1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Remapped 1.8T FWD Vs standard S3

vetch Apr 21, 2009

  1. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

    My point was that its even less of a sports car than the M series BMWs or to take your example, the R32.

    I can see the Cayman being the 'drivers car' in future, the 911 has been plagued by this insistence to remain rear engined, then in 2009 they release the new Cayman with a LSD, 320Bhp and most importantly a mid engined layout.
    The press go mental, the car is hailed as a 911 killer and nobody can find anything in its handling that is not a hugely superior to the 911 series cars.

    So lets not get bogged down in semantics, as all manufacturers regardless of status have cars designed for you average person, based around the notion of a sports car, but not actually living up to the true definition thereof.

    The point is this, is that a true sports car is designed to be such a thing, and not just to be an aesthetic incarnation of a previous model.
    It has to inspire, it has to be the best car they've ever made for driving, it has to evoke emotion every time its used.
    People like Lamborghini and Ferrari still do this with every single car.
    In the case of Audi, the S3 isnt that car, according to the press (Chris Harris for example) the only production car Audi has ever made which drives like a real sports car is the Audi R8. (And of course the original SWB Quattro but we are hitting rarest of the rare there)

    I'll repeat what I know from experience. I am running R888 tyres. I have a lightweight car, with the rear being especially light. Traction is produced at the rear of my car.
    I have no issues except in standing water or snow.
    I have yet to find a 'need' for 4WD in the British road environment.

    Now all of the is ONLY opinion.

    It counts for nothing. Same as everyone elses opinion counts for nothing.

    However, you cannot deny the Audi S3 (and the point of this thread) is simply an aesthetic incarnation of the A3 series and it has huge flaws, some of which like its under steering characteristics simply cannot be taken out of the equation regardless of modifications.

    The S3 is simply an aesthetic improvement on the A3 series cars.

    The 45Bhp is neither here nor there, 45bhp doth not make a sports car.

    EDIT - Spelling Spakka
  2. 1animal1

    1animal1 The Clar!! it mouves!!! VCDS Map User

    Dave you paint a good picture and some points even i agree with, but you simply cannot plant your foot to the floor whilst aiming at a wet roundabout managing to steer out and then in without lifting your foot in your M3.... my S3 can.... obviously depending on the roundabout... this is one example and im sure there are plenty more.

    I cant talk on the same level as you and Glen but i know what is physically possible considering the laws of gravity and traction....

    The S3 is to an A3 what an M3 is to a 3 series, they are both made from that crappy production car that rolled off the line with 318 tattoo'ed to its **** end.... yes the M3 has more done to it but then when you compare an RS4 to an A4 then you have Audi's equivelent.... the same basis exists for all 3 of these cars
  3. jcb

    jcb Active Member VCDS Map User


    Have you ever driven one?

    What is your definition of a "sports car"? fast, light, exceptional handling

    the Ur Sport Quattros are nose heavy with dreadful steering, the engine in stock form is far from exciting. (2.3l 20v I5 putting out 220bhp in a car weighing 100 tons) they are only regarded as anything special because of the killing they made of the rally series of their day. Even in 3,4 and 500bhp form they are often described as "agricultural".

    on your points as tarted up models of exisiting cars, the Sport only existed because the original LWB Ur Quattro was even worse due to it's wheelbase so they chopped it up.
  4. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

    Nope, thats why I specifically prefixed the comment with 'according to Chris Harris' who was writing for Autocar and now runs Drivers Republic. I was quite specific it was according to the press and not my own knowledge.
  5. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

    Could you in any 320Bhp car?

    Normal fast driving and physics dictates that you never apply power mid corner, you brake for the corner, then power out. Think of Club or Farm on Silverstone GP. Especially if its tight, like a roundabout would be. Something less tight you would turn in and treat it as straight, thinking of the chicane (Ireland) on silverstone south for an example.

    To apply power on a corner, all the way round breaks all rules of driving.

    So what you're saying, is that the S3 compensates for stupidity.

    This is good, its what I've been saying all along.
  6. 1animal1

    1animal1 The Clar!! it mouves!!! VCDS Map User

    i like the term Dave 'compensates for stupidity'....but in actual fact you arent far wrong....... it compensates more so than a 320bhp lsd equiped M3 if you want specifics... an i would bet limbs on that if the surface was wet - but then we have been here havent we
  7. Ess_Three

    Ess_Three Active Member

    Oh yes...but that's got 4WD.

    You should maybe tell Rally drivers they can't drive then, and they are breaking the rules of driving.

    If the car is set up correctly, and you are of sufficient skill, you can brake pre-apex, power on hard as you turn in and you hit max torque as the apex aproaches - or before - to kick the rear out under power, straighten the steering and power it out under control. How else do you 4 wheel drift an Evo round a hairpin? (or any other similar 4WD car).

    Another example...a certain German car with the engine in the wrong place...has it there for a reason.
    Because of the weight - or lack of it - over the front you need to break hard and late to get the front to stick, then back on the power as you turn in to balance it...as the apex approaches you progressively add power, as the rear rotates, straightening the steering until it's straight and you give it full welly.
    That's allpying power on a corner...all the way round, in my book.
    And it works.

