TSI anstatt TDI | Posts 32+

Yes, even with the GDPR regulations, the data consumption isn't that bad.
You could say that I consume approximately 6.7 liters of gasoline at an average speed of around 70 km/h.

I usually drive on the highway at speeds between 110 km/h and 140 km/h.

LG
Maxx.

@maxx1278
Thank you! Very informative and useful, the Spritmonitor!
I will consider that as well.
What kind of heater do you have? I wanted to order them together, but they weren't/aren't available for TSI.

@matthiasTDI96
I'm nowhere near being upset. And you?
I would like to have a factual/technical discussion with you about the TSI concept.
I much prefer the alternative wording.
"Level playing field" came into play as my defense, not out of arrogance or any disrespect towards other educational backgrounds. There are many people in this world who I cannot intellectually compete with. Whether you are one of those people is irrelevant to me. Maybe you have a doctorate and work in engine development - it doesn't matter.
I play with an open hand, you don't.
You're talking about "us" - it surprises me that you know what others are thinking.
My thought regarding the cessation of PD production may have been of little value, but it was certainly not unfounded.
Have you read the VW SSP documentation? I suspect not, because it doesn't have the risk of manipulating anyone or using certain words – it's a well-written, easily understandable technical document that describes the facts, including with helpful graphics. That's all there is to it. And I certainly don't have any reason to criticize VW or be easily misled. Read it, and you'll agree with me.
I don't see any extraordinary waves, but the topic is obviously interesting to many people - undoubtedly.
And finally: I'm not sure if buying the TSI was the right decision. But I have a good feeling about it. I don't expect you or anyone else to tell me how great I am or how great my decisions are. And thank you for your test drive experience, even though it wasn't particularly helpful, as I had a different experience myself.
I didn't want to have the last word, and I would have appreciated further comments on the topic.

...nevertheless, we are here with the "diesel enthusiasts" and not in the "TSI fan club."
How do you conclude that diesel drivers, of all people, can contribute particularly to this, or even want to? Undoubtedly, TSI technology is interesting, but it somehow feels out of place here.
If you're looking for experience and want to exchange opinions, please find a more suitable forum or create one yourself.

Here's a brief summary of why this thread was created:

Golf+TSI 140 wrote:

I wanted to specifically ask here if anyone has switched from an ASZ engine to a BLG or BMY engine, and can share their impressions/experiences by directly comparing these two engines.

It's possible that there are people here in this diesel forum who are switching to gasoline engines, or who already have experience with TSI engines (perhaps as a second car, or through family or friends).

LG
Maxx.

@Thomas:
I have the Webasto ThermoTop P with a T91 control unit installed (it was an aftermarket addition).
The TSI has not been delivered with a factory-installed SH (short-throw shifter) to date.

kai_od wrote:

@maxx, Especially since he probably won't have any problems with particulate matter.

Do gasoline-powered vehicles also emit particulate matter, or not?

Aliendrummer wrote:

Don't gasoline engines also emit fine particulate matter, or not?

Yes, but that will only be discovered by politicians once all those who aren't "diesel fanatics" have been converted to gasoline car owners through tax incentives and DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) issues.

Aliendrummer wrote:

Gasoline-powered vehicles also emit fine particulate matter, don't they?

Especially with direct injection engines under partial load conditions. (Under full load, it operates like a normal gasoline engine with mixture distribution, but under partial load, it operates more like a diesel engine, hence the increased soot). A friend with an A3 1.6 FSI noticed a black exhaust pipe just 10 km after washing the car, and I don't even want to imagine how much soot is coming out of there.

Unfortunately, with direct injection, there isn't optimal mixing of air and fuel during lean operation, which is why soot is produced.

Okay, that's going a bit too far off-topic again.

@R.M.
My intention was not to bother or upset the Diesel Mechanics Forum and its users with the topic of TSI. I was actually looking for serious answers beyond mockery and arguments, and I expected interest, not disinterest. Is this forum primarily about religious conflicts or technology?
As long as it doesn't become unbearable, anyone can simply ignore the topic if they don't want to comment on it. I probably wouldn't have posted in this forum if there was a TSI forum, ideally with people who have switched from TDIs or drive both TDIs and TSIs, as that would have answered my original question.
The suggestion about creating your own forum is really good. Unfortunately, I am unable to do that. I hope that someone else will be willing to do it, as some people have kindly done for this forum.

