Car modifications and warranty related issues

"Will this modifications void my warranty?"

The gazillion million trillion dollar questions that basically get on my nerves and I believe will also get on motorhead's nerve in general.

So to new car owners, the general rule is this (which pretty much is common sense lah, but I feel its lacking alot), modifications DO NOT go hand in hand with warranty.

What does that mean?
That basically mean that the moment you modify something, you run the risk of your warranty being voided.
IF you have modified something and your warranty is voided, please do not go around bitching about it. The terms and condition of the warranty is there for you to see and read. So please read and understand it.

So please do not go around asking the question. You basically make yourself look stupid.

You itchy backside want to modify, you run the risk of your warranty being voided.

Common sense. Grow some please.

And yes, I am very sensitive to this question. Sensitive as in very sensitive and potentially I will go super saiyan ape-shit if being asked question.

Here's a customary potato after a rant post.

P/S - modifications is not the same as enabling/disabling BCM functions.

[Review] Volkswagen Jetta MK6 1.4 TSI - An onwer's review

Volkswagen Jetta MK6 1.4 TSI , launched in Malaysia back in October 2011 in a completely built-up (CBU) guise, imported wholesale from Mexico. The Jetta then retails for RM 149,888 without insurance.
The newer Jetta is now being assembled locally in Pekan via completely knocked down (CKD) packs and retails for RM 130,888 without insurance.

The difference in specifications between Jetta CBU and CKD can be found here.

A C-segment option in the already crowded C-Segment market in Malaysia where the Jetta will have to go up against the Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla Altis, Nissan Slyphy, Peugeot 408, Kia Cerato K3 to name a few.

There is already test drive reviews by the usual motoring sites and magazines. Now its about time to get an owner's review as the owner will be the one using the car day in day out as compared to those motoring sites that only has the car for a couple of days.

To be continued... brain jam... LOL

DQ200 (DSG7) - VW Jetta 1.4 TSI

I have written about the DSG7 discovery previously.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Even though it is DSG7, but the car in question is a Malaysian VW Passat 1.8 TSI.
Those few article helps in clearing doubts about the DSG7 but on the Passat 1.8 TSI.

Now I would like to take an opportunity to share about DSG7 mated to a Malaysia VW Jetta MK6 1.4 TSI which seems to be gaining popularity.

In this post, I've shared that I am now running 177HP and 270NM of torque to the wheels.

This easily exceed the supposedly known 250NM torque limit.

For easier reference 

RED is stock power figure.

BLUE is new power figure.

I've have been running with this power figures for about 1.5 months now. In this 1.5 months, I've been to the track, gone on some B-roads drives, high-speed drives and the usual daily grind and everything is still holding up very well.

A complete scan of my car controllers shows a clean bill of health. Even the DSG7 clutch reading shows that everything is working fine.

Even though the period is just a short 1.5 months, I've just wanted to share what is my personal experience thus far and let people judge themselves if the 1.4 TSI / DSG7 combo is as fragile as what people (usually non-owners) claim it to be.

Nothing beats hearing from an actual owner directly.

For information sake, I've use the following fuel type:

Petron RON95 - Nov 2012 to August 2014

Petron RON97 - September 2014 - January 2015

Shell V-Power Racing - Febuary 2015 - current

This car is still being daily driven at the moment and its now clocking 80k km.

DQ200 (DSG7) - The max torque story v3

From the previous v2 DSG DQ200 post here, the team at Project'A continue to refine the Stage 3 map on the Passat B7.

With more refining done to it, as expected, there is a bump in power output too.

The final figures are now as below.
Numbers are on wheel.

Peak power is now 297 PS, up from the previous 284 PS.

The major gain will be the torque as there is consistently at least 350NM of torque available from 3.5k rpm onwards as compared to the previous 300NM.

Overall, with this new map, apart from a gain in power, the daily drivability is much more linear too as regardless what is shown in the graph, the actual drivability is better than before.

And yes, this is the exact same Passat as before with DSG7 (DQ200) gearbox and running on stock clutch pack. 

And yes again, this car is still being happily driven around town by the owner.

For more information, contact the guys at Project'A.

DQ200 (DSG7) - The max torque story v2

Continuing from here, where it shows that the DQ200 (DSG7) potential maximum factory rated torque of 360 NM instead of the more commonly known 250NM torque limit, I am fortunate to have a friend to test out this theory.

The car involved is a Passat B7. A Passat B7 that is locally assembled in Malaysia with a 1.8L turbo-charged engine with a rated 160PS and 250NM output stock from factory. And yes, it has a DQ200 (DSG7) gearbox mated to it.

So what we have done to the car is the usual full custom exhaust system, upgraded coil packs, upgraded spark plugs, upgraded the factory turbos, upgraded the stock intercooler, junked the factory intake and replaced it with an APR intake kit and not to mentioned we have a stage 3 Project'A map done to the car.

With all the mods and fine-tuning to the engine mapping done, we finally arrived at this figures below.