    No, I don't think so...it'll still understeer if driven stupidly.

    Once set up though, it allows the driver to take liberties that they can't do in FWD or RWD cars - like mash the throttle as you turn in and let the car sort it out...which you can, in a well set up S3.

    Which is exactly the reason my old S3 was significantly faster round a wet track, or on a wet back road, than M3s (E36 & 46).

    Horses for courses and all...
  8. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

    I refer you to my previous comments regarding rear engined German cars.
    They bring out with a mid engine layout and suddenly its a better drivers car, handles better and stops better than every 911 ever made.
    Simply because it has some similar parts, in that a 3.4 engine, similar horsepower and a LSD.
    Change the layout, make a better car.

    Regarding your Rally/Evo comments. Now you're talking about controlling a car whilst it DOESNT have traction.
    Drifting isnt traction, you have to apply the rules of slip angle, and you are specifically passing the slip angle point and drifting the car.
    Both in rally and drifting you are doing the same thing, surpassing the slip angle, controlling via throttle and then bringing it back inside the slip angle to regain control.
    Grip vs Drift - Grip is usually faster.

    Your argument doesnt apply in this case.

    Your final comment supports what I've been saying all along. The S3 massages the ego of a driver, makes them think they can do things when in fact the traction control, haldex and wheel speed sensors are sorting it out.

    But we are missing the point again, where is the contrary evidence to show the S3 isnt just a tarted up A3?
  9. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

  10. Ess_Three

    Ess_Three Active Member

    See, now you are talking rubbish.
    Show me a mid engined car that can outbrake a rear engined car equally as well set up?
    911s go pretty much 50:50 under extreme braking...you can't get any better...a Cayman cannot out brake a 911...it's that simple.

    Handles better...hmm.
    Handles more naturally, yes.
    Define better?
    The 911 is more work...more rewarding and has more mechanical grip out of a corner...better?
    Have you driven them both enough to make a fair comparison?

    Better how?
    Easier to drive, perhaps?
    But better? That's to open a word to comment either way.
    Anyway, I digress.

    No, I'm talking about having more torque than grip...but still keeping some traction or you'd sot on the spot with all 4 wheels spinning. You still have grip...each wheel with slip...the likes of Evos continually directing power to maintain slip etc.
    That's very different to having NO traction.

    Whilst in theory this is true, in this case, you can't take grip vs slip in isolation. You must factor in momentum, steering angle and the ability to use the slide/drift/slip (call it what you will) to get the power on earlier and make for a faster exit from a corner.

    Rally cars don't do it because it's slower Dave.

    Don't be ridiculous.
    The driver with any sense makes best use of what's available...
    So what if the chassis is doing the work?

    People tell me all day mine isn't a proper 911 as it has 4WD...but point to point, when they can't keep me in sight, they have to re-assess.

    You use what you have...and if you have a lot of mechanical grip, good grunt and a trick chassis (not referring to an S3 specifically) you use it...that's not massaging your ego...that's boxing clever.
    You use what you have/can...anyone with a hole in their ar*e will see that.

    Hell, even GT3s have traction control now...but I doubt anyone would accuse them of 'cheating' or massaging the drivers ego.

    But it is...
    In the same way a M3 is a fettled 3 Series.
    So what?
    An RS4 is a fettled uber-bland A4...does it matter?
  11. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

    My internet keeps breaking....

    Anyway, regards your 911 vs Cayman comments.

    I suggest you read last months GT Porsche, or refer to Chris Harris' Drivers Republic website.
    Professional drivers (Chris Harris drives a Porsche in the VLN) disagree with you, they think the Cayman is an all round better car, and in the words of GT Porsche, so good its not worth buying a 911.
    I think this says a lot.

    Regards the above, I perhaps wasnt clear in my explanation but I think I refered to slip angles enough for you to get what I was saying.

    Rally drivers have mud, gravel and loose ground, so it is faster for them to exploit slip angles and small amounts of traction to their advantage.
    Grip drivers, like race drivers do things very differently.

    British roads are like neither, but are a LOT closer to the grip scenario. As such, keeping power on all the way through a corner like explained by a previous poster is utter incompetence.

    A far smoother approach would be to brake before the corner, turn in and power as soon as you hit the apex.

    Of course, as you've then hit the apex, chances are you havent got much turning left to do (refer to traction circles) and as such you can apply a lot of power without it dissapearing into cornering forces.

    Regardless, this is a far more efficient and faster way to corner when talking about either a track, or a road. It wouldnt be the best way on a dirt track in cumbria.

    FWD, RWD, 4WD, AWD - It doesnt matter really, its HOW you drive that makes the difference, in essence mirroring your comments above, making the best of ones car.

    The point I was making was that the S3 is a tarted up A3, I think we've confirmed that. And my secondary point was that the S3 makes adjustments for you thus fooling you into a false sense of security.
    The thing is, if you were to drive properly, you would rarely need the Haldex to operate as you'd be driving appropriate to the chassis.

