[kbk_75]

Can all TSI owners confirm their engine numbers please (just the first four letters)?

I just discovered that my car (that I have not yet taken delivery of) has an engine number that begins with CBZC. Did some digging around and the CBZC engines are 90 PS versions, NOT 105 PS. The 105 PS engines are CBZB and the 86 PS versions CBZA.

If VW is offering a 90 PS motor and marketing it as a 105 PS engine here, I will not accept the car. I drove the 1.2 TSI 105 PS in Denmark and it felt a lot quicker than the car I drove here for the test drive. I assumed it was because it was detuned, but if VW are knowingly selling a 90 PS version of their engine as a 105 PS we've got a problem on our hands!

[sandeepmohan]

Originally Posted by kbk_75

Did some digging around and the CBZC engines are 90 PS versions, NOT 105 PS. The 105 PS engines are CBZB and the 86 PS versions CBZA.

I really hope this is a case of wrong engine code stamping. I can't comment about the car you drove in Denmark. De tuning can make a world of a difference in engine response. The claimed 17+ kmpl is another give away. I wonder how they achieved this or if this is another government scam. Having driven a Ikon 1.6l, Baleno and Etios, all are about 90ps cars, the GT felt quicker. It could be the surge of the turbo charger combined with the fast shifting box that makes the car "feel" quicker. I never felt the power to be out of place from the claim VW have made. The only way to test would be to dyno the car.

[joslicx]

Originally Posted by kbk_75

if VW are knowingly selling a 90 PS version of their engine as a 105 PS we've got a problem on our hands!

If VW are knowingly selling you a 90 PS engine as a 105 PS then actually you have a gold mine in your hands!!! You'll only need a bulletproof proof of the same for a successful litigation against them. They surely cant get away with it.

[oxyzen]

Originally Posted by kbk_75

I just discovered that my car (that I have not yet taken delivery of) has an engine number that begins with CBZC. Did some digging around and the CBZC engines are 90 PS versions, NOT 105 PS. The 105 PS engines are CBZB and the 86 PS versions CBZA.

VWs are not known to do these. And where will they find a 90 PS car just for you. I dont think it is even being manufactured in India.
If you have a doubt. a 0-100 timing should clear it. Anyway you are going in the right direction, crosschecking the engine munber with others.

[kbk_75]

Originally Posted by oxyzen

VWs are not known to do these. And where will they find a 90 PS car just for you. I dont think it is even being manufactured in India.
If you have a doubt. a 0-100 timing should clear it. Anyway you are going in the right direction, crosschecking the engine munber with others.

I am obviously not suggesting that I am the only one whose car has a CBZC engine. To suggest that would be utterly idiotic. The point is these engines are all manufactured at the Skoda factory in the Czech Republic, and there are three KNOWN versions of the same block engine. The CBZC engines are the mid level engine that makes 90 PS.

[kbk_75]

Originally Posted by sandeepmohan

I really hope this is a case of wrong engine code stamping. I can't comment about the car you drove in Denmark. De tuning can make a world of a difference in engine response. The claimed 17+ kmpl is another give away. I wonder how they achieved this or if this is another government scam. Having driven a Ikon 1.6l, Baleno and Etios, all are about 90ps cars, the GT felt quicker. It could be the surge of the turbo charger combined with the fast shifting box that makes the car "feel" quicker. I never felt the power to be out of place from the claim VW have made. The only way to test would be to dyno the car.

It might also explain Autocar India's 11.34 second 0-100 test run!

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by kbk_75

It might also explain Autocar India's 11.34 second 0-100 test run!

Interesting! 90ps 1.2 TSI is the base variant for the Polo here in Singapore, the 0-100 figure mentioned is 10.9 seconds (9.7 seconds for the 105ps).
Do keep us updated on the developments on this. Thanks!

[kbk_75]

Originally Posted by vb-san

Interesting! 90ps 1.2 TSI is the base variant for the Polo here in Singapore, the 0-100 figure mentioned is 10.9 seconds (9.7 seconds for the 105ps).
Do keep us updated on the developments on this. Thanks!

Precisely. A 10.9 second 0-100 can easily be 11.34 (which is what Autocar India tested the car at) depending on road conditions, fuel quality, etc.

A 9.7 second 0-100 car would have to be VERY badly driven, perhaps have a gear missed (which wouldn't happen in a 7 speed DSG), to record an 11.34 run!

