# remap 2.0tfsi or 3.2 best results?



## sweatystt (Jan 29, 2015)

So currently in the process of selling my remapped mk1 and thinking of moving over to a mk2. As title. What dya think fellas?? cheers


----------



## barry_m2 (Jun 29, 2015)

You'll get much better results from the 2.0 as it's a turbo. More boost pressure and fuel will always show better gains than an NA engine.


----------



## Hoggy (May 8, 2002)

Hi, As above, very little to gain from remapping the V6, it will just be more responsive.
Hoggy.


----------



## maltloaf (May 8, 2015)

I test drove several v6, several regular 2.0 tfsi and 2 x tts in my recent quest for a new car.

I actually didn't buy a TT and ended up buying a main dealer approved Audi S3 because it was the best bang for my bucks (about £2k less than an equivalent TTS) and much less awkward for our 2 year old to sit in the back HOWEVER it does equate to a TTS pretty well, performance wise, in standard form.

I found the V6 had plenty of low down raw grunt and an awesome sound but was left a bit unexciting in a bizzare way. It never ran out of puff and pulled well all the way up but it seemed much less punch than the equivalent 2.0, even if that's in my head, it's still something I felt. I have no problem admitting that I'm a turbo boost junkie! I also knew that basically with the v6 you are stuck with what you have as tuning doesn't yield much without paying big.

The straight common or garden 2.0 tfsi in the vast majority of mk2's is a pretty nice engine for what it is and remaps nicely to give another 40 or so bhp, but the overall driveability is really nice. A decent punch once the turbo is spooled without being earth shattering.

The TTS is a nicer proposition if you can afford the price hike - another 70 or so bhp for around £5k on top, like for like means that financially at least the 200bhp model is a far more attractive proposition. It does however feel and drive MUCH faster than the regular 2.0 and also a fair bit quicker than the v6. If you can afford it this is the one to go for (unless you can afford an RS of course!)

My S3, which as I said compares very much to a TTS has remapped from 265bhp to 310bhp with only an uprated intake and it's now properly quick. First and second gears are almost too short and if you don't have your wits about you, you find yourself much deeper into the redline than you intended, which is exactly what I found from a remapped TTS I was lucky enough to try - and almost buy. These cars aren't worried by much on the road, save the odd tuned up Evo etc.

Essentially, if you can afford it get a TTS, which remapped will give you a 0-60 in the upper 4.x range, if not I personally would buy a 2.0 and mod it, you're going to get to 250BHP without trying too hard, which will give you a 0-60 in the upper 5.x range. Buy a V6 only if you never intend altering it's performance.

cheers,

malty


----------



## 8JVR6 (May 13, 2013)

maltloaf said:


> Buy a V6 only if you never intend altering it's performance.


I would re word that to: Buy a V6 only if you want to heavily modify the car.

Quite easy to get 500bhp out of it on stock internals.


----------



## maltloaf (May 8, 2015)

8JVR6 said:


> maltloaf said:
> 
> 
> > Buy a V6 only if you never intend altering it's performance.
> ...


I suppose that all depends on your definition of easy. There aren't any easy gains to be made on the v6 like for example a remap will do on a turbocharged engine. To get anything like those gains you must need a supercharger and that's going to cost you major bucks.

It's a great engine though and sounds awesome, I almost bought one for £8k but couldn't agree on price with the seller.

Cheers

Malty


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

From Revo, stage 1 remaps

2.0 - 200BHP to 230-260 BHP - max 30.0% gain
2.0 - 211BHP to 254-284 BHP - max 34.5% gain
3.2 - 250BHP to 258-268 BHP - max 7.2% gain


----------



## lordlee (Jun 20, 2012)

We drove both before deciding on the 2.0T and we'd come from a V6 SLK so favoured a V6. We just found the delivery of the turbo engined car more inline with a fun drive and the front end felt usefully lighter. Now its been remapped its a simple no brainer - I use it on my advanced driving sessions and I can coax 34.6mpg out of it in mixed driving which is pretty good for an engine with 246bhp and 350Nm torque.


----------



## tttony (Dec 21, 2014)

Also, don't forget that the V6 is quattro and the majority of 2.0l petrol cars are FWD only. Moving from a Mk1 you may miss the quattro function.


----------



## lontansci (May 26, 2016)

Recently bought a 2011 Audi tt Quattro sport tfsi s-tronic (in the last couple weeks). Previously drove a 2004 BMW z4 3.0i.

From my understanding the factory facelift 2.0 tfsi quattro s-tronic is quicker than the 3.2 and even more so with a stage 1 remap.

Going from the i6 engine in the z4 to the tt, the 3.0l engine definitely felt more raw when accelerating and i'd assume the 3.2 tt would feel the same. But the tfsi quattro s-tronic to me sounds a lot better than the z4 3.0 (although a friend had a 3.2 tt and that sounded good as well) and while the pull is not the same as in the Z4 you notice that the TT is accelerating wuicker if that makes sense. All in all, if your looking for easy gains go with the 2.0.


----------



## sweatystt (Jan 29, 2015)

OK thanks all. Looking to achieve more than approx 265bhp. Got that now on the mk1. What would a stage 2 acheive?? Thanks


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

sweatystt said:


> OK thanks all. Looking to achieve more than approx 265bhp. Got that now on the mk1. What would a stage 2 acheive?? Thanks


Have a look on revo website for figures for each stage. http://www.revotechnik.com/


----------



## marcy4287 (May 27, 2016)

3.2


----------

