Doesn't this guy compare the cone result with the standard set-up result he previously had on a different day (possibly warmer day)?
I'd say Ess Three's results are more conclusive, but i'm sure it's possible for different people to have different results on different (but similar) cars.
i have done lots of logs recently with pipercross pannel filter which nearly every time gives a peak maf reading of 204gs give or take, i done a couple of logs last nite with the bmc filter fitted mostly the results were lower like 202gs but one was peaking at 208.64gs so once adapted might be ok and steady higher then lower
i think it would be worth talking to AMD and having an idea as to what you want your car to be like. if you want a very punchy map ( as i did, and still loving the punch!!) then go revo, if you want more progressive then try AMD.
Just because a RR don't show no increase in powerr or torque, doesn't mean the driveabilty of the car hasnt been improved.
In the second run, we both got it wrong, and was in the 15secs, which is crap.
I have no doubt the Revo is more aggressive midrange, but I think I have you guys licked at top end, I was reeling Jason(Voorhees) in, near the end of the strip, I was almost level with him, despite being 2-3 car lengths behind at one point!(We have different driving styles)
I have to point out that 1/4 mile times and how it looks in vids is 2 different things. It doesn't take reaction time into the equation, so I could still get a better 1/4 time than my opponent if I reacted 1/2 sec later than him. But it will look like I lost the race.
The vid is just a bit of fun, and is only valid for 12 months :), so rematch next year at GTI Inters if we both still have our S3's! :racer:
When I had my original map put on at big boys toys Essex I was having the Amd map put on, mainly because at the time I didn't know much about revo ( I'd had Amd on my previous car ) when I spoke to one of the lads that worked there picking his brain about the 2 maps he said that generally speaking the Revo would get away quicker but the Amd would reel it in, so over a reasonable distance ie 1/4 mile there wouldn't be anything in them...
for me that is an unessesary part to change, im not in the habit of wasting money for the sake of a 'whoosh'....if it gave me 5bhp id be straight down to the shops to buy one otherwise....
go get one then, i went out doing more logging lastnite and hit a peak maf reading of 211.5 g/s and lots of 206's and 207 g/s. before fitting the bmc i was getting 204 nearly everytime. i also done logs on my actual v requested boost and its meeting requested boost quicker then before so its not in my head that its spooling quicker.
i cant see how people think the bmc is restrictive i certinally dont but the std air box seems to be restrictive in comparison maybe its just my setup
your not getting 5 bhp+ :)
kev have you read the original thread by Glen? this test was conducted without an airbox and with the airbox...... there was hardly any difference which led Glen to maintain the original airbox.... that S3 was pretty much as maxed out as any KO4 S3 is likely to get
now im happy that your getting all these logs etc showing you what the difference is, but until you have evidence that it is actual and not based around sensors readings, then i will be keeping my airbox..... try doing the actual test in test conditions via an RR
be interested to find what 1.8T experts such as Bill think about this.... surely some other testing has been carried out at some point to swing it either way? as it stands all we have is what Glen spent thousands of his own cash on to ensure he was only changing what was absolutely needed
rolling road is just lottery stuff on road test is actuall tests, i no you dont like the sensor theroy but if the engine is reading more air in then there is always going to be a gain in bhp as its one of the key parts in an engines performance as long as you have sufficient mods to get rid of the burnt gasses after.
my previous logs also showed little gains over standard but since letting it adapt then doing more logs i have now definantly gained with out dropping maf readings. so on this dyno lottery test was the car left and run on road to let the ecu adapt to the new mods or just chucked on and re-run???
IIRC the test was on the RR and not left to adjust.....the RR is dyno lottery.... what he used as a gauge is that 1 run on an RR then upgrading, then another run will infact produce an increase if there is infact one there....assuming all the calculations are done exactly the same.... this was done at Star performance, your best searching for it
the thing is (nothing against you) Glen spent thousands that day testing various bits of kit to see what was worth putting on his S3 to squeeze that little bit more power out..... you have simply checked your logs. Whilst i dont wana promote people 'not' testing, it seems to me that the tests Glen conducted were pretty robust (would you spend thousands testing?)....
im not 'pro Glen', i'm merely not into spending money for tha sake of it and the write up from that day still stands today.....nobody has proven otherwise
i have spent thousands testing rather then just looking to what others have tried and going by there experinces, i was one of the 1st to try ap coilovers where most would just go out and get the 'tried and tested' billys and h+r combo. also the large fmic that most deem to big for a k04 turbo.
what have you tested other then a cc remapp?? no offence but serching on fourms and going by other peoples rr graphs where its had no time to adjust to the replaced parts, imo thats not a way to test parts on a car that is known to have a adaptive ecu.
