Power output

bobtooke

bobtooke

Registered User
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
UK
Anyone put their 2.0TDi on a rolling road?
I did and had some interesting results.

350lbft @ 2950rpm
176bhp @ 3814rpm

I thought they were only supposed to put out 140PS?

Still, I'm not complaining.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yes.gif
 
Those are some impressive numbers for a Standard?? car, How many miles have you done? I think a modern diesel is very tight from new and seems to loosen up and grow in power a little,

I had a diesel 120dci Renault that showed 147 and 280! against 120bhp/220 ftlb after 25K miles, and sounded much better than new also

Where did you get it tested please?

I've just had mine REVO'd and want to see what the result is, feels better,

anyone know of a four wheel (don't really fancy disconencting the Haldex)rolling road they can recommend in the Southern region, Portsmouth/Southampton ideally?
 
No-one has played around with it, it's as Audi made it, picked up from Caffyns in Brighton 6 weeks ago. Not quite 1000mls on the clock yet.

Had it RR'd at Fast Parts, Tait Road, Croydon.

It was a group session arranged by the Midget and Sprite Club. My Midget was off the road so I put the Audi on instead.

Only a 2WD RR there but Paul Hebden who runs it is a top bloke who does a bit of VAG tuning on top of the A & K series race tuning he does on his own race cars.
 
Dyno outputs vary,so that ones maybe reads high.

Dynos are only any good,in my opinion,to measure before and after figures.

Anything else is pretty irrelevant.

I'd be willing to bet you won't find your car any faster than the next Tdi,so does that mean they all put out 170+ bhp ?

I don't think so.
 
audi upgrades
^^^ 'tis true chaps, was done at AMD a couple of years back. Was totally standard, but pretty loose (had covered 50k miles or so at the time).

AMD's RR is meant to be pretty accurate and people who had their motors RR'd elsewhere previosuly were seeing figuires within 1 or 2 horsepwoer of what they had seen before.

rrd.jpg


The full report here...

http://www.golfgti.co.uk/viewpastevents.asp?eventID=42
 
A black Gti with it's bonnet open ?

Where d'you get a picture of my old car then ?
 
Unless I've got the only genuine 140bhp A3 in existence (highly unlikely),then there's absolutely no way these things are putting out a genuine 170+bhp.

Honestly,would they take a beard-growing,paint drying,26 seconds to go from zero-100mph if they were ?

It just doesn't equate.

It doesn't equate in real life either.
Not by the way my thing wheezes past other cars and I have to pre-plan overtakes.

Only a few months back I was telling you all about how I struggled to get past an ancient Golf Gti.

Does that sound like a 170+ bhp car to you ?

My car's no slower than any other 2.0tdi either,as witnessed by a fun wee dogfight I had with a 2.0tdi A4 S-line the other week.
 
[ QUOTE ]

Do you knwo reading this song reminds me of an old song... ;-)

J.

[/ QUOTE ]

And that would be!?! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
 
audi upgrades
Snap - I've got the power ?
Osmonds - Crazy horses ?

Anything by The Magic Numbers ?

 
[ QUOTE ]
Unless I've got the only genuine 140bhp A3 in existence (highly unlikely),then there's absolutely no way these things are putting out a genuine 170+bhp.

Honestly,would they take a beard-growing,paint drying,26 seconds to go from zero-100mph if they were ?

It just doesn't equate.

It doesn't equate in real life either.
Not by the way my thing wheezes past other cars and I have to pre-plan overtakes.

Only a few months back I was telling you all about how I struggled to get past an ancient Golf Gti.

Does that sound like a 170+ bhp car to you ?

My car's no slower than any other 2.0tdi either,as witnessed by a fun wee dogfight I had with a 2.0tdi A4 S-line the other week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you can/can't beat another car on the road you cannot go around making definitive statements about it.
For example, you couldn’t beat an ancient golf gti? One of my friends has an ancient golf gti
it happens to be powered by a 5 litres V8 from a TVR Griffith
does that make my audi any faster or slower? No, of course not. Does it help us determine how fast his car is? Nope.
Likewise, I could have a 'race' with many cars and beat them - as long as we weren't properly racing
I could take on a Bugatti Veyron and win (if the driver was dead).
Would that make my Audi faster than a Veyron? Of course not.
The fact remains that the PD engines quoted power figures fall short of what they actually churn out. Quite why, I don’t know - but I have spoken to too many people in the VAG world with these things to think its a freak occurrence - its the norm
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unless I've got the only genuine 140bhp A3 in existence (highly unlikely),then there's absolutely no way these things are putting out a genuine 170+bhp.

Honestly,would they take a beard-growing,paint drying,26 seconds to go from zero-100mph if they were ?

It just doesn't equate.

It doesn't equate in real life either.
Not by the way my thing wheezes past other cars and I have to pre-plan overtakes.

Only a few months back I was telling you all about how I struggled to get past an ancient Golf Gti.

Does that sound like a 170+ bhp car to you ?

