Difference Between ASZ and ARL TDI Engine

Hello.

What is the difference between the ASZ 96kW TDI engine and the ARL 110kW TDI engine?

The difference should be 96 kW (ASZ).

-other control unit
-other PD elements
- Alternative crankcase with higher strength.
-other crankshaft main bearing journal diameters (larger)
-other connecting rods with higher strength.

I obtained this information from WOB.
I once asked my VW dealer about it, but he couldn't tell me anything. A friend told me that the only difference is between the engine control unit and the AGR intercooler. What should I believe?
I would be very happy if someone could help me with this problem.

Best regards.
Patrick.


PS: I have a VW Polo with a TDI engine, manufactured in February 2011. I would like to modify it if possible.

Hi Patrick,

It seems there will also be a larger charger for the 110 kW model, as its power advantage mainly comes from the higher RPM range, which translates to maximum airflow. And for that, the 1996 loader was probably a bit too small for the designers.

The other differences will probably generally be correct, because the 110kW version is, AFAIK not just a factory-tuned 96 with the same hardware.

Hello Ulf,

The thing about the larger loaders isn't true; I've already checked.
My ASZ engine has a GT17 49V turbocharger, just like the ARL engine, and I'm quite sure of that because I've compared the turbocharger specifications.

Special TDI wrote:

That thing about the larger loaders is not true.

Hi.

If you've done a targeted comparison, that might be true - my comment was just based on my memory.

Is there any new information on that topic?

Perhaps the GT1749V is just a base model, and there are different versions of it. It would be great if we could get more details about that.

1.9l 96kW TDI PD: Garrett VNT17 (GT1749VA) turbocharger, used on the ASZ engine.

1.9l 110kW TDI PD: Turbocharger Garrett VNT17 (GT1749VB).

I highly doubt that these two chargers are the same.

Then there are differences in the materials used, for example, between the 1.9L 110kW TDI engine and its smaller 1.9L counterparts: what are these specific differences?

* In the connecting rod bearing area, a three-layer bearing is used in the lower connecting rod bearing shell.
* In the upper shell, a standard sputter target is used.
* The main bearing shells are designed as three-layer bearings.
* The diameter of the hub bearing journal has been increased, and the material has been changed from C38 to 42CrOS4.
* The crankcase is now made of GG27 instead of GG25, and has been additionally reinforced in highly stressed areas, such as the main bearing housings.

That's at least what the A3 forum says! I highly doubt that the engineers would invest so much money in the development for a mere "ridiculous" 20 horsepower if it could be achieved just as well with a chip installed at the gas station!
Especially now, when price is the number one selling point...

blau wrote:

* In the connecting rod bearing area, a three-layer bearing is used in the lower connecting rod bearing shell. Bitte gib den Text an, den du übersetzt haben möchtest. That's what the A3 forum says, at least!

If this isn't an ancient post, then those who are concerned about this are behind the moon.
In recent years, the ARL and ASZ systems were completely identical in terms of construction (except for add-ons like WaPu, loaders, etc.). According to akte.

ulf wrote:

In recent years, ARL and ASZ have been completely identical in terms of construction (except for peripherals like WaPu, loaders, etc.) within the G4. According to akte.

ulf wrote:

The other differences will probably generally be correct, because the 110kW version is, as far as I know not just a factory-tuned 96 with the same hardware.

On the one hand, you mean that the variants are the same except for the "attachments," but on the other hand, you confirm that different materials were used - so how now?

blau wrote:

On the one hand, you're saying that the variants are the same except for the "attachments," but on the other hand, you're confirming that different materials were used - so, how is this?

In the early years of construction, the blocks were also different (as my cited post shows, which is only just under 3 years old ), and in the end, they were the same.
I don't have the exact date of when the change occurred readily available.

Okay, sorry, I didn't really notice that thing about the 3 years.

but if the materials, or the installed bearings/connecting rods, etc., are actually the same in the newer models, then it might be possible to create a reliable ARL engine by using a turbocharger and a low-compression kit from an ASZ engine.

blau wrote:

but if the materials, or the installed bearings/connecting rods, etc., are actually the same in the newer models, then it might be possible to create a reliable ARL engine by using a turbocharger and a low-compression kit from an ASZ engine?

Correct - except for the ZK screws, which I unfortunately forgot : The ARL has different (presumably harder) ones than the ASZ.
Interestingly, the documents for the BPX (160 hp) engine show the same screws being used as for the ASZ engine.

And some ASZ (depending on the vehicle type) have smaller permissible deviation (PDE) values than the ARL. However, 150 horsepower instead of 130 should easily be achievable even with the "smallest" ASZ turbocharger models.

I have an ARL turbocharger here in front of me; it's a Garrett GT1749VA.

VAG No: 038 253 016 E V200

And I always thought the ARL turbochargers were GT1749VB and the ASZ turbochargers were GT1749VA.
Is something wrong?

Quote:

Correct - except for the ZK screws, which I unfortunately forgot about. The ARL has different (presumably harder) screws than the ASZ. Interestingly, the parts list for the BPX engine (160 hp) shows the same screws as for the ASZ engine... icon_question.gif

Please provide the text you would like me to translate from German to English. I need the text to be able to translate it. Elring.

http://www.elringklinger.de/pages_g/ersatzteil/ZKS_KAT_04/p_190_volkswagen.pdf

The strength classes of the ZK screws are also described there.

"On my AJM motorcycle, after a head gasket failure, I used parts from the ARL."
What concerned me somewhat was the fact that (AJM GG25 instead of GG27 ARL) the higher clamping force of the screws in the area of the threads in the engine block could cause distortions that could deform the cylinder bores. So far, about 12,000 km, but everything seems to be okay.


"Also here too:"
http://www.tuneline.at/news/detail.asp?start=35
"It's possible to infer some things."