As per my 1st logs with the bmc fitted if i were on a rr test i no doubt would have lost bhp as thats what my maf readings were indicating at the time but also on the rr i would'nt have felt the difference the bmc actually made to the feel of the car where as on road testing you can
'what have you tested other then a cc remapp??' - I am not a mechanic for a living, nor do i pretend to be, what i have is a knowledge from my uni years of engineering both electrical and mechanical..... i know a few crap mechanics and i know some bloody good ones that are able to do things with cars i never thought possible..... i DON'T just take someones word for it when i read something...i look into it further if its not something i can do myself.... this is what i basing my theory on
from what Glen has done for this forum and by his S3, he has far more credit to his name than you, yet you pop up fitting a cone to your car and sprouting how its increased your power JUST by logging..... your gonna have to come up with something better than that to convince....otherwise im afraid you'll just end up another sales figure for these lovely chaps selling 'cones' claiming ridiculous figures....
fully appreciate what you have tested previously.... BUT you havent gone anywhere near the levels that Glen did which is where your argument falls down.... i appreciate what your vagcom tells you, try a clinical test via an independent piece of equipment (your only option is to bench test the engine or RR it).....then run (after your ECU has adjusted if you so wish) in as near the same conditions again....THAT is what will tell you what you have in terms of bhp....not what a sensor tells you,converting to a hidden calculation bhp figure......
you have done the easy bit in logging, you havent proven anything other than an increase in the air going past your MAF..... as you have stated, that doesnt automatically equate to power, and the difference is so minimal I would question the benefit vs cost
personally i think you'd be better ripping your back seats out spare wheel to create the same effect :)
There is only one way to settle it, 1/4 miles! Click on vid in my sig for a demo of Revo vs AmD. :)
i belive i have carried out many tests on my own car much in the way glen has done i just dont write a new thread about every product i have tested on here i reply to someone asking a question about a product i have either tested or have fitted to my car im not as clued up on the tecnical stuff as glen is to give detailed reports however im intelligent enough to no what im doing and to no if im correct in what i have done,
Just like to add i wasnt the sales figure for the bmc as id never have risked paying £200+ for an air filter that my improve things may not have done i left that to the guy i brought it off for £70 :)
no worries Kev..... well fill us in on ya testing next time.....you know im all ears ;)Nattie.... if you fitted it for sound then fair enough, you may have more airflow but is it the correct sort of air?....ie cold air ;)
I would like to have a race with any other stage 1 S3 next year, i.e amd CC etc all I have is stage 1 as seen on the signature.
And your making 312lb/ft of torque from just a stage 1 :think:
yup me too if im not on holiday :)
I am thinking of changing my filter now to a Jetex one after reading one of the Cupra R boys results. Its a far bit bigger than the filter I have on now and for £47 ish, seems pretty good.
im just gonna increase my cold air intake to a 4" jobby once the FMIC is on....that may be why Glen didnt find any increase in airflow and will ensure all of my airflow is cold air :)
on a serious note iam attending the rr day with tuffty etc and the only changes to my car since amd has been the bmc and 007p so we shall see if there is any improvements or losses, however its a different rr and different day i no but if the difference is massive its can only have improved/lost power from the bmc
i cant disagree fella :respekt:
I think it would take the same RR (same conditions) to convince me mate TBH.... the other consideration is the fact that the ambient temp of the increased airflow would have theoretically dropped, hence why im still thinking 4" CA feed once the FMICs on.
if your getting a massive difference in power, the 007p and filter wouldnt be to blame i shouldnt think.....
Thats a hell of amount of torque from a stage 1, not disagreeing that your car isnt making that amount at all but is that RR'd tested too?
it is considering the Revo isnt a fully customisable map in stage 3 guise...... ive not heard of a stage 1 hitting those figures....Revo controller or not
open to being proven wrong
big misinterpretation that Revo maps are open to manipulation by the supplier...they are limited, otherwise Revo would be leaving themselves wide open. Also one of the reasons JBS no longer use them..... because they are adjustable only within parameters - although i know a lot of Revo dealers will argue the toss :)
Back on topic and directed to the OP (enough of this nonesense about who's is quicker, better or has an extra 1bhp here or there, or even how much air flows through the damn air filter rubbish!)
I too am an Ex M3 owner. Yes the remap is a must on the S3, far too sluggish without, but it really doesn't matter which one you go for. Turbo cars perform differently each time you put your foot down on the same day let alone different days/atmospheric conditions.
I got the JBS remap, green panel filter and Forge DV offer for £350. Its been spot on.
I remember back in the earlier days when everyone was getting their 8L S3's remapped 300lb/ft of torque was standard reading, and we all got wet over it, as no one could dyno a Haldex equipped car properly.
I was very impressed with the result myself I do have a print out so if you guys feel the need I need to prove it, then by all means, I will upload it. the first run after the map was even higher with 324lb/ft but low on bhp, so they had to change things around a bit to get a better result in between. but then again I have only had her on RR at AMD essex I don't know if I have to do a RR at a different place to get a better mean result!
312lbs/ft !! thats extremely generous isn't it :) I'm a Revo man but someones pulling your leg with that figure.
So you think they made it up then! I am curious. It felt way quicker than pre-map. So I feel a bit confused now. What are my rights? If any! Shall I get an independent RR to see if it matches? or take it back? what do I say to them?
Mine was 275lbs/ft when last tested which keeps me firmly in the seat :)
I always remember the saying 'its a dyno lottery' as the figure can vary depending on what the technician does.