SimonS3 was the member i was refering to before.
I think Simon means 262bhp Std and 304bhp mapped , not Std cars are putting out 304bhp.
p
Prosport Rolling road day results
- Thread starter phantom
- Start date
SimonS3 was the member i was refering to before.
I think Simon means 262bhp Std and 304bhp mapped , not Std cars are putting out 304bhp.
p
Yes it certainly is, I haven't said anything to suggest otherwise
Your facts are based on a measurement taken from a machine. Which you can't deny may not be 100% accurate. Well no measurement is 100% accurate if you want to get technical.
My opinion is still that I don't believe them whereas my advice is to take the results with a pinch (or a handful).
I think we should stop there and agree to disagree mate. There are too many varying results from ALL sources to be able to put an exact figure to it.
I have a strange feeling that IGGU's car will run circa 260hp Std and 291hp Bluefin'd on saturday ( weather permitting )
I'll pay to run my car on Saturday and hopfully get 294hp again ( weather permitting )
5 hp either way is a good rolling road result on a different day.
p
I'll pay to run my car on Saturday and hopfully get 294hp again ( weather permitting )
5 hp either way is a good rolling road result on a different day.
p
No but yours puts out 304 standard and Simon's 262 standard - that's the spread I'm on about.
A 14% variation on a standard car you pay the SAME money for - that's something people should know about when placing an order. If we can show this on Saturday that deserves a "sticky" thread. In fact it deserves a letter to Ingolstadt and I'll write one.
Iggu,
You seemed like a really chilled bloke on Saturday. In fact they had to come and find you in order to give you your RR plot!!
You didn't seem *****. But now you seem ready to start filming for a new series of "One foot in the grave" taking on the lead role as Victor Meldrew!!
Seriously though, good luck on getting it sorted.
AL
You seemed like a really chilled bloke on Saturday. In fact they had to come and find you in order to give you your RR plot!!
You didn't seem *****. But now you seem ready to start filming for a new series of "One foot in the grave" taking on the lead role as Victor Meldrew!! Seriously though, good luck on getting it sorted.
AL
Not being up to date on all the other RR sessions but looking at sat list all the S3 on that day are showing high BHP readings (in fact most if not all the cars on sat show high bhp)
Other RR seems to show different findings
Operator error on some of the RR sessions or more accurate machines? on others
Other RR seems to show different findings
Operator error on some of the RR sessions or more accurate machines? on others
With the two rolling road club days we have been on Std S3's have put out 285-296hp ( Horsepower, metric, DIN, PS ) 281bhp-292bhp.
I think the two machines we have been on are very very accurate.
And most impoertantly WE HAVEN'T BOUGHT ANYTHING off them or they WASN'T TRYING TO SELL US something , to give them a reason to FUDGE figures.
Thats why i think the figures are correct.
They would fudge Std figures down so we buy there product , they would fudge mapped figures up so we think we need to buy there product.
p
No one is suggesting fudged figures but drivetrain losses are variable from one car to another (few bhp) but all will have additional drivetrain losses that are more consistant and the classic " at the wheels bhp translates to a calculation of engine output".
Until someone puts their engine on a test bench (which Audi might have done) all the rest is best guess/calculations
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 2,016
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 38
I spent a good 30 mins talking with the fella with the focus ST and with Pete... not once did they mention anything that could be considered salesy. They really were just there making sure we all had as good a day as we could. Never asked if I had a map, tried to extoll the virtues of a map, or did anything other than tell me of story's being in a car with Colin McRae, and someone making Pete throw up after taking him for a spin in their car.
I noticed earlier in the thread some people saying why they didnt go to the rev limit? Is that the redline or the cut off limit? I have the vid of mine or jonnyc's run and the driver does let off as soon as it hits the redline FWIW.
Either way, at the end of the day for me this day was just a chance to meet some audi-sport users and the other to chuck the car on the RR and see what came out the other end.
Interested to see the results tho for Iggu and Phantoms other run on Sat.
