Awesome Gti RR day

Ive already said spins car felt faster and more eager than mine , coz of the extra torque , and he had me in the car!

So there is no doubting a mapped car would be quicker!

Agreed i need to drive my own car mapped on my own to help me decide.

I know your disappoined Martain , and thats understandable , but i don't think there was any FUDGING FIGURES going on , coz if that was the case STD would of made STD power , Revo and GIAC would of made more than STD, and the APR map they put on Mitch78's car would of wiped the floor with everyone!

Thanks

leon
 
Its not necesarily the peak figures that are important, but rather the figures throughout the range (ie the area under the graph on the rolling road plots).

Eg, a mapped car may only have 10bhp more at peak power than a standard car, but at certain points in the rev range it could have 30bhp more, that sort of thing would make a big difference to how fast the car is.

If anyone is fudging the figures its the remapping companies when they sell their chips/remaps, after all, with all other things being equal you'd choose the remap that gave the most power, hence why the 'Hammer' 330bhp map is proving irrisistable to many when compared to everyone else 305-310bhp maps. The reality would appear to be that the 330bhp map is not hugely more powerful than revos 310bhp map at peak power, however maybe it generates far mopre torque/bhp throughout the range when compared to a standard or a revo remapped car.

It would be really useful for you guys to each post copies of your rolling road plots so that we can overlay them and look at the full picture, and not the the headline power figures.
 
Mines up!

I think the STD cars made more than the book , and the map cars made slightly less than claimed.

Theres no doubting a mapped car would be quicker than a STD car.

p
 
I'm only disappointed because I didn't feel the day went as well as previous I've been too, the figures have always been relative and I know this only too well but I have come to expect greater things of Awesome. Not exactly confidence inspiring when one minute its FWD and the next it's 4WD.

I only wanted Clutch figures to add some substance to GIAC power claims, I can review my own findings all day long and tell you Guys that in my opinion its fast in both Hammer and normal 310 GIAC mapped form but some 'estimate' figures would add weight for those considering a remap, again this is for the benefit of Forum members not so I get a pat on the back in the pub.

I don't have enough technical knowledge about Dyno's to argue a strong case but common sense must prevail, transmission losses would be expected to be a lot higher, looking at the Regal dyno plot the GIAC 310 map made 308.5bhp at the flywheel and only 225 at the wheels, this is in line with what we have begun to expect from haldex equipped cars so we have 3 conclusions -

1) The dyno process was not correct on the day.
2) Audi screwed up with the standard cars and fitted some 'project' RS3 engines by accident.
3) Revo an GIAC are a complete waste of money and all power claims total Cobblers.


Its up to the individual but I've had 6 cars remapped to date and all have come within 5bhp of the claims made by mapping companies, I'm also a hard person to please from a customer service perspective with extremely high expectations so would have no problem complaining I wasn't being offered value for money - the S3 certainly feels very different behind the wheel so as long as everyone is happy with their choices made enough said.....
 
Interesting thread.
As has been stated I really wouldn't worry to much about power output readings. I have not run a car on a RR to be honest but i have run some very quick bikes on a Dyno over the years. Results are pretty good for before and after mods and comparisons to other bikes but peak power results should be taken with a pinch of salt IMHO. They can vary quite a bit from Dyno to Dyno. Another factor with bikes is ram air effect. Most air boxes need, when running at say 150mph, a 150mph draft blowing into them. I would assume cars are no different. Even tyre pressures can zap power when you are trying to read it through the wheels and looking for a few BHP at 200BHP+.
I don't want to belittle the tests but look on them as a comparison to other cars on the day and not a true power output.
 
As ive said else where these engaines seem to be putting out upto 20bhp more than claimed when run in and good fuel used, Mk2 Cupra is putting out 260bhp all over the country on different RR's , the same with the ED 30 , and reading some of the std S3 owners runs from the past and the two runs from the other day the S3 seems to be doing the same!

TT-S 275bhp std?

Thanks

p
 
paddy said:
Interesting thread.
As has been stated I really wouldn't worry to much about power output readings. I have not run a car on a RR to be honest but i have run some very quick bikes on a Dyno over the years. Results are pretty good for before and after mods and comparisons to other bikes but peak power results should be taken with a pinch of salt IMHO. They can vary quite a bit from Dyno to Dyno. Another factor with bikes is ram air effect. Most air boxes need, when running at say 150mph, a 150mph draft blowing into them. I would assume cars are no different. Even tyre pressures can zap power when you are trying to read it through the wheels and looking for a few BHP at 200BHP+.
I don't want to belittle the tests but look on them as a comparison to other cars on the day and not a true power output.
Click to expand...

