a wider gear was used in the oil pump for greater oil flow rate.


----------



## G-Shock (Jun 14, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (ALEX_GTI_1.8T_2003)*

Very informative http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## barelyboosting1.8t (Nov 18, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *john s* »_
































To reduce vibration of the larger engine, counter rotating balancing shafts were employed. The unit is in an aluminum housing located under the crankshaft and driven by chain from the crank. Issues with dynamic chain tension were addressed by decoupling the instantaneous speed variations of the balancer shafts from the chain drive. A special coupling with rotational compliance and friction damping was devised. Also note in the picture a wider gear was used in the oil pump for greater oil flow rate.

JESUS CHRIST! Are you one of the engineers or something? http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## 4thvw (Jan 4, 2004)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (john s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *john s* »_









Why does VW insist on tuning every turbo motor to have a torque curve like a diesel? So exciting to drive


----------



## Seanathan (May 1, 2002)

Damn man. Thanks for all the pics!!







Where'd you get all these anyway??? Can't wait to see how tunable this engine is.... Intercooler looks nice.. might be a bit thin.. we'll see... intake looks setup nice too.. hmm.... along with the crank setup.. and especially the pulleys. Don't think we'll be seeing any ECS pulleys anytime soon.


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (Seanathan)*

Excellent thread! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
I'm a little dissapointed by this new engine though. Judging by the way the torque drops off so early I bet the K03s is still hanging off the exhaust manifold.








Some real confirmation on the type of turbo would be really nice.


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Connecting Rod Specs.*









Rods are the same size as newer 1.8T motors. Not any stronger, but less likely to bend. They can handle 38% more load before bending. So those that have posted bent rods might have been saved with these, those with broken rods, well we'll have to wait for the 265 hp version.


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: (chris86vw)*










_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_... the real kicker for upgrade is gonna be the injectors, no more tossing in some green tops off ebay.

Moding has already begun.


----------



## dbrowne1 (Oct 31, 2000)

*Re: (john s)*

Mmmm....100 bar fuel pressure. Can we say "fueling headroom?"
Chris, I don't think you'll need to worry about new injectors. Just program in longer spray duration and crank up the boost.


----------



## hoTTub (Nov 5, 2000)

*Re: (dbrowne1)*

awsome info John...thanks!


----------



## VDUBNDizzy (Mar 12, 2003)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*

Damn what an intercooler.


----------



## rowdyzombie (Jan 18, 2001)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (VDUBNDizzy)*

I'm with you, I'm mesmorized by the intercooler. How did they go from simple intercooler, to such a huge design. Someone will have to figure out how to get this on our cars (take out a/c?). Looks like a promising engine.


----------



## Jetta_1.8Tip (Jun 3, 2001)

Wow.... Lotsa Info


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (Jetta_1.8Tip)*

looks like a diesel truck intercooler.


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: (Seanathan)*


_Quote, originally posted by *4thvw* »_Why does VW insist on tuning every turbo motor to have a torque curve like a diesel?

Engine is designed for a maximum pressure level and drivetrain for a maximum torque value. So good engineers try to get this maximum value at all rpms







.

_Quote, originally posted by *Seanathan* »_ Where'd you get all these anyway? 

25th Vienna Motor Symposia. 
http://www.oevk.at/oevk_symp.html
Audi made presentations on 3.2 FSI, 2.0 FSI and 3.0 TDI.
VW made presentations on Bentley EXP 08 (Audi R8) FSI engine and synthetic fuel tester for HCCI engine.


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Piston data*


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Engine data*


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*2.0T FSI Fuel System*


----------



## DubGray1.8T (Sep 24, 2003)

*Re: 2.0T FSI Fuel System (john s)*

All good info John. One ? Why is the 20V intake valve area so much larger. Granted it does have a little less lift though. Hmmm


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*bsfc*









For most drivers the bulk of the time is spent in the darkest gray area (greater than 6% fuel savings), however most Vortex members will be in that lighter gray area marked 2% to 4% savings.


_Quote, originally posted by *DubGray1.8T* »_Why is the 20V intake valve area so much larger.

Audi did a lot of work with a 5V TDI engine in the mid '90s. It just wasn't practical to fit a spark plug in between exhaust valves because valves are pretty far over with 3 intakes, so they went with 4V design. HP injectors are getting smaller and NGK now makes a 10mm spark plug, so will they go back? To make use of the greater lift on FSI engine port had to be raised. 