Perhaps it's also my fault, because I made that unfortunate comment about the TDI shaking thing, and many people immediately thought that I was just trying to stir up trouble.
That was not the case, and it still isn't.

For those who want to seriously and scientifically engage with the TSI concept, in addition to the above-mentioned comprehensive source (Self-study program 359), here are two more: MTZ 11/2005, page 844, 'Part 1: Constructive Design'; MTZ 12/2005, page 980, Thermodynamics. If you have read and understood these, you will have a pretty good understanding. Otherwise, I don't know on what basis someone else should know anything about the properties, durability, etc. of the TSI. There are two other possibilities: You were involved in the development, or you have been driving one for as long as possible. I'm specifically looking for people here who have experience with TDI conversions or who drive both types of vehicles, as they would be the most knowledgeable. This is probably logical (ideally with experience with ASZ engines, as I still drive one myself).

Regards,
Thomas.

For those who want to seriously and scientifically engage with the TSI concept, in addition to the aforementioned comprehensive source (Self-study program 359), here are two more: MTZ 11/2005, p. 844, 'Part 1: Constructive Design'; MTZ 12/2005, p. 980, Thermodynamics. If you have read and understood these, you will have a pretty good understanding. Otherwise, I don't know on what basis someone else should know anything about the properties, durability , etc. of the TSI. There are 2 other sources: Someone was involved in the development process, or someone has been driving one for as long as possible.

'Sorry, Thomas, but I actually thought you were more critical than that.'
Sure, as an 'outsider,' it's difficult to get access to the really important information.

MTZ is definitely a great newspaper, and its articles are written in a way that is both informative and engaging, with a good level of detail. My colleagues often post here.
The SSP (Service Service Program) is intended for the 'average' mechanic who needs to understand the workings of this plastic/aluminum/metal assembly in some way so that they can repair it.
However, you will find no mention of the systems' weaknesses in either of these media. This is not something to brag about.

Daimler had also described the E-Class as the ultimate model, until it became notorious for breaking down repeatedly due to electrical defects. You'll only find this information in the ADAC's accident statistics, if at all.

However, if you add two and two together and consider the current cost pressure faced by OEMs, I'm almost inclined to believe that an engine has been completely redesigned within just a few years. (Minimizing [weight/size/complexity] only became 'modern' when gasoline became expensive and the CO2 discussion began.) Take a look at the VAG shelf and you'll find the (existing) base for this engine.
Just to give you an idea of the scale, it takes approximately 2 years of development time to switch a tax device from one design to another.

Anyone who still believes that this engine has a reserve of 20-30% more power hasn't factored in the cost analysis performed by the original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). They have nothing left to 'give away.'
'Every driver with a 170hp TDI engine will tell you the same thing, and if you do a little searching, you'll quickly find similar posts.'

Thomas, I'm just asking you not to contradict everything just because you might be reading here that your new engine isn't developed as the brochures claim. There are some people here who experienced the beta test firsthand, and they are sharing their experiences.
In 7 or 8 years, when you add up the costs and the time spent in the workshop, you'll understand what we've written here.
And if things are different for you, yes, I'm happy for you that you are an exception.
My experience unfortunately suggests something different.

Best regards, Jochen.

Oh dear.

Why don't I play my cards on the table like you do? Because nobody cares what anyone does for a living. Your guesses are surprisingly good!

Unfortunately, I still find that you see everything from a perspective that only works for you. You should know this, especially as an academic who studied management: The MTZ is a collection of reports where people who have developed something present it. The SSP is great, and yes, I know it just as well as the PD SSP, from the 3-cylinder to the 10-cylinder engines. These things are for the people who are supposed to work on them. But it's questionable whether anyone actually reads it; however, as a picture book, it's quite useful and informative, and it clearly indicates where to find things.

Why aren't you applying the critical thinking skills you've learned? The principle applies here as much as anywhere else: both sides of the issue should be examined. You only look at things from one perspective; people who offer different viewpoints make you uncomfortable.

