TSi Weaker Engine and better base to build from than GTi Mk6 FSI engine?

[PAPA GTI]

A good friend and fellow forum member has mentioned to I on a few occasions that he is pleased to have a mk5 GTi, mainly because the 'FSi engine is stronger and is a better base to build from with than the TSi'.

The examples my friend presents to explain this statement are:
Golf & Sirocco R has a FSi engine
Upgraded GTi's with a K04 Turbo have found the engine is unable to cope like the FSi
so on, so on.....
From a sales and marketing perspective below is my understanding on the statements above.

Golf & Sirocco R has a FSi engine
The FSi is an engine which is now in its ROI (return on investment) stage, meaning, once a product has been fully developed it is exploited and slightly altered to induce development by simply adjusting it slightly or in this case, placed in a different chassis to continue milking the product.

So buying a R for $60,000 is a money spinner cause the engine is already fully developed, instead a R with a new engine needs to make the return on R&D and ensure that the consumer will be just as convinced that it is as good as the old...and this adds more costs...$$$'s!!!

Make no mistake, manufacturers don't limit themselves by not already having readily available the improvements for the next model with upgrades to make you feel inadequate. (does anyone here not know of the company apple....ipad...iphone etc...)

Another example other than just engine modifications is ECU flashing,
ECU reflash is frowned upon by manufacturers, not because they don't want you to hurt their engines, but for the fact that when they release another model or a limited edition they can improve/upgrade power etc.. and sell the same car by just reflashing the ECU at factory, therefore doing jack, hence why they are trying so hard to stop aftermarket tunes with security lockout methods (if that is what you can call it) with the ECU.
So next time you hear someone say why doesn't it come from the factory like this, or why is the car powered down, you will have a better understanding.

So I hear, then why would VW place the TSi engine in the Mk6?
Would you have bought another GTi with a FSi engine?
It was a needed upgrade in order to sell a new model and to make you feel it was a totally new Gti over the Mk5, cause, really, the exterior didn't change all that much.

As for the Mk5 R32, it is a 3.2 V6 which no longer met the EU environmental emissions act, so milking the the Pirelli based engine with some adjustments in a Mk6 R was smart business.

As for the Sirocco, it is new car all together in Australia, though in Europe the Sirocco has been there for years, geez... I drove a Sirocco when I was holidaying in Greece 3 years ago with the FSi engine. So once again it was just simply using the same engine as Pirelli with refined adjustments.

By no way am I suggesting that any of these cars or engines are inferior, actually quite the opposite, they are all great. However have no doubt when the R has been saturated to death in the market, a new engine will be dropped in and the advert for the Mk8 R will be an engine that is new and produces more power etc....

To think that a manufacturer would make a weaker engine and then place it in one of they most prized selling cars goes against all marketing concept.
I asked Barloworld of late on this, (though they really sometimes know nothing) and they were quite the opposite to the notion that the idea would be that the TSi would be weaker to the FSi.

Upgraded Gti TSi with a K04 Turbo have found the engine is unable to cope like the FSi
In regards to this, I can not explain as I have only come across one GTi I know that has had this upgrade and that is Sammy's car.
I could only say that Sammy's car has had some major stuff done and he is a track nazi!! On this note, best for the guys with K04 upgrades to explain.

I thought I would put this out there to see what the masses will respond to in regards to the notion that the FSi engine is inferior in strength or a better platform to build from than the TSi.

I am happy to stand corrected and am looking forward to some factual, proven explanation.

[Corey_R]

Much of this has already been discussed throughout the Golf R -v- Golf GTI thread.

[AdamD]

I suggest you have a hunt around for the specific differences between the EA113 (FSI) and EA888 (TSI). They're actually not that different, despite what VW (and some others) would have you believe.

They share displacement, bore and stroke, direct injection, and (AFAIK) plenty of parts are either interchangeable or very closely related. The EA888 is an Audi design.

The differences between 113 and 888 that I know of are:

• Pistons and rings
• Fuel pump
• Mass airflow sensor
• Oil and vacuum pump changes
• Static compression drop (10.5:1 to 9.6:1)
• Switch from timing belt to chain

The EA888 meets Euro V emissions standards; the 113 in the MkV was Euro IV (but is presumably now Euro V in the R). The new engine is supposed to be quieter and more refined, but to be honest I don't personally think there's much in it.

The new engine does have a reputation for running its oil hotter, and consuming more oil on the track. This doesn't mean it's a weaker engine, or has lower tolerances for usual driving scenarios (including the odd track day), but has been enough to concern some people, and has been the cause of some heated discussion.

I don't think anyone's yet given a concrete reason why the R models still use the EA113 over the new engine. I'm sure that ROI, coupled with the need for further investment to get extra power (with corresponding higher tolerances) from the new engine, played a major part. VW had already developed the EA113 to run a K04 with the Pirelli, so presumably much of that R&D work was already done well before the R came along.

[WhiteJames]

When Audi developed the EA888 motor in the Mark 6 GTI, they designed the motor in conjunction with metalurgy experts to achieve the best thermal balance between the piston/rings expanding and contracting and the engine block/head expanding and contracting. This may result in a different grade of metal in the engine block of the EA888 for improved thermal properties between piston/rings and bore. Additionally ... the turbo in the EA888 has the manifold incorporated into it improve exhaust/air scavenging, which aids responsiveness and takes up to half a second less to spool to max boost. Other changes in the EA888 is the adoption of a four lobe cam actuator for the fuel pump ensuring greater consistency and refinement in fuel delivery. I guess in developing the Golf R ... VAG have to ensure that the heating, expanding and cooling, contracting occurs in a uniform way when running larger turbine with added boost pressure. Generally this may take anywhere from 18 mths to 3 years to complete test and develop.
Cheers.
WJ

[group 3]

Or they just pulled one out of the nearest S3.

[Lams]

I'll have the EA888 thanks!
it doesn't have a timing belt, it has better fuel pump, it is more compact, it doesn't have the silly airbox in the engine cover. It is a revised and refined version of the 113.
Oh and going to K04 is a lot cheaper!
The EA888 feels more responsive and eager to rev as well.

The stronger bits you mention about the EA113 engine are found in the K04-fitted cars - S3, Pirelli, Golf R, Scirocco R etc