S5 Sportback | REVO re-map
 

Q - primarily aimed at Adrian E

I've recently enquired with a garage local to Gatwick/Crawley area (TC in Copthorne) and was quoted around £700 for an initial DSG/TCU remap up to 410bhp/395lb/ft and the big upgrade was around £1700 including fitting a new supercharger pulley.

I'll probably go for option 1 instead of option 2 as I think the latter option might be a bit scary and I'd rather have less stress on components etc.

Option 1 gives an extra 80bhp and 70lb/ft of torque

Have you had any 'work' done on your S5?


Cheers
John G

Hi bud

Mine is still entirely standard - apart from a factory ECU map change to the engine due to fitting an updated PCV, and the gearbox map had to be changed when the mecatronics threw a wobbly (the kit Audi now sell to resolve this fault includes a couple of new valves as well as the boards and wiring that frequently fail)

I did look to get Revo on the S8 when I originally got it (and decided it wasn’t worth it). Having used TC before for my old B5 era Passat I took it there for them to read the stock ECU. They’re a reputable outfit (and can’t recall why I stopped using them but think it was just the distance and lack of loan cars)

The obvious choice for a map would be MRC. I’d always favour a map that’s tweaked to the individual vehicle rather than a generic one. Worth noting the B8 is tuned for 95 fuel and there’s no appreciable benefit to running it on 98 with the standard map. I’d defo be asking the question of any mapping outfit over which fuel it’s being mapped to use, and if it’s 98 whether it’s ‘safe’ on 95. Given the lack of range with these cars (I’m nearly always looking for a fuel station after 200 miles) there’s some significant cost implications for having to use 98……

PS One thing I did on the S5 with VCDS was enable TPMS. It can be done for free and involves coding changes to 3 modules to make it work (MMI to tell it to add the function, ABS module to send the data, and the instrument cluster to throw the warning)

I think Audi charged £250 to enable that as a factory fit option 😂

I've certainly enjoyed the benefit of not having to use super unleaded fuel since my swap from A8L to S5. I got some decent mpg on an long run to Cornwall recently of around 31mpg. I did notice the TPMS option on the display and duly acknowledged the question after I'd set the correct tyre pressures but was unsure as to how it all worked. You've certainly shed some light there, and as for the £250 - Audi stealer phrase comes to mind.

I'll check out MRC - thanks for this.

I'll also see what is available on my OBD Eleven dongle - I'm not sure of capabilities etc. as this stage so I may be offering you some beer tokens.

You mention about the PCV - mine does like a drink of oil so I suspect that mine might need attention. Cheers for all the info, I appreciate it.


John G

Wait till the thermostat fails (it’s when, not if!) as the supercharger has to be lifted to get to it. Everything age related that fails is under it (coolant hoses, PCV, injectors etc) the supercharger also needs to be removed to change the oil in it……the revised PCV did reduce oil consumption a bit, but still requires a top up between annual services. Just one now, rather than two!

David has some experience of these jobs - you can guess from working on which car lol

You’re doing well on fuel if that’s a tank average - best I get is 26-28 mpg on a long run (possibly down to the greater drag of the 20s, but just as likely to be my inability to drive it slowly!). This time of year with lots of local runs it drops to 16-18mpg average. It REALLY chucks fuel in on a cold start.

That's actually quite odd, given that adjusting for fuel quality/RON with knock sensors etc. isn't exactly new technology. And it's an "S" Audi..... :o

Both my S8 and the much newer Volvo say specifically that they get best performance (and fuel economy) on 99RON fuel but can run on 95. And they do! Cost per mile is I think certainly no worse on Tesco Momentum than on standard 95 and since E10 appeared, which has worse efficiency, I suspect the balance is now in favour of E5/99.

A nice option, if not too expensive, would be a map that takes advantage of E5 with better performance and economy, but will equally run without complaint on E10.

Indeed - the RS models will still specify (I believe!) 98 for best performance but will run OK on 95. The S models (the ones I've seen that are later than the D2 anyway) simply say 95 and do not specify/mention 98 at all. I think MJ has mentioned her experience with this batch of vehicles too, but I've found on tank averages that there's no appreciable performance benefit and no measurable improvement in fuel consumption by running a car intended to be run at all times on 95 on 98.

A lot of it is down to advances in other parts of engine/management design, plus changes in perception over fuel grades in Europe, so if you can safely produce the power and associated driveability on 95 then that's what is specified by the manufacturer.

My dad's car is one of that select band of vehicles post 2000 that cannot use E10 fuel (2006 Lexus IS250) so he's having to remember to fill up with E5. Luckily his mileage these days is tiny so he probably only tops up every couple of months.

Agreed that a map that covers both (but delivers the majority of the benefits on E10/95) would be ideal scenario.