_Modified by john s at 9:45 PM 5-31-2004_


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (dbrowne1)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dbrowne1* »_Mmmm....100 bar fuel pressure. Can we say "fueling headroom?"
Chris, I don't think you'll need to worry about new injectors. Just program in longer spray duration and crank up the boost.

I was more referring to end user, simple larger maf and injectors some tweaking and you are on your way to moe power... johns last pic though answers the question of are they out there, but how mcuh do the cost is the next question...


----------



## RuffDice (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: (chris86vw)*

So.. are they sticking with KKK's?
the fuel injection system looks much more intense.


----------



## Mike0105 (Dec 31, 1999)

*Re: (RuffDice)*


_Quote, originally posted by *RuffDice* »_So.. are they sticking with KKK's?
the fuel injection system looks much more intense.

I'd be willing to guess that they are just cause KKK has been supplying turbo's to german car companies for a long time. I doubt it will be a k03 but I'm sure it'll be a turbo in their lineup. Let's hope it's one that can take a beating just like the little k03 can!
Great info John, the new engine seems really impressive...but god damn does it have a high compression ratio!
Mike


----------



## SAVwKO (Mar 8, 2003)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (4thvw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *4thvw* »_Why does VW insist on tuning every turbo motor to have a torque curve like a diesel? So exciting to drive










I have that Turbo book by Corky Bell and it says something about the ideal spool up time for a turbo'd car. And 1950rpm, (peak torque for the 1.8T) is exactly X%(I forget exact number) of the peak hp rpm. According to Corky Bell, VW has it perfect.


----------



## hugemikeyd (Aug 28, 2001)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (SAVwKO)*

i need to read up on FSI technology....
this thing looks awesome!
More power with less effort and less fuel consumption...


----------



## SlvrBllt (Oct 15, 2001)

*Re: (john s)*


_Quote, originally posted by *john s* »_








Notice also the nice clamping arrangement so that aluminum head temperature cycling doesn’t strain gray iron exhaust manifold.


Didnt the old Ford 5.0s use a similar exhasut mani setup? I remember they didnt use gaskets, and the bolt holes were elongated.


_Modified by SlvrBllt at 10:57 AM 6-1-2004_


----------



## Toaster29 (Jan 19, 2000)

*Re: (SlvrBllt)*

The compression ratio is high comparable to a standard fuel injected motor, however this one is not. One of the huge benefits of the direct injection is the ability of the fuel to cool the charge and the charge only. Most of the heat absorbed by the fuel during conventional fuel injection is from the port/valve area and not by the charge itself.
With the fuel maximizing the charge cooling, there's a much higher resistance to detonation and hence higher compression and higher boost. Its nothing to worry about, just adds to power, efficiency, and throttle response off and on boost


----------



## PDXA4 (Oct 9, 2001)

Fantastic thread...great information...
New engine looks very nice...


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: (phiphi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *phiphi* »_Are they using roller rocker arms for the valves now? What are the advantage of this design compare to the old 1.8T head?

Allows camshafts to be placed lower in the head, moves lash adjusters out of reciprocating mass, allows (by way of leverage effect) lower lobe heights, allows (by way of reduced size) smaller base circle, gives simple cost effective roller arrangement for reduced friction, overall inertia is less, simple to lubricate and more that I can’t think of right now. It’s a no-brainer.
Don’t have a good picture of 2.0L FSI head. Here’s a cut-away shot on 3.0L TDI, very similar except TDI gets low maintenance timing gear. FSI head has better direct shot ports.


----------



## MEDoc (Feb 7, 2002)

*Re: (john s)*

Great Info John! It will be interesting to see how these motors take to mods. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (JettaDude101)*


_Quote, originally posted by *JettaDude101* »_are they still using the allmighty K03s?

BorgWarner rates the K03 frame for 150kW and the K04 for 200kW. Since this is a 147kW engine it could be K03. Audi considered both for 165kW TT and decided on K04. Surprised no mention was made of turbocharger at presentation, considering advancement in control system. Maybe it was stripped out for completely separate paper.


----------



## Blue GTI (Jul 20, 2001)

*Re: (RuffDice)*


_Quote, originally posted by *RuffDice* »_So.. are they sticking with KKK's?
the fuel injection system looks much more intense.

2.0T-FSI is using Garrett turbo. Turbo and exhaust mainfold are togeather as only one part : 
http://www.mobisux.com/album/d...t.gif

Part # for turbo and exhaust mainfold is : 06F 145 701 B with price about 1100 euro.

2.0T-FSI uses FMIC : 
http://www.mobisux.com/album/data/3141/8690IC.gif

Engine code is *AXX*








Computer part # is : 
- 6 spd. : 8P0 907 115
- DSG gearbox : 8P0 907 115 A
Clutch is 240mm (6 spd.)