I noticed earlier in the thread some people saying why they didnt go to the rev limit? Is that the redline or the cut off limit? I have the vid of mine or jonnyc's run and the driver does let off as soon as it hits the redline FWIW.
Either way, at the end of the day for me this day was just a chance to meet some audi-sport users and the other to chuck the car on the RR and see what came out the other end.
Interested to see the results tho for Iggu and Phantoms other run on Sat.
Were going round in circles here ( it's not just you Dipstck )
You asked about RR machines , and i gave my reasons why i don't think Awesome or Prosport had operator error and gave two ( rolling roads ) examples and reasons why they were accurate.
I know you wasn't mate , the fudging figures were all part of my reasons why i think there accurate.
We got figures ATW from Awesome and after 18-20% drivetrain losses the figures were still 286-296hp ( Horsepower, Metric, DIN, PS ) 282-292bhp ( the same as we saw at Prosport ) thats why we go on 4WD rollin roads.
You are correct about the engaine dyno is the only 100% way to find out , but it's not rearly gonna happen is it?
I just don't see how " some " people can't accept that our cars make the power they do , we have two different sets of figures from two different machines , 4 months apart and there still showing the same results.
Embrace it , thats what i say , thank Audi in your prayers at night , that they have given us " up to " 30bhp on top of what we paid for!
p
I Kontraband has hit the nail on the head, it was a great day out and a chance to put faces to names, nothing more than that, not for me anyway.
Having said that i do hope some good comes of this thread. If Iggu can get his BF map sorted then its not all bad is it?
Personally, im not too bothered about numbers and charts, its about driving the thing and having fun.
Having said that i do hope some good comes of this thread. If Iggu can get his BF map sorted then its not all bad is it?
Personally, im not too bothered about numbers and charts, its about driving the thing and having fun.
I think because sometimes, if something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. But saturday could be the exception.
I had my old S3 8L on Awesomes rollers in 2005 - people dismissed the figures. It was 195bhp @ wheels. Awesomes rollers couldn't measure the drive-train losses for 4wd cars (can they now?), so they just said "add 40bhp and that should be about right", which gave 235bhp. I didn't like the "finger in the air" estimate to be honest.
So, you can't win basically. Which ever rolling road you go on people will always disbelieve the figures.
There's only one thing for it, another session at another rolling road.
AL
i have just tried to book mine in for saturday morning but the women i need to speak to is busy so not sure if they will have room, might see you saturday guys
There's only one thing for it, another session at another rolling road.
AL
I'd be up for that
I Kontraband has hit the nail on the head, it was a great day out and a chance to put faces to names, nothing more than that, not for me anyway.
Having said that i do hope some good comes of this thread. If Iggu can get his BF map sorted then its not all bad is it?
Personally, im not too bothered about numbers and charts, its about driving the thing and having fun.
Very sensible Leon - totally agree. I'm genuinely curious to be honest - feel like Sherlock Holmes on the hunt for answers. Just got to see it through. Won't change how my car drives, how I drive it or the fact that I met some top geezers last Saturday who I hope to meet again soon.
Its just an itch I gotta scratch ! Hopefully the journey will have been of some interest to others too.
maxS3uk
mike
How much does it cost?
And what day are you going again?
As I might be interested, but I might be going over to Awesome at some point soon if they get back to me so dont fancy 2 journeys over your way really
But would be good to compare results as I might end up going on Awesome's rollers too.
And what day are you going again?
As I might be interested, but I might be going over to Awesome at some point soon if they get back to me so dont fancy 2 journeys over your way really
But would be good to compare results as I might end up going on Awesome's rollers too.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 2,016
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 38
it was £40 on the day for us, but that inc. lunch and a charity donation to the kids hospital...
There's only one thing for it, another session at another rolling road.
AL
We did do AL , Prosport last saturday was it..... as a second opinion to Awesomes rollers , where we got the same results
Anyway , i'm glad everyone who was there had a good day , and i like the rest had great time.
p
Kris
Registered User
Well, my input to this thread may not be as thought out and constructive as others but here goes .............