[NevGin]

Originally Posted by kbk_75

Can all TSI owners confirm their engine numbers please (just the first four letters)?

I just discovered that my car (that I have not yet taken delivery of) has an engine number that begins with CBZC. Did some digging around and the CBZC engines are 90 PS versions, NOT 105 PS. The 105 PS engines are CBZB and the 86 PS versions CBZA.

Thank you for sharing this. I have my doubts that VW would resort to falsifying specs especially after the homologated car was certified as having a 77 Kw output from the motor. But your research is spot on. The CBZC has been indicated as a 66 Kw motor. Could it be that in order to reach a better price (or more margin, whatever may be the case) they have simply used this engine and modified the turbocharger geometry? Both blocks are 1,197 cc.

[kbk_75]

Originally Posted by NevGin

Thank you for sharing this. I have my doubts that VW would resort to falsifying specs especially after the homologated car was certified as having a 77 Kw output from the motor. But your research is spot on. The CBZC has been indicated as a 66 Kw motor. Could it be that in order to reach a better price (or more margin, whatever may be the case) they have simply used this engine and modified the turbocharger geometry? Both blocks are 1,197 cc.

The engine is mechanically identical in all three versions, as I understand it. The ECU is what makes the difference between the versions. Factory performance-chipping, if you like!

I am trying to find out from VW why the engine has a CBZC code, when it should clearly be a CBZB.

As to what lengths corporations will go to, to make a profit, the less said the better. We don't have to look very far to recall other cases of auto companies being involved in various scams.

I sincerely hope there is a simple explanation for this and it's nothing more sinister, in this case!

[tharian]

Maybe all the 1.2's output is the same(90ps) and it is the mapping and turbo that makes the different outputs and the code that you said was different, is country and power specific and not power output specific alone.

The only way to find that out would be to check if all other GT TSI in India has the same code as yours.

Really doubt if VW or any auto major would give us a true 90ps engine claiming it is 105ps when everyone knows there are a millions ways to find the right figures.

[Sankar]

Originally Posted by kbk_75

Can all TSI owners confirm their engine numbers please (just the first four letters)?

I just discovered that my car (that I have not yet taken delivery of) has an engine number that begins with CBZC. Did some digging around and the CBZC engines are 90 PS versions, NOT 105 PS. The 105 PS engines are CBZB and the 86 PS versions CBZA.

If VW is offering a 90 PS motor and marketing it as a 105 PS engine here, I will not accept the car. I drove the 1.2 TSI 105 PS in Denmark and it felt a lot quicker than the car I drove here for the test drive. I assumed it was because it was detuned, but if VW are knowingly selling a 90 PS version of their engine as a 105 PS we've got a problem on our hands!

Man, i'm surprised to hear this!! And you are right, the 77KW engine's engine code should be CBZB! If you are sure that the TSI engine you got (and what others got if they could confirm) is the CBZC then it can't be the 105PS engine, see the pic attached engine code for 105PS engine is CBZB - this piece of info wouldn't be wrong.



Can other owners also confirm?

Probably this explains the o to 100 timings!!

[kbk_75]

So I just verified with a 90 PS 1.2 TSI Polo owner in Denmark and their car has a CBZC engine as well. This firmly points to the fact that the so called Polo GT's engine is the 90 PS version of the 1.2 TSI mill. And yes, this would explain the slower than expected acceleration figures that Autocar India got.

I hope I'm wrong and I hope VW has some simple explanation to put all this to rest, but I will certainly not accept this car if the claimed power output differs from the actual engine's.

POLO GT OWNERS PLEASE CONFIRM WHAT THE FIRST FOUR LETTERS OF YOUR CAR'S ENGINE NUMBER IS. THANK YOU.

[prithwi-81]

Instead of speculative statements, why dont one of you write to vw india (email) and ask them to clarify. Alternatively ask autocar or some mag to reachout as well. Should solve the issue straight up.

[kbk_75]

Originally Posted by prithwi-81

Instead of speculative statements, why dont one of you write to vw india (email) and ask them to clarify. Alternatively ask autocar or some mag to reachout as well. Should solve the issue straight up.

I've already written to VW and spoken to HS at Autocar India. I've also PM'd all the owners on this thread to ask for their confirmation on what their engine numbers are.