Have to agree totally, had many discussions about the gains from various remaps and in most cases a sensible remap will give 10-15 bhp
on their own with no other mods
 
Off topic a bit but slightly relevant....
I remember one day seeing a couple of guys really fighting it out on a Dyno with a couple of road bikes. the guy that won was about 18stone with a R1 the other guy was crestfallen that his GSXR1000 was consistently down on the RI.
Point was, he was about 12stone , 6 stone lighter than his mate.
Now for arguments sake the bikes were 350 lb each but with riders were 518lb and 600lb. so power to weigh ratio ( which is what its all about) with the quick bike producing 160 BHP and the slow bike 150BHP equates to 150/518= .29BHP per lb and 160/600= .26BHP per lb so the 150BHP bike would have been considerably quicker on the road with his power to weight ratio about 8-10% better.
What i am getting at is that by losing a couple of stone, taking the spare wheel and tool box out the boot and leaving the wife at home you will probably be better off than having a remap both performance and financially :))
 
audi upgrades
dipstic said:
Have to agree totally, had many discussions about the gains from various remaps and in most cases a sensible remap will give 10-15 bhp
on their own with no other mods
Click to expand...
Sorry, but don't agree with that at all..
10-15bhp would be only slighty noticeable IMO and if I switch my map off and compare the difference, it aint 10-15bhp, NO CHANCE! Yeah, some cars on occasions don't take to a remap to well and don't give the figures they should. But a normal map should give a lot more. Plus I very much doubt a LCR with just 240bhp (222 standard) would run a 14.0 @ 99mph, do you?
I do agree that they don't give as much as some owners are led to believe though. I would say about 30-35bhp on average..
 
Cheers dipstic
Remember that its always cheaper to shed a few pounds from a vehicle than to add a few BHP. The reason an S3 is a bit Quicker than a 3.2 is probably nothing much to do with the extra 10 BHP but a whole load to do with the weight of the engine. In the bike world its ALL about junking weight by adding carbon fibre fairings and titanium this and that.. In the car world people seem to go out of there way to add weight !! You ever felt the weight of electric/heated seats !! put them in an S3 and your probably back to 3.2 performance straight away...
You get the picture.
 
Vtec Abuser said:
Sorry, but don't agree with that at all..
10-15bhp would be only slighty noticeable IMO and if I switch my map off and compare the difference, it aint 10-15bhp, NO CHANCE! Yeah, some cars on occasions don't take to a remap to well and don't give the figures they should. But a normal map should give a lot more. Plus I very much doubt a LCR with just 240bhp (222 standard) would run a 14.0 @ 99mph, do you?
I do agree that they don't give as much as some owners are led to believe though. I would say about 30-35bhp on average..
Click to expand...

Only saying what I have seen (on dyno) which is not the same as a real quarter mile run,and many tuning companies tend to over inflate the performance gains on exhausts,remaps,intake mods hence dynos really only any use for before/after mods and I have never seen a proven gain of 30-35 bhp just with a remap yet on a standard setup.
 
audi upgrades
dipstic said:
Only saying what I have seen (on dyno) which is not the same as a real quarter mile run,and many tuning companies tend to over inflate the performance gains on exhausts,remaps,intake mods hence dynos really only any use for before/after mods and I have never seen a proven gain of 30-35 bhp just with a remap yet on a standard setup.
Click to expand...

It's in the tunners interest to claim " up to blah, blah, blah " i'm not saying the claims can't be achieved, i'm the lad who spent £400 on a remap for a handful of BHP on a N/A engaine.

Sometimes it's in the interest of the car manufacturer for there cars to be more powerful than they claim? to protect sales of " better , more popular cars , and future models " and to keep insurance premiums down so more people buy the model.

EVO mag have already got the S3 claimed 5.7 0-60 down to 5.6.

It makes you wonder?

p
 
Ive just had a look on the GIAC and Revo web sites , and the figures there quoting ( not including the Hammer map ) tally up with the runs we saw on the RR day.

GIAC - 25-45 hp - 40-65 lbft. = 305bhp 300-325lb ft

http://www.giacusa.com/programs.php?mpid=179

Revo - 300bhp - 310lb ft

http://www.revotechnik.com/products/softwareProduct.aspx?pvID=980

I think everybody was expecting the mapped cars to do better than what the tuners claim, but in fact they were bang on!