Unfortunately, my experience was too short to form a well-informed opinion, which I admit. You only brought that up after your tenth post. I know you were looking for explicit experiences with transvestism, and this platform seems suitable for that. However, it doesn't seem like there's a large audience for that here. I don't mean to be unkind, but if you want to find ways to justify it, you could also try asking the guys at Motor Talk; they're sure to have some completely new perspectives.

If you are a reader of MTZ (like me), get the latest issue 3/2007, starting on page 206, titled "How can the gasoline engine be made to achieve diesel-like fuel consumption in full load conditions?" It's not just developers of a specific technology who speak out, but also people from more or less independent research institutions.

I have a feeling you're going to accuse me of being offended again. I'm not offended myself; I was referring to something completely off-topic. When I say "we," I don't mean everyone, but rather a select few (you can often tell in a forum who, how, when, and where people are responding).

This is getting a bit off-topic, but important for what has happened so far:

@matthiasTDI96,

It's good that you responded again. We're focusing on the facts, and I agree with most of what you've said.
Why should I not be interested in the basis on which someone (my) technical assessments and statements are commented? The profession, or "qualification," can play a significant role. I certainly give more credence to a statement from someone working in engine development (MTZ) than to someone who doesn't work there. Where did that person get their knowledge from? And what goals does he pursue, compared to the goals that the authors of articles in MTZ might subtly pursue in addition to publishing scientific findings and research and development work?
All of this always has both objective (factual) aspects, which can be found, for example, in the VW SSP and the MTZ, and subjective aspects (feelings, opinions, etc.), which are rarely found in the VW SSP and even less so in the MTZ. This distinction is rarely discussed, but it's similar to the experience of a test pilot when buying a new product or car. The subjective part may, but does not necessarily, be intended negatively.

You might ask: Why, Thomas, are you seeking out contacts with diesel mechanics in addition to reading publications like MTZ and VW SSP (which tell me what you think I should know: TSI is great; however, they also say TDI is great, which is true)?
My answer would be: Precisely because I want to hear different, but qualified, opinions that represent a counterpoint to the views of scientists and are critical – but please, not ideologically (TDI is better than TSI). I have repeated this many times now, and I have also significantly contributed to the misunderstanding myself.
Once again: The ideal evaluator, the one I've been looking for and continue to seek, is someone who has switched from ASZ (etc.) to BMY/(BLG) or who uses both systems concurrently. This person, who can provide an objective (and if necessary, subjective) assessment, can tell me more than MTZ, VW SSP, or any other source. I'm looking for him/her.
Maxx is already very close, and his statements align very closely with what I expect. Just the opportunity to connect with him made it worthwhile for me.
I hope it's now clear that my intention is not to praise or criticize, but to focus on facts (as mentioned in my initial concern, the part about the TDI issue and the statement "hopefully everything will get better" should be considered subjective, speculative, and even foolish). My interest in the durability of the TSI engine is secondary, as I mentioned before. However, I am happy to engage in a discussion (in a factual manner) if it is brought up from another perspective, as it does hold some secondary interest for me. My decision had already been made; I want and am able to convert no one, and I don't need anyone's approval for my decision.

It's important to me that everyone who has previously read along and/or actively participated doesn't feel negatively about anything.
I will definitely read the MTZ article you mentioned because the topic is incredibly interesting and, in my opinion, one of the weaknesses of the TSI compared to the TDI, but also an improvement over similarly powerful gasoline engines. Otherwise, I don't regularly read such literature, but only when needed (e.g., regarding TSI). If you know of any other, preferably independent sources about the TSI, I would be grateful if you could let me know, as I haven't found much informative material so far. It took me a long time to figure out the differences between the BMY and BLG engines (engine mechanics, transmission, clutch, brakes).

In that sense.
Regards,
Thomas.

Golf+TSI 140 wrote:

I certainly tend to give more credence to the statements of someone working in engine development (MTZ) than to someone who doesn't work there. Where did

he get his knowledge from?
And what use is the knowledge of the developers and the descriptions in MTZ and SSP to a "real motor consumer" like you?
That he can read up on a few(!) interesting details about construction highlights .