_Modified by Blue GTI at 11:04 PM 6-4-2004_


----------



## Spool'n Turbo (Feb 7, 2002)

*Re: (Blue GTI)*

GT 25


----------



## QGMika (Jul 25, 2002)

*Re: (Blue GTI)*

The TB to endtank section doesnt match..


----------



## Blue GTI (Jul 20, 2001)

*Re: (337GTIspeed)*

Pictures in etka arent allways totaly exact











_Modified by Blue GTI at 1:21 PM 6-5-2004_


----------



## john s (Nov 14, 2000)

*Re: (337GTIspeed)*


_Quote, originally posted by *337GTIspeed* »_The TB to endtank section doesnt match..









Interesting, switched from side to center feed. Also note no more hose clamps, switched to o-rings and retainers just like radiator hoses.


----------



## VDUBNDizzy (Mar 12, 2003)

*Re: (Blue GTI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Blue GTI* »_Turbo and exhaust mainfold are togeather as only one part : 


...ala SRT4 stlyle. Interesting.


----------



## D-TechniK (Aug 25, 2002)

*Re: (VDUBNDizzy)*

I hope this car can take mods well like the 1.8 T. Will probably be a year or 2 before aftermarket companies catch up with this motor.


----------



## vwracer00 (Jan 4, 2004)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (john s)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (vwracer00)*

2.0T FSI uses some version of the K03, as confirmed by a spec sheet that was sent to me by BorgWarner on the 2.0T FSI. No Garrett turbo!


----------



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (vwracer00)*

2.0T FSI uses some version of the K03, as confirmed by a spec sheet that was sent to me by BorgWarner on the 2.0T FSI. No Garrett turbo!


----------



## groftja (Jul 19, 2004)

First I want to say that John S. is my hero for sharing this.
Second I am amazed that nobody has asked him where he is getting all of this great info. Don't worry John, you don't have to tell if you don't want to. Maybe the reason nobody has asked is because everyone already knows the answer except me.








Third I am really impressed by the work the VW/Audi engineers have done on this engine. That 280 hp Audi S3 sounds like it would suit my desires just fine.


----------



## Binary Star (Mar 27, 2001)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (Pelican18TQA4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pelican18TQA4* »_2.0T FSI uses some version of the K03, as confirmed by a spec sheet that was sent to me by BorgWarner on the 2.0T FSI. No Garrett turbo!

thank you... after about 5 months i finally got the answer.


----------



## Mad Mel (May 14, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (JettaDude101)*

I had a 2.0 FSI 16v turbo in my garage, the turbo says KKK although i cant see any other numbers like kkk16 or kkk03 on it. The compressor was bigger than that of a k03 but the turbine looks really small. It has a forged crank also, maybe we can use those cranks in our 20V engines. Still need to find that out.


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (Mad Mel)*

Go have a look in the Car Lounge. Apparently the numbers from the first chipped 2.0 FSI are available. Looks quite good. I'd link to it... but that would get my wrist slapped.


----------



## ReverendHorton (Sep 27, 2000)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (SnowGTI2003)*

thanks for the heads up http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (SnowGTI2003)*

Got Link?....


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

now all we need are some real rpm limit and flow #'s for that cylinder head








also its going to be a lot of work to get rid of all the junk balance shafts and everything else out of that motor and turn it into something that will make big power. 
is it still short deck? 
PS odds are those injectors barely flow anything @ what we would call a regular pressure, thus making them the correct size at huge pressure. 
Finding larger injectors, and a way to program and control that setup would be a nightmare. At least at first, i can see people aiming for big #'s having to ditch that entire FSI setup and go back to conventional. 


_Modified by fast_a2_20v at 7:49 PM 11-17-2004_


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_
Finding larger injectors, and a way to program and control that setup would be a nightmare. At least at first, i can see people aiming for big #'s having to ditch that entire FSI setup and go back to conventional. 



They already make them.. john had posted some information on them in a thread at one point but i forget where that was


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (groftja)*


_Quote, originally posted by *groftja* »_
First I want to say that John S. is my hero for sharing this.
Second I am amazed that nobody has asked him where he is getting all of this great info. Don't worry John, you don't have to tell if you don't want to. Maybe the reason nobody has asked is because everyone already knows the answer except me.










unfortunately john can no longer answer anyones questions on here he passed a few months back
(not trying to bring this down just mentioning it for those who are new and did not know)


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

chris i'm sure the FSI system can be upgraded easily within a certain amount, but for guys looking for 500-600+ whp i think for all practical purposes it is a loss. 
The pump will max out, the lines will max out, and thats assuming you can find injectors that size. no existing standalone will easily control the rail pressure, man theres a lot of problems.