Most people were surprised that the STD cars made so much more than claimed , but TBH i wasn't as i explained earlier in the thread about this engaine making more than claimed, thats why i wanted to get a run under my belt before i started modding.

I have no doubts that the mapped cars will be faster and more drivable on the road or track , and sooner or later i will be getting a remap.

Thanks

p
 
phantom said:
Ive just had a look on the GIAC and Revo web sites , and the figures there quoting ( not including the Hammer map ) tally up with the runs we saw on the RR day.

GIAC - 25-45 hp - 40-65 lbft. = 305bhp 300-325lb ft

http://www.giacusa.com/programs.php?mpid=179

Revo - 300bhp - 310lb ft

http://www.revotechnik.com/products/softwareProduct.aspx?pvID=980

I think everybody was expecting the mapped cars to do better than what the tuners claim, but in fact they were bang on!

Most people were surprised that the STD cars made so much more than claimed , but TBH i wasn't as i explained earlier in the thread about this engaine making more than claimed, thats why i wanted to get a run under my belt before i started modding.

I have no doubts that the mapped cars will be faster and more drivable on the road or track , and sooner or later i will be getting a remap.

Thanks

p
Click to expand...


Sorry leon but as you're a DJ, I think it was a track by Livin Joy - Dreamer.!!! :)


There is no way the difference between mapped and standard is 10/15 bhp and absolutely no way on this earth that a standard car will have nearly 250bhp at the wheels, if it makes you feel good about the S3 fine but absolutely no way. Even if your car as standard makes around 280bhp, which wouldn't surprise me that much as all my previous VAG cars have made good gains from standard (ie my 3 x 2.0tdi 140 averaged 153bhp) but to get 250 at the wheels you are talking around 290/300 bhp. To prove transmission losses on the same RR take a look at their website as it has my GTI Mk5 on there with dyno plots from 2006 it was obviously front wheel drive yet made substantial losses ? In the case of my GTi i believe the power figures to be within 2/3 bhp as proved by 2 separate RR, JBS & Superchips HQ.


Go figure.
 
Only one of my runs was 248 ATW , the other two were 243 and 244 ATW , so 290-300 bhp is not gonna be right, the bloke did say one of your runs will be higher than the other two.

I'll settle for 280bhp tho!

LOL

Thanks

leon
 
http://www.audi-sport.net/vb/showthread.php?t=51689&page=2

I'm not slagging off the Hammer , GIAC , or Revo in this thread mate, i'm as gutted as you that the remapped cars never made as much as we all hoped for!

Ive gone out of my way 2/3 times to say that your car feels faster than mine , and would be better to drive day to day on the road or the track!

The STD cars made more than most of us expected.

Would it be fair to say the tuners are guoting 40bhp off there remaps, but you MAY only receive 20bhp or so off there maps , because the STD car MAY be putting out 20bhp over book figure?

I will still get a remap , probabley GIAC at some point.

Oh and if were comparing songs , here one for you by Public Enemy, Don't believe the hype!!! :) LOL

love

leon AKA Phantom
 
As said before, total output is not the full story,the figures seem to suggest 15-20 bhp difference in mapped and std cars,but that is peak output untill the graphs can be overlayed to see the difference, the advantages of mapped against std is not perhaps going to be so obvious from dyno readings.

On the day same rollers all the mapped /non mapped S3 seem to be fairly consistant so any issues should apply to both, therefore drivetrain loss should be irrelevant to output readings, so the difference (apart from bhp) has got to be the difference in the power delivery.
 
^^^^^^^^Exactly , and ive said throughout this thread that a remapped car ( IE , one from the RR day ) would be faster all over the rev range than a STD car, be much more fun , and i'am gonna get a remap!

p
 
As an Illustration of what a remap gives you besides peak figures, this is a printout from when I had my old LCR remapped at awesome I had 3 runs done and then remapped while still on the rollers and then 3 runs with the remap.

As you can see the peak bhp was only slightly up, but the curve is different. The plot shown was on a 95ron remap, I later had the 98ron put on as well and that gave 234whp with 267lb/ft

RRA3printout002.jpg
 
Agreed , it's not just peak power, the extra 30-40lb ft will make a huge difference to how the car drives , and the speed it can reach peak power.

A remap will be worth the outlay of money for the drivability factor , but at this stage of my cars life , and the fact so little is known of the maps/long term damage, i maybe wise to hang fire for a while, ive only done 7k miles!

p
 
Agreed , it's what ive been saying all day!

Iam not disputing any of this , in fact i'm not disputing anything......it's other people who are!