What do these details say about the real, long-term reliability of each individual component in a new design, i.e., the statistical defect expectation?
Not much at all.

During my driving career so far, I have driven two engines that were newly introduced to the market at the time.

1. Renault 5 Alpine Turbo. The manufacturer kept changing the factory specifications for the spark plugs every six months, without really getting the car to work properly under all operating conditions (but when it did run, it was a really great machine - the standard-looking R5 with a 1.4L engine and 108 horsepower).

2. G3 AFN. In this case, the undersized VTG (Variable Temperature Generator) canister caused occasional loss of thrust and excessive oscillations after approximately 20,000 kilometers. Typical: The engine block, which had already overcome its initial teething problems as a 1Z, ran smoothly, but the then-new and unique feature called VTG immediately started causing trouble.

My other 4 engines, including. ASZ, on the other hand, have been on the market for a longer time and have all been operating smoothly (in a positive sense).


I don't have a degree in business administration or anything similar, but my personal knowledge and... Based on approximately 28 years of driving experience, I can confirm that the rule of thumb is 100% accurate.
"If you don't want to deal with potential early-stage issues with your engine, wait at least 2 years after its market launch before purchasing."

"I'm sorry I can't share specific experiences with the TSI engine, but why would the TSI engine, of all engines, be completely perfected right from the start of production (as Jochen's answers also suggest)?"

Okay...

Okay, let me reiterate: When someone writes in the MTZ (presumably a specific publication or forum), for example, a colleague of mine, they are reporting on THEIR findings and presenting THEIR (or the findings of their working group) results. This is not objective. It's simply a collection of results presented to showcase a piece of work. If one were to be very honest (though no one is, because it makes no sense to publish if you're not), you could describe it as including discussions of setbacks, highlighting problems, and providing an outlook that reveals the necessary potential for improvement, because there is always room for improvement. If the goal is simply to publish, one can compile a collection of results and present the project. It's advisable to remain objective and avoid dwelling on problems. However, internal reports are different. When we discuss our results within the building, we don't start by praising progress; instead, we first discuss the results and then address the problems in order to find solutions. There are never any problems that are completely straightforward. There are always compromises. Unfortunately.

I'm not going to provide you with sources; you should find those yourself. That hasn't changed, and there's no shortcut to getting the information you need. Most well-stocked university libraries with relevant departments have almost everything you could want to know about downsizing. They have books on Otto engine technology, covering everything from simple flow machines to stationary gas turbines, providing all the information needed for understanding the subject. Materials science and surface treatment fill entire rooms. There are so many process engineering steps involved in the implementation that it is impossible to manage them all.

Let me reiterate something. I don't want to talk anyone out of anything: Everyone should buy what they want. That's how it works, and anything else would be a shame. (I'm going to leave out that one word). I'm not a staunch defender of VAG TDI engines. For me, when buying a car, there's only one thing: to get from A to B as economically as possible, and the car should appeal to me from the inside. Back then, 4 years ago, there was no way around the Golf, because the fuel consumption it achieved was sensational for daily commuting (max 90 km/h ~ 22 km --> under 4.5 liters). I also believe that it's more sustainable to reduce CO2 emissions than to worry about the few percent of particulate matter that comes from my exhaust, because, and we don't need to debate this, those emissions are so small that everything else on the car generates more dust (tires, brakes, road grime, pollen, Saharan sand...). It's a good thing when public transportation within cities is converted to non-diesel vehicles, and when trucks are fitted with filters... just a side note.

But to reiterate: statements like "This is the answer I expected" or "This confirms what I want to hear" are not appropriate for a discussion. Here, things should go well without any preconceived notions: I'll take on the role of devil's advocate and summarize the points here.
You don't want to be a test driver and object to the description, but you're putting all the new components, which have never been tested in mass production or used together, into the mix.
If people tell you how a development process is going or how a test stand test is conducted, you're not interested.
You're throwing your hat into the ring and emphasizing the accuracy of your statements by citing developer reports. However, at this point, it would also be interesting, and perhaps even more interesting, to hear the perspective of the other side, because what's in your reports is something that anyone can see "under the hood."
The actual topic is hardly being addressed at all; this is your contribution, and you are the moderator.
Unique experiences that align with your expectations are prioritized.