My car's no slower than any other 2.0tdi either,as witnessed by a fun wee dogfight I had with a 2.0tdi A4 S-line the other week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you can/can't beat another car on the road you cannot go around making definitive statements about it.
For example, you couldn’t beat an ancient golf gti? One of my friends has an ancient golf gti
it happens to be powered by a 5 litres V8 from a TVR Griffith
does that make my audi any faster or slower? No, of course not. Does it help us determine how fast his car is? Nope.
Likewise, I could have a 'race' with many cars and beat them - as long as we weren't properly racing
I could take on a Bugatti Veyron and win (if the driver was dead).
Would that make my Audi faster than a Veyron? Of course not.
The fact remains that the PD engines quoted power figures fall short of what they actually churn out. Quite why, I don’t know - but I have spoken to too many people in the VAG world with these things to think its a freak occurrence - its the norm

[/ QUOTE ]

So,do you believe these figures then ?

If so,can you explain why a 170+bhp car accelerates so slowly ?

The BMW 320D is much quicker to 100mph,on it's quoted 163bhp,so should we assume it is actually putting out over 200 bhp ??

Seriously,can you see why I'm so sceptical here ?

If our cars seemed unbelievably fast for 140bhp,then I'd have no problem.

It's like saying Britney Spears has 40DD hooters,when all your instincts say "Naaaaah"..
 
I believed the figures of the golf as I saw it with my own eyes

and last time i looked, you could spot big hooters whereas i couldnt look at an engine and see its BHP /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]

If so,can you explain why a 170+bhp car accelerates so slowly ?

The BMW 320D is much quicker to 100mph,on it's quoted 163bhp,so should we assume it is actually putting out over 200 bhp ??



[/ QUOTE ]

err, try considering.....

Weight,
gearing,
Final drive,
aerodynamics,
power delivery/curve

Comparing two different cars maximum power figures and then questioning why their performance isn't identical is frankly a bift daft.

Consider a 128bhp fireblade-powered westield, and a bog standard 2 litre Mondeo if you want to look at an extreme.
 
Acceleration is more linked to torque output than bhp. For example a 170bhp diesel with 400Nm or torque, will out accelerate a 200bhp petrol with 300 NM or torque ...... until you hit the torque/bhp cross over point on each engine.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Acceleration is more linked to torque output than bhp. For example a 170bhp diesel with 400Nm or torque, will out accelerate a 200bhp petrol with 300 NM or torque ...... until you hit the torque/bhp cross over point on each engine.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not that simple either...

You have to consider gearing and kerb weight to get the full picture.

If the two cars you mention were identical weights and had identical gearing, then your suggesion is true.

In reality, it is not always the case.
 
Nobody has yet answered the question.

Do you believe the car performs like it has 170+bhp ?

I say no,definitely not.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Acceleration is more linked to torque output than bhp. For example a 170bhp diesel with 400Nm or torque, will out accelerate a 200bhp petrol with 300 NM or torque ...... until you hit the torque/bhp cross over point on each engine.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not that simple either...

You have to consider gearing and kerb weight to get the full picture.

If the two cars you mention were identical weights and had identical gearing, then your suggesion is true.

In reality, it is not always the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally agree, just trying to make a basic example.

Bowfer.... have you ever driven a 170bhp 2.0 tdi ?
 
I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that the PD's can put out a fair bit more that what they're quoted. AFAIK, a PD140, can put out about 156, maybe 160, if it was way above that, I'd put it down to over-optimistic rollers.
 
[

[/ QUOTE ] have you ever driven a 170bhp 2.0 tdi ?

[/ QUOTE ]

That will be mine then, though a 1.9 unit... Tested on Star Performance's rollers. Came in at 177 bhp loosing abot 40 bhp through friction/transmission losses.
 
I would have been doubtful of the figures but the fact is that I saw mates cars hit the rollers before and after. Both produced exactly as expected and matched previous figures at other RR's. OK, I can accept that nearly all RR's will have differences but I know for certain that this one ain't THAT far off the mark. Maybe 4 or 5 bhp out but no more. Any more than that would be noticed big time on a radical Mini engine squeezing the last drop of power!

Interestingly, on a second run I had the A/C on by mistake which swiped 4bhp off the max figure.
 
Ahhh here's the rub, what were the losses from the flywheel to the wheels? I've seen some right numpty calculations of 40% loses, 'so my car has 200bhp!!". Yeah sure.......

Who did the rolling road that gave you 170bhp and 350lb ft from a std 140 car?

The Revo figures for a remapped 140 DSG are 203bhp and 285lb ft, with a power loss of 17.1%, these figures from Vince at Stealth. which were very little different (<1%) from the RR at Clive Atthowe's in Norwich.
 
Graph shows max of 139bhp at the wheels.

Which equates to approx 22% loss.

This sounds about right to me for a modern FWD box. If it were a Mini I might be a bit more sceptical.

To be honest, it sounded a bit farfetched to me which made me question the figures in every way I could think of. Every way you look at it, it points to fairly accurate figures. The other thing is that the guy in the garage has no interest in inflating the figures. It's a brand new car and he's done no work on it so why should he give a toss as to how much power it puts out?