----------



## SP00LN (Oct 18, 2002)

*Re: 1.8T’s replacement – 2.0T FSI (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
unfortunately john can no longer answer anyones questions on here he passed a few months back
(not trying to bring this down just mentioning it for those who are new and did not know)

Holy @#[email protected] that whole thread then reading that he passed away jsut threw me in a state of shock


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_chris i'm sure the FSI system can be upgraded easily within a certain amount, but for guys looking for 500-600+ whp i think for all practical purposes it is a loss. 
The pump will max out, the lines will max out, and thats assuming you can find injectors that size. no existing standalone will easily control the rail pressure, man theres a lot of problems. 


Many manufactures are going to FSI type motors.. just like the injectors we use in our cars today when we upgrade.. they come from another OEM source or they are modified.. or through the efforts of racing we get injectors.. There is alwaysa way... if no one makes them OEM then certainly some aftermarket injector company will get into it.
The pump yeah thats a good point.. but ok so you run two stock ones.. you get the one out of a Audi thats making double the stock power.. again there is a way to do this.
last time I checked no standalone system controlled the fuel pressure right now so thats not an issue.
Lines.. people upgrade their lines all the time.
Its the same cry when they switched from carbs to FI... but hey look it worked out for the best.. note you said stand alone wouldnt' work with it not carbs. You wouldnt' have your autronic if it wasnt' for advancements in fueling.

and here is the link.. why someone thought they would get in trouble for posting a link I have no idea.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zer...age=1
but the thread is a big waste of time.. bunch of pu$$ies crying about how bad a chip is for your car wah wah wah...
200hp/tq stock to 240/248 or something like that chipped.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

"The pump yeah thats a good point.. but ok so you run two stock ones.. you get the one out of a Audi thats making double the stock power.. again there is a way to do this." 
the pump is cam driven, how do you plan to run 2? any audi making 400 horse is going to be a V engine using one pump per cylinder head. 
i wasn't speaking of any lines i was speaking specifically of the high pressure lines and passenges in the cyl head. 
i know advancements in fueling yada yada yada but this will make it a big pain in the rump for the next half a decade or so. Hell it took 20 years to figure out regular fuel injection. 
Your standalone will need to control the fuel supply valve i saw on the diagram of the pump, It is clearly electronic. or someone will need to devise a 10bar external fuel pressure reg (shouldn't be a big deal, plumbing it in will be fun though)


----------



## Mad Mel (May 14, 2002)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

A guy over here is running a FSI 2.0 16V with a Eaton, he modified the pistons, removed the balance shafts and plugged the injectors in the head, now running normal injectors in the inlet manifold and standalone.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

i was just thinking about it more
^^^ thats what i'd do too, but... 
you could probably run a cog belt driven alchohol fuel pump to produce those kind of pressures. expensive setup though.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: (Mad Mel)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mad Mel* »_A guy over here is running a FSI 2.0 16V with a Eaton, he modified the pistons, removed the balance shafts and plugged the injectors in the head, now running normal injectors in the inlet manifold and standalone.

That would seem like a practical approach,maybe start fitting these in A2's







.
Does anyone have a diagram showing the exhaust and intake manifold design(preferably the flanges).Do they follow previous VW/Audi patterns or is the 2.0T FSI a completely different animal?
The 20V Head with all of its bs about 6 years ago can still bolt onto a 1984 VW Block.Has VW been kind enough to share this new 2.0 FSI head with us?
http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

If the 5 valve head flows more this is all a big waste of time anyways lol. And by the looks of those diagrams i think it might.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_If the 5 valve head flows more this is all a big waste of time anyways lol. And by the looks of those diagrams i think it might. 

VAG will disclose how much cfm's the 2.0 FSI head flows?And thats true if it does flow less then the AEB's are going to become like candy on halloween.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_
the pump is cam driven, how do you plan to run 2? any audi making 400 horse is going to be a V engine using one pump per cylinder head. 


yeah I forgot about that... my bad

_Quote »_
i wasn't speaking of any lines i was speaking specifically of the high pressure lines and passenges in the cyl head. 

I got a place 5 minutes from the shop that could make me lines to handle that pressure in about 20 minutes.. And there is one in just about every town with more then 5 people

_Quote »_
i know advancements in fueling yada yada yada but this will make it a big pain in the rump for the next half a decade or so. Hell it took 20 years to figure out regular fuel injection. 