I nearly ate £40 worth of food, first time i had met Pete and he was a top guy, enjoyed meeting you guys and having some banter, last but not least i won't be loosing any sleep on my max power output as strangely enough i just enjoy driving the car.
Anyway, you guys are entertaining when you get the bit between the teeth so i'm off to get some more pop corn, i'll rush back so i don't miss anything
I nearly ate £40 worth of food, first time i had met Pete and he was a top guy, enjoyed meeting you guys and having some banter, last but not least i won't be loosing any sleep on my max power output as strangely enough i just enjoy driving the car.
Anyway, you guys are entertaining when you get the bit between the teeth so i'm off to get some more pop corn, i'll rush back so i don't miss anything
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 2,016
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 38
Originally Posted by Iggu 
I thought the fella with the Cupra scoffed all the food ....
That's waaaaay out of order Iggu
I thought the fella with the Cupra scoffed all the food ....
That's waaaaay out of order Iggu
Don't worry about it. Takes more than that to upset me.
Good luck with the Bluefin :thumbsup:
Seen so many threads like this over the years. They are entertaining and in the most part irrelevant.
Having been to a fair few rolling roads over the years, one way or another you'll never find a rolling road that is entirely accurate. Different software, different manufacturers of equipment different operators. However you guys like us, have done the best kind of event. In that you brought car's of a similar specification and ran them all on the same road under more or less the same conditions.
It's nearly always variable though most good RR's I've used have always been +- 5hp either way off the actual mark. The true test of an engine is a bench dyno, but no-one is going to do that.
For example I've ran at Awesome recently, achieving 305hp 360lbft (with updated pump), I ran it at RS Tuning in Leeds last month, it produced 305hp 315lbft (stock pump). Then i ran it at ProSport (updated pump), it ran approx 311hp 335lbft.
All similar headline figures yet with different torque outputs, this can be caused by wheel slip, tyre pressures or simply the way one roads software calculates variables over another, including what load parameters are used.
Someone coined a very good phrase on Cupra.net for it, we call it Dyno Lottery. Do you feel lucky.
As for the Bluefin inconsistances.
Do Superchips make any allowance for the midrange fuel cut-off caused by the standard pump?
Every other TFSI tuner on the market has identified this problem and had to alter the way they approach mapping the TFSI engine due to the way the stock pump delivers. If they are pushing the mid-range part of the map it could at worse be running lean or simply not delivering the fuel pressure where it's needed.
Alternatively they may of played it very safe across the mid-range to get round the fuel cutoff, but then not actually realised the stock pump is able to pump more fuel towards the higher end of the rev band so stalling your headline figures. In effect leaving it a bit linear when they could of bumped it up more towards the tail end. Conjecture on my part I would have to look at the graphs more closely.
Superchips have a good name no doubt otherwise they wouldn't be in the business, but I've never really seen them pushing the same kind of figures as other tuners do in most of the markets I've seen them in.
Nothing wrong with that persay, they may very well be playing it ultra safe for the manufacturers (Superchips do appear to work with the manufacturers more than others), where the American tuners do not.
In short though there could be a multitude of reasons why one car showed less figures than others, technical or otherwise.
Stock TFSI engines in nearly every application they are used in, especially this variant as used in the Ed30, Cupra and S3 have displayed higher than publicised figures on a wide number of RR's across the country.
Nearly every TFSI Cupra i've seen so far produces 260hp give or take as stock, Ed30's similarly. The only time i've seen them display lower is when they are brand new. Mine only showed 240hp when it was new, but after it got past 1000miles it physically loosened up you could feel it on the road, and low and behold next RR it went on, 260hp. It's almost like there is some inbuilt run in time that pegs back the power.
With the engineered differences of the S3 TFSI engine, I wasn't overly surprised to see the impressive stock figures last weekend at ProSport.
All my opinion you understand and I'm certainly no expert, but i've seen this subject done to death on many forums including my own. No one really provides a definitive answer.