The figures are accurate - why is it so apparently high? I have no idea, but it's not a problem to me!
 
Sorry,but you're still not answering the question Bobtooke.

You're obviously into cars,so you obviously know your stuff.

Does it feel like a 170+ bhp engine to you ?
 
***, in some cases it feels equally as quick as my old impreza - which had 276BHP - when are you going to realise its not just BHP, torque gets you rolling and moving and a shaking
 
[ QUOTE ]
***, in some cases it feels equally as quick as my old impreza - which had 276BHP - when are you going to realise its not just BHP, torque gets you rolling and moving and a shaking

[/ QUOTE ]

here here
 
[ QUOTE ]
***, in some cases it feels equally as quick as my old impreza - which had 276BHP - when are you going to realise its not just BHP, torque gets you rolling and moving and a shaking

[/ QUOTE ]

Discounting gearing and weight again...

My old Integra Type-R felt faster (and in fact WAS faster) through certain gears than my S3.

It would match it from a standing start...

It only had 130 lb-ft of torque.
The S3 has 210. Similar BHP (ITR was about 10 BHP less)

How's that work then?

Weight and gearing.

Torque is not everything...it's a great thing assuming the vehicle is geared to make best use of it and the vehicle isn't overly lardy.
 
Perhaps Audi ran out of 140 engines and fitted a 170 !
 
the fact that it rev's to 9k rpm and therefore can do much more speed in each gear - you can't discount gearing really
 
I thought their were issues with the DSG gearbox and torque. If the engine puts out 350lbft as standard (that's 114lbft more than official quoted by the manufacturer), why haven't all DSG boxes broken at the first gear change?

177bhp as standard perhaps is just about feasible - but then why does Audi quote at least 160bhp (tolerances are not that wild from car to car). But 350lbft is pie in the sky.
 
I'd agree with that. It's almost impossible to compare the "feel" of a 170bhp Turbo diesel against say, my old car which was a 160bhp petrol driven 4X4. Difference in weight, handling and ultimately, the fact that it's a diesel will all make a difference. But above all, as the torque output is not vastly different to the standard figure, the "feel" would most likely be similar to a standard car anyway.

I like the fact that the car seems to do well on the RR but I am long past realizing that RR bhp figures are purely vanity.

What I am sure of is that I am more than happy with the performance of my new diesel car regardless of what the figures say.
 
[ QUOTE ]
What I am sure of is that I am more than happy with the performance of my new diesel car regardless of what the figures say.

[/ QUOTE ]
... and that's surely the most important thing! Outright figures aren't everything.

As for the RR figure, my previous car was a fully-loaded, mechanically-standard Focus ST170 which I owned from new and put 11k on in around 15 months. I sold it to a nice guy I met through a Focus internet forum. A few months later, I got a text from him one Saturday morning, asking me if it really was standard - the car had just come off the rollers at Power Engineering and had produced 185bhp and 157lb/ft - up 14bhp and 12lb/ft respectively. Of course, we were chuffed and quickly lay claim to the UK's most powerful standard ST170!

Lots of people were suspicious however, and when the car went back on the same rollers a few months later, it was actually DOWN on standard - 167bhp this time (not sure what happened after that). The moral of the story is if the figures do seem a little unreal, and you're really that worried about it, get it on the rollers again, preferably at another site.
 
Could the difference be something as simple as Audi giving an "at the wheels" figure for BHP rather than at the crank? Most folk know that they consistantly make more than stated. Seems the margin of difference is consistant if Audi state the bhp after friction losses rather than the crank figure?
 
My 2.0TDI Quattro feels nowhere near as quick as my Impreza(330bhp/310ftlb) I would say maybe around 150bhp would be about right but no more, I will have to get it on the RR and see what I get, There are 2 good 4x4 RR near me.
 
Is your Imprezza a diesel version then Power_junkie?
How can you tell what 150bhp of diesel feels like compared to a hi-performance petrol car?

Of course you can tell the difference between a 2000kg car with 100lbft and a 500kg car with 300lbft but judging bhp with differing fuels and weights is an impossibility without a dyno!
 
this debate could go on and on i think,im not experienced with rolling roads,
but from what ive read so far,tyre pressure's,air temp,the operator and the differing makes of rolling road,all add up to varying figures,
when i put mine on the one at power engineering,i was given an approx figure at the flywheel,of 170bhp,with the remap,and to be honest im not 100% sure what it should feel like compared to standard, as i was still carefull with it when i had the map done,
i guess a comparison with another similar a3 is the only way to know,again the way a car is run in will produce different figures as well?.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

audigex
BOSE Sound System: power output?
Replies
2
Views
3K
Sayam
Sayam
C
High output TDi
Replies
12
Views
990
bunny
B
J
Symphony line level output
Replies
0
Views
423
jackowack559
J
P
converting MAF output to bhp
Replies
8
Views
966
pablo
P
jsws3
Power power power
Replies
4
Views
962
Iggu
Iggu
Top
Back