We managed to push the Passat to a final figures of 284PS and 321NM on wheels.

This is done with a fuel rating of RON97.

In case anyone has been wondering of the durability, this car has been running around town since 5th of May 2014 till now without issues. Total stock gearbox with stock clutch pack.

On top of being daily driven, this car has also seen the usual mountain road runs of Ulu Yam and Genting Highlands on an almost bi-weekly basis. Not to mention too the usual high-speed runs on the highways around the country.

A closing note:
This is by no means an absolute fact about DSG7. This is purely based on the personal experience that me and my friend have playing around with the "supposedly fragile" DSG7.
Mod at your own risk.

Updated:
I've gotten the green light to reveal the tuner.
This Passat is running on a stage 3 Project'A map.

More info on the stage 3 output here.

RON97 vs RON95 - The comparisons

RON97 vs RON95 arguements has been going around for quite sometimes already with some saying RON95 is shit fuel and RON97 is the better fuel and provides more power, better mileage etc.

Now that Paultan has done a RON97 vs RON95 fuel test as written in their article here, I think I can further add on to their test.

For those lazy buggers who are lazy to click on the link to read, Paultan's team basically does a fuel consumption test between RON95 and RON97 on 2 similiar car, namely 2 VW Polo Sedan 1.6 and 2 VW Jetta 1.4 TSI with one of the Polo being filled with RON95 and the other with RON97. Its the same scenario with the Jetta too with one running RON95 and one running RON97.

The cars are then driven as "real world" as possible through a mixture of heavy traffic routes, trunk routes, highways and so on to find out what will be the consumption be at the end of the journey.

Now please click the link here to find out more as I won't be repeating their article here.

My personal test
What I am going to show here is that, what will be the difference in power between RON95 and RON97 on the same car, which is a VW Jetta 1.4 TSI belonging to yours truly here.

For this scenario, while the car has been running RON95, I've managed to dyno the car to get an output figure for reference purpose.
For the RON97 dyno, I filled up the car with RON97 for 4 tanks before hitting the dyno again. This is so that I've completely clear out as much RON95 as possible from the car fuel tanks.

Between the last RON95 tanks and the 4 tanks of RON97, roughly about 1800 km's has passed.

And the car is running on stock ECU map. No performance remapping done. Plain stock map from factory.

Now enough of text, time to show hand.

Click to enlarge the dyno chart image.

RED is RON 97

BLUE is RON95

Now from dyno chart, between RON97 and RON95, there seems to be no significant power gain.

What you most likely gain is that with RON97, the engine delivers the power smoother compared to RON95 and thus gives the impression that RON97 "produce" more power.

Basically with a smoother engine, the engine sound or note will be less harsh and thus reinforce the impression of more power.

So whats the moral of the story?

Unless you are running performance map or a performance/race/tuned-up engine or driving a performance/sports car, there is no noticeable difference between RON95 and RON97.

So for others driving regular cars and can't decide between RON95 and RON97, the only question you need to ask yourself is , "Can my pocket afford to pay more for fuel?"

Your personal call.

Opinion: "Performance" Oil Filters - Works Engineering

Before any hardcore supporters of the brand goes amok on me, please take note that this is only my personal opinion.
If you don't like, don't read la. Easy right?
t(-.-)t

This is to share my opinion on "performance" oil filters.

Now before I go further, the product that is the center of my opinion today would be non other then Works Engineering High Performance Oil Booster Filter.
Yeah serious. That is the complete name.

If you are to ask me if oil filters increase HP, I would have bitch slap you on the spot. Serious.

How is it that an oil filter is able to increase the power of your engine? 

Do they even know what they are doing?

First a failed camshaft. Story here.

Now this?

For those that are not in the know, basically how engine works is like this. 

When you do an oil change, you basically release back the lost engine power that is lost and this will make you feel as though as your engine is making more power. 

In ACTUAL fact, you are just gaining back all your lost power since the last oil change.

How?

As your engine oils gets dirtier (from giving protection to your engine parts, DUH!), you lose efficiency and thus in the process, losses a couple or so HP/Torque. That is why you hear people complaining about engine being sluggish and such but once an oil change is done, the engine felt better and more responsive.

This is an on-going process.

Simple car maintenance 101. It will not get any simpler then that.

Now lets relate to the mentioned product. 

Notice how it say that you need to do the following:

"However, to maintain optimum low pressure loss properties, it is recommended to change the filter every 3000 km when an oil change is performed."

Basically what it say is to recommend a user to do an oil change every 3000 km in order to feel the filter effect.

Isn't this bullshit plain and simple?

A regular oil change interval is 5000 km and to use this filter, you do it at every 3000 km instead?

Shorter interval means fresher engine oil means more responsive engine means u have less power loss means you feel you have more power when in fact you are actually minimizing the power loss due to dirty engine oil.

Please do some thinking here.

1 + 1 = ?

So now to claim that an over-priced oil filter is able to add HP, in my opinion, would be a plain con job.

Not sure about you but I am surely not falling for this con.