Try a few different rolling roads, if its producing similar figures elsewhere, i'd say it's either the map or there is an underlying problem with the car, dodgy MAF or boost leak. Yes TFSI;s still get dodgy MAF's
Having been to a fair few rolling roads over the years, one way or another you'll never find a rolling road that is entirely accurate. Different software, different manufacturers of equipment different operators. However you guys like us, have done the best kind of event. In that you brought car's of a similar specification and ran them all on the same road under more or less the same conditions.
It's nearly always variable though most good RR's I've used have always been +- 5hp either way off the actual mark. The true test of an engine is a bench dyno, but no-one is going to do that.
For example I've ran at Awesome recently, achieving 305hp 360lbft (with updated pump), I ran it at RS Tuning in Leeds last month, it produced 305hp 315lbft (stock pump). Then i ran it at ProSport (updated pump), it ran approx 311hp 335lbft.
All similar headline figures yet with different torque outputs, this can be caused by wheel slip, tyre pressures or simply the way one roads software calculates variables over another, including what load parameters are used.
Someone coined a very good phrase on Cupra.net for it, we call it Dyno Lottery. Do you feel lucky.
As for the Bluefin inconsistances.
Do Superchips make any allowance for the midrange fuel cut-off caused by the standard pump?
Every other TFSI tuner on the market has identified this problem and had to alter the way they approach mapping the TFSI engine due to the way the stock pump delivers. If they are pushing the mid-range part of the map it could at worse be running lean or simply not delivering the fuel pressure where it's needed.
Alternatively they may of played it very safe across the mid-range to get round the fuel cutoff, but then not actually realised the stock pump is able to pump more fuel towards the higher end of the rev band so stalling your headline figures. In effect leaving it a bit linear when they could of bumped it up more towards the tail end. Conjecture on my part I would have to look at the graphs more closely.
Superchips have a good name no doubt otherwise they wouldn't be in the business, but I've never really seen them pushing the same kind of figures as other tuners do in most of the markets I've seen them in.
Nothing wrong with that persay, they may very well be playing it ultra safe for the manufacturers (Superchips do appear to work with the manufacturers more than others), where the American tuners do not.
In short though there could be a multitude of reasons why one car showed less figures than others, technical or otherwise.
Stock TFSI engines in nearly every application they are used in, especially this variant as used in the Ed30, Cupra and S3 have displayed higher than publicised figures on a wide number of RR's across the country.
Nearly every TFSI Cupra i've seen so far produces 260hp give or take as stock, Ed30's similarly. The only time i've seen them display lower is when they are brand new. Mine only showed 240hp when it was new, but after it got past 1000miles it physically loosened up you could feel it on the road, and low and behold next RR it went on, 260hp. It's almost like there is some inbuilt run in time that pegs back the power.
With the engineered differences of the S3 TFSI engine, I wasn't overly surprised to see the impressive stock figures last weekend at ProSport.
All my opinion you understand and I'm certainly no expert, but i've seen this subject done to death on many forums including my own. No one really provides a definitive answer.
Try a few different rolling roads, if its producing similar figures elsewhere, i'd say it's either the map or there is an underlying problem with the car, dodgy MAF or boost leak. Yes TFSI;s still get dodgy MAF's
Seen so many threads like this over the years. They are entertaining and in the most part irrelevant.
Having been to a fair few rolling roads over the years, one way or another you'll never find a rolling road that is entirely accurate. Different software, different manufacturers of equipment different operators. However you guys like us, have done the best kind of event. In that you brought car's of a similar specification and ran them all on the same road under more or less the same conditions.
It's nearly always variable though most good RR's I've used have always been +- 5hp either way off the actual mark. The true test of an engine is a bench dyno, but no-one is going to do that.
For example I've ran at Awesome recently, achieving 305hp 360lbft (with updated pump), I ran it at RS Tuning in Leeds last month, it produced 305hp 315lbft (stock pump). Then i ran it at ProSport (updated pump), it ran approx 311hp 335lbft.
All similar headline figures yet with different torque outputs, this can be caused by wheel slip, tyre pressures or simply the way one roads software calculates variables over another, including what load parameters are used.
