JAW

JUST got a 56K 1.8TQ Should I chip considering the high mileage?

Gordon Martin

56K isn't high mileage in the grand scheme of things.

I haven't scene any scenario where chipping a 1.8 isn't a valid option.

I say go for it!!

Gordon Martin
<A HREF="http://131.107.68.28/a4.org/registry/details.asp?car=2200">98.5 2.8QMS (Santorin Blue)</A>

RickM

This same question came up a few weeks ago, and many responded with their mileage-upon-chipping. I'd suggest a check of the archives if you're really interested. In general, as I recall, there seems to be little or no concern about chipping at higher mileages like yours. "High mileage" is relative, of course. 56K isn't a whole lot of miles. Now, if you were asking about chipping at 156k, then I might have second thoughts.

Rick

Stephen K

as long as it is past the break in point?

Why would 56 K miles be ok but not 156 K?

If I chip my 1.8T, should I expect I can't reach the same milage I could with a stock motor?

RickM

...the consensus seems to be that a chip almost certainly has a negative effect upon overall engine life. To what extent and at what point in an engine's life any "deterioration" in performance (or, more likely, premature failure of parts) attributable to the chip will become evident are the unanswered questions. Past posts indicate many tens of thousands of chipped miles being had without problems arising, so as more time goes by that potential failure threshold seems to be getting higher and higher. But let me emphasize, I'm no tech, this is what I gather from the discussions had here over the past 6 months or so. Perhaps more knowledgeable folks can offer some insight. As for why I'd chip at 56K but hesitate at 156K, well, it's the same reason I'd hesitate to take that 156K car out on the track for some serious hard running. It's been around the block quite a few times, and after all those miles I'd simply have second thoughts about throwing new, additional high-heat, high-torque stresses on it. Not very scientific, I know.

Rick