Did it really take 20 years to figure it out?? not really.. and ok so it takes a half a decade.. thats how long it took people to start making power with 1.8ts.. they will figure it out just in time.

_Quote »_
Your standalone will need to control the fuel supply valve i saw on the diagram of the pump, It is clearly electronic. or someone will need to devise a 10bar external fuel pressure reg (shouldn't be a big deal, plumbing it in will be fun though) 

Your autronic doesnt' have GPOs???


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

shhhhh

*whispers* i sold my autronic they pissed me off 
my buddy got me a good price on a haltech E11, and yes i believe it could use an input (fuel pressure sensor) and an output to control that. 
the autronic SMC has NO inputs.


----------



## eh (Mar 4, 2003)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_and here is the link.. why someone thought they would get in trouble for posting a link I have no idea.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zer...age=1
but the thread is a big waste of time.. bunch of pu$$ies crying about how bad a chip is for your car wah wah wah...
200hp/tq stock to 240/248 or something like that chipped.

That thread is a wealth of misinformation and down right idiotic opinions. A typical Car Lounge thread.


----------



## HPR (Oct 31, 2004)

*Re: (Wizard-of-OD)*

Valve area on 2.0 fsi is dia 33.85x10.7 lift x2
on 20V dia 27x7.67x3 

Or on high lift cams fsi dia 33.85x12x2
20V dia 27 x9.25x3
So the Fsi look the better option


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

well a cammed 1.8t will lift 13mm. so i don't think the FSI could possibly get enough lift to equalize that. 
its all up to the port which frankly we don't know anything about.


----------



## HPR (Oct 31, 2004)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

13MM?on a 24mm flat tappet follower? on the exhaust yes,on the inlet 11 mm with mech.cams/hydro 9.xx


----------



## groftja (Jul 19, 2004)

*Re: (chris86vw)*

Thanks for letting me know John passed away. That really disturbed me to hear it though. Hopefully he still was able to hear me call him my hero.








Sorry to hijack...now on with the technical talk you people.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

it is 13mm exhaust and 12.75 or right around high 12's intake. 
on a mech lifter as i have said a million times before the small lifter arguement is purified ABF propoganda lol. cat cams has them.


----------



## slickfisher (Oct 16, 2004)

*Re: (john s)*

Your a tech that's been to the new product school in Lanham Md. and have one of those little booklets they used to give us.
Right/Wrong?
Whichever- thanks much. I always found those books very good even though they didn't go into alot of technical shop type detail.
Slickfisher


_Modified by slickfisher at 10:27 PM 11-19-2004_


----------



## slickfisher (Oct 16, 2004)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

Direct injection is emissions driven. And slight fuel MPG also I would expect. 
VW is not necessarily interested in the drag strip.
Slickfisher


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

hehe, k03 is SO a drag turbo. 








and yea i agree most of DI is emmisions and MPG, most guys trying to make power are moving them further from the head not closer lol


----------



## Volkdent2 (Jan 16, 2004)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (jettasin00)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jettasin00* »_when will the first engine swaps be starting. there has to a mk2 ready for it.

You guys seem like a smart bunch, anyone know if the new block has the bosses cast into it for the old style engine mounts?(not pendulum)
Without the bosses, its going to be interesting to see how people get these motors into anything older than 1998.
Jason


----------



## Scrampa1.8T (Feb 10, 2003)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (Volkdent2)*

IF foresay the 5v head did flow more, would it be possible to swap the 5v head onto the 2.0 block?


----------



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

*Re: Steady-state power & torque (Scrampa1.8T)*

...and keep the FSI system, no.
Now, whether or not the 5v head can be put on the new 2.0T block to make a sort-of 2.0T without FSI, that remains to be seen yet!


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

"
IF foresay the 5v head did flow more, would it be possible to swap the 5v head onto the 2.0 block?
" 
why the hell bother? put it on the ABA.


----------



## Scrampa1.8T (Feb 10, 2003)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

Sorry, but I'm not too familiar with the ABA. I was referring to swapping the block/lower rotating assembly from the new 2.0T's into the MKIV and possibly using the 20v head. Care to fill me in on the ABA's characteristics?
-Brian


----------



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

I'm not 100% sure, but I think the ABA is one of the original 1.8Ts and it had larger intake/exhaust valves.
I think what fast_a2_20v was referring to was swapping the ABA head onto the new 2.0T block.


----------



## DEzNutZz (Apr 19, 2005)

*Re: (john s)*

so will aftermarket headers keep this design???


----------