Someone coined a very good phrase on Cupra.net for it, we call it Dyno Lottery. Do you feel lucky.
As for the Bluefin inconsistances.
Do Superchips make any allowance for the midrange fuel cut-off caused by the standard pump?
Every other TFSI tuner on the market has identified this problem and had to alter the way they approach mapping the TFSI engine due to the way the stock pump delivers. If they are pushing the mid-range part of the map it could at worse be running lean or simply not delivering the fuel pressure where it's needed.
Alternatively they may of played it very safe across the mid-range to get round the fuel cutoff, but then not actually realised the stock pump is able to pump more fuel towards the higher end of the rev band so stalling your headline figures. In effect leaving it a bit linear when they could of bumped it up more towards the tail end. Conjecture on my part I would have to look at the graphs more closely.
Superchips have a good name no doubt otherwise they wouldn't be in the business, but I've never really seen them pushing the same kind of figures as other tuners do in most of the markets I've seen them in.
Nothing wrong with that persay, they may very well be playing it ultra safe for the manufacturers (Superchips do appear to work with the manufacturers more than others), where the American tuners do not.
In short though there could be a multitude of reasons why one car showed less figures than others, technical or otherwise.
Stock TFSI engines in nearly every application they are used in, especially this variant as used in the Ed30, Cupra and S3 have displayed higher than publicised figures on a wide number of RR's across the country.
Nearly every TFSI Cupra i've seen so far produces 260hp give or take as stock, Ed30's similarly. The only time i've seen them display lower is when they are brand new. Mine only showed 240hp when it was new, but after it got past 1000miles it physically loosened up you could feel it on the road, and low and behold next RR it went on, 260hp. It's almost like there is some inbuilt run in time that pegs back the power.
With the engineered differences of the S3 TFSI engine, I wasn't overly surprised to see the impressive stock figures last weekend at ProSport.
All my opinion you understand and I'm certainly no expert, but i've seen this subject done to death on many forums including my own. No one really provides a definitive answer.
Try a few different rolling roads, if its producing similar figures elsewhere, i'd say it's either the map or there is an underlying problem with the car, dodgy MAF or boost leak. Yes TFSI;s still get dodgy MAF's
Thats what I was going to say..
I always look to bph on rollers has an indication, not an objective reading.
Having said that... rolllers can compare the same car even if they are out...
What I mean is if a roller is not calibrated and gives, let's say 300bhp as standard... it should give way more in the remapped one so the comparison is accurate even if the numbers might not be...
My car is standard and I am definitly leaving it standard... When I want a faster car I just buy one like that if I can...
But applause to you for tuning your cars... for me I love cars but they are a thing I can be bothered fiddling about... already have lots of other hobbies far more interesting to spend my money...
Waiting to see results though... as everyone
Pedro
Having said that... rolllers can compare the same car even if they are out...
What I mean is if a roller is not calibrated and gives, let's say 300bhp as standard... it should give way more in the remapped one so the comparison is accurate even if the numbers might not be...
My car is standard and I am definitly leaving it standard... When I want a faster car I just buy one like that if I can...
But applause to you for tuning your cars... for me I love cars but they are a thing I can be bothered fiddling about... already have lots of other hobbies far more interesting to spend my money...
Waiting to see results though... as everyone
Pedro
You are spot on Pedro , my point is, after three times of getting similar figures on two Dynos there must be some accuracy in them.
p
What can be more interesting than spending thousands of pounds that will never been seen again on your road car?
I must admit ZBOYDs post has convinced me a bit that there could be something in it. I'm looking forward to Iggys results though.
What can be more interesting than spending thousands of pounds that will never been seen again on your road car?
Lol... can tell you a few... Karting, windsurf, radio control cars... just to name a few...
Pedro
ZBOYD did explained it far more eloquntly than i ever could. ( puts on posh voice ) I'm from Salford darling!
p
ZBOYD did explained it far more eloquntly than i ever could. ( puts on posh voice ) I'm from Salford darling!
p
lol I'm afraid I have to agree