Please don't be too upset that I'm saying this again, but the professional background is that I need to reiterate: it really doesn't matter to us (possibly the members of this group who post frequently). That's what makes a forum, and it should be that way in any development that comes closer to the ideal. Unfortunately, experience is worth more than a diploma in every respect. I'm fortunate to be in a position to witness this, as I have great respect for colleagues who are nearing retirement, whose knowledge and experience will soon be almost irreplaceable for us.

Applause ,

I think that's a very insightful and well-reasoned comment.
Comment.
Regardless of what has been discussed here, Matthias's latest post clearly shows what this forum is generally about.

One cannot have a factual discussion.

To be honest, I'm proud that we can have such a high-level discussion here.

Unfortunately, due to my position, I am unable to give a positive review. However, I would like to request that those who can (@rainer) do so on my behalf.

Very pleased.
Jochen.

P.S. My thanks also go to everyone who contributed constructively to this discussion. I don't want to cheat anyone.

Hello matthiasTDI96,

Okay, I agree with you on many points. However, in some areas, I completely fail to understand what you're saying, and either you're misunderstanding me because you want to, or I'm not expressing myself precisely enough. Okay, gib mir den deutschen Text.
The verb 'erwarte' (expect). It wasn't meant in relation to Maxx that I expect to hear his opinion or anyone else's, but rather that his actual experience aligns with what I expect from reality based on my considerations and research. These are two completely different things that, after the German language is sometimes not precise enough, one can negatively interpret, as you do. As far as I can remember, I haven't said anywhere, even in the slightest way, that I want to hear something specific (do you have an example?). You seem to be referring to the same text passage, and to that I can only say:
Maxx has been the only one who has said anything relevant to my topic, and he was able to speak from experience (since he owns a TSI and used to own a TDI). Everything else, except for Ulf's test drive experience, was completely off-topic, but I reacted to it without suspecting anything. Apparently, some people in this forum wanted to express their opinions about buying a TSI at this stage, with the intention of discussing its reliability and everything else. That's fine. I'm happy to discuss those things. But it seems I've been cast as the "TSI academic villain" from the beginning, even when I say that you're right that I was, am, and will continue to be a test driver, and that I do it voluntarily. You wrote that I supposedly said I don't want to be a test driver, and about the new components. Yes, they are new and innovative, they bring improvements, and nobody knows what will come of them, not me, and not you either. If everyone always stuck with the tried and true, we wouldn't have TDIs with such ingenious and innovative features like direct injection, turbocharging, or even common rail systems, and we'd still be living in caves (that was a deliberate exaggeration). That was and still is not my problem, although I bought a TSI model, which should now be quite clear.

Okay, I'm just going to stop here, even though I have more to say, but just one more thing: I hope that other people who are switching to this model and/or driving it in parallel with another car, like I will be, will chime in. And I hope my car (ASZ) lasts a long time with me (it currently has 140,000 km). Ideally, it should last longer than the availability of replacement parts.

Oh, and here's something else that might be interesting:
As a test driver for my ASZ 2002, I previously had (positive) contact as Thomas TD130, and experienced ASZ test driver issues (idle vibrations, new engine, new TL...).
That's why I thought: the forum was very interesting and helpful back then, so I should give it another try... well.
By the way, it's running stably today, which is why I haven't been on the forum since then. Unfortunately, since my email address has changed and I've forgotten my password, I'm unable to log in.

Don't worry, I'm not that upset with you, matthiasTDI96. Life goes on.

Regards,
Thomas.

You're not Professor Buhmann, are you? No one has said that. I'm referring to the academic, Professor Buhmann (sorry, I always bring him up), because he relates to one of your statements, so I'm mentioning him. As well as eye level.

The rest is too much for me now.
I need to work and do research, and so on, so that the world can become a little bit better. I hope so, at least.

You're ignoring my test drive now... well, there's only one left from Ulf.

Otherwise, you'll have to forgive us if we don't achieve what you expect from us. DIESEL MECHANICS... DIESEL... well, we've messed it up and ruined it. Now, I agree with you, it should stop.

May these experiences now bring the topic to a close and allow for a wealth of insights.