Whos plot is that Lee?

p
 
So you had three runs with the map on?

Were you still there when Louay ( the red S3 ) ran? what did he get?

leon
 
looks pretty clear that the standard S3's put out more than the factory stated 265bhp, also looks like the remap companies match what they say they put out ,with the exception of GIAC's 330bhp map, which seems to be just slightly more than everyone else 300-310bhp map.

The extra power and torque throughout the rev range on that APR map (and I presume the other tuning companies maps would be similar) should make a huge difference to how fast the car is despite the peak figures being only 15bhp more than standard.

Very useful info, thanks all.
 
Can we say we got there in the end? :icon_thumright:
 
Damn, that got a debate going ....... has the dust settled :).

Well, i also have the GIAC map (best stop calling it the 330 eh!). Initally i wouldn't say i was disappointed but a little supprised with peak bhp figures although i did expect graphs to show a boost in mid range. So, i'd pretty much agree with what's been stated in that stock cars put out more bhp than manufacturers suggest and remaps are a little over estimated. That said and i take on board comments about remaps only offering 15/20 bhp peak power and i can see why there's a doubt as to whether they are worth the money for the apparent small gain. I'm kinda glad i had mine remapped before i knew the GIAC figures as i may not have had the map done even allowing for the extra mid range as i too would be sceptical about it all. Not here to blow hot air up GIAC's *** but i have had it remapped and glad i did. So, forgetting dyno figures and seat of the pants driving ...... When the turbo spools up and you keep it on boost up and down the gears (driven in anger ;-)) the car really does pull hard. One of the downsides if it can be called that is that the S3 excellerates with little to no drama and as much as it is fast i personally don't always get a full sense of the speed until i look at the clock and think oh ****! Which leads us on to yesterday when i went out for a good run in the S3 with my friend in his Z4M (338bhp). Straight speed from a 1st gear roll on and red lining in gears to over 130mph (would have guessed at around 100 or so) there was little to nothing to speperate the two cars. With the Z4M leading, coming out of bends he had a slight edge which i'm not sure whether it was the extra power and straight six engine or simply he could get the power down first. I'm not saying the S3 is better, faster etc, simply that in the remapped state it can certainly hold it's own against more exotic and powerfull cars. Fuel didn't last long but we both had a big grin when we got back. In conclusion, if someone wanted a remap for pub bragging rights or to potter around in it then i'd probably suggest keep your money. If you want some extra ooomph, like to have a play with the heavy right foot and don't mind the car drinking fuel then i'd suggest the remapped S3 may just put a smile on your face. As to which or who's remap it seems now that they are all pretty much all on par.
 
Awesome post.. Looking forward to playing with some exotics myself come end of April, when I get te ED30 mapped..:icon_thumright:
 
Superb post Kris and in hindsight the correct approach to a remap, forget the figures and focus on the driving experience.

To everyone I've disagreed with - Ilove you :)
 
I had a dabble with a Porsche Cayman S on the way back from this and was suprised how he didn't pull away until..well i'm not going to admit the speed on a public forum. :)

What did suprise me is the way the S3 handles at high speed on a motorway, it really didn't feel safe or planted at all - the suspension rebound feels very harsh and lumpy when you're getting on a bit. I had read about this in various reviews before buying the car but this was the first time i'd experienced it first hand and I didn't like it at all.

I'm going to have to seriously think about suspension and brake upgrades before even considering more power!
 
What are you on at the moment Jordan? lowering springs?

Are you gonna go the whole coilover route?

p
 
I'm on standard suspension!

Yes I will more than likely go for fully adjustable coilovers (adjustable rebound/damping), i'm not just going to drop it to the floor I want it setup correctly so i'll probably get Quattronics to do this for me.

Hard to explain but when going over bumps on a motorway at higher speed the rebound seemed to be too fast and the car seemed to skip and jump over the bumps, at one point it felt like the back end of the car was actually in the air and at high speeds that's a scary moment!
 
So with that in mind, i'd be better off putting the £200 it would cost me for a set of H&R's to a decent set of coilovers?

p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Awesome gti RR day
Replies
9
Views
1K
Lima
Lima
CornRattle
Awesome GTI
Replies
13
Views
2K
_G_
G
M
Awesome GTI
Replies
7
Views
1K
AwesomeSarah
A
simon t
awesome gti remap
Replies
6
Views
1K
WALTO TDI
WALTO TDI
M
awesome gti remaps
Replies
54
Views
6K
munchkincoupe
munchkincoupe
Top
Back