    I also agree that people spend all day laughing at your 4WD Porsche, I was chatting to my mate Simon who is a team manager for the RSS Performance Porsche Cup team, and he used some cnoice words when I asked him about 4Wd Porsches. Needless to say he does not agree with them as a superior car, and he is in a good position to make judgement calls.
    However, if thats what works for you so be it.
    Porsche also make the GT2, which is faster than the turbo midrange, and is also only RWD. Theny you have your GT3 series'.
    So in essence ONLY the Turbo, the Porsche with no roll cage unlike the GT2 or GT3 has 4WD if we are talking race heritage sports cars.
    So someone in Porsche is confident that 4WD does not make a superior car.

    Reagrdless, aside from all of this, the Haldex IS a good system, it works, it helps average drivers make the best of their car, but its just not for me, and in my opinion, I dont think its a true sports car either.
  12. Ess_Three

    Ess_Three Active Member

    Since you are fond of taking magazine articles as gospel, read evo. They looked at both...and it was a split decision...both good. Just different. Neither better.

    If you've spent enough hours in them, you'd come up with the same conclusion I'm sure. The Cayman is accessible...the 911 takes learning.

    *cough* Tarmac.
    Big wheels, wide cut slicks...not skinny knobblies on gravel.

    British roads are like Tarmac rallys as tarmal rallys are run on roads/tarmac!
    Come on Dave...

    And back to the original comment...keeping power on is what every 911 does and has ever done.
    Does that make them all incompetent?

    Smoother, but slower?
    There are instances where you left foot brake to keep the revs up and power on, turn in under power. progressively squeezing the throttle as the tail runs wide under power, straighten the steering as you apex and nail the throttle. Typical 911 stylee.
    If you turn in under no power you risk the tail becoming a pendulum...so you need to keep the power on.
    Lift off, you spin.
    Too much gas, you spin.
    That's where a driver has to learn the balance.

    My point exactly...
    "as such you can apply a lot of power"...not start applying the power. The incinuation being there was power 'on' before the apex...as would be the norm.

    So why is there a problem with a driver of an S3 with more grip than torque turning in under power and letting the chassis work to send it where it decided it can best use it?

    If you drive 'properly' and don't need the Haldex, then you are wasting valuable seconds by not getting on the power early enough. The trick is to use as much torque, as early as possible...which is why an S3 can be sooo damn quick out of corners once mapped and set-up well.
    Quick enough to leave a 911 for dead. Proven.

    And believe me, that was 'using' the Haldex...and making it work hard.

    Ahh...a Cup team. A race team.
    I don't race mine.
    I don't live on a race track.
    It's a road car.
    So do I really give a toss what's quicker round LeMans, fully stripped, on slicks?
    Or perhaps my house to Aviemore, in February, in the wet may be further up my priority list?

    Race cars have about as much in common with road cars as I do Angelina Jolie.

    I think you need to re-visit your information Dave.
    The range splits and goes two ways...pure road cars and track focussed road cars.
    The turbo is the top of the road range...and is pretty much unstoppable in all weathers...faster than a GT2/3 in the wet, easier to drive etc...why?
    Oh yeah...4WD.

    For the track, you wouldn't choose it. But as stated above, I'm not a racing driver and my street isn't a track - despite some of the local Saxo/Corsa drivers thinking it is.

    So road car for road use...4WD = quicker point to point, more often.

    Can you really not see this?

    There are times when I just want to drive, and drive hard.
    I couldn't give a toss how pure the technique is...I want to go from A to B on poor roads, in changing weather as fast as the car and my talent will allow.
    I manage just fine in my 4WD non-proper sportscar.

    I do get bored waiting for the 'pure' wannabe racing drivers to catch up in thier pure RWD cars though...it gets boring seeing how much time we (the C4/C4S) drivers can pull out on the C2 drivers on a wet day.

    Well, we differ here again...I think it's pretty cr*p!
    It's not progressive nor predictable...like a mechanical system is...give me viscous/torsen anyday.
  13. ChriS3

    ChriS3 hud at ye bam

    How about 414bhp? :)

    Oh yes....
  14. ianysm

    ianysm Active Member

    E46 M3's and CSL's do have Traction control!

    Well i'm no amazing driver either but I too have driven numerous M3's and 911's pretty quickly on some bumpy country lanes over the years and i've found, while feathering the throttle with a little tail slide out of corners is fun, it certainly means you can't ask for full power quite as early as you can with 4wd. On track its a different story but i'm talking about bumpy wet B-roads. There are some bumpy uphill sections on my normal commute which had RWD cars twitching, but the Quattro just carries on accellerating. Not as fun but more useable!

    Not many people out there can happily tailslide (or dare) an M3 or 911 threfore 4wd performance cars are more useable more of the time for more drivers!
  15. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

    I'm talking about one specific person above, Chris Harris. Evo magazine are well known for being, shall we say, economical with the truth about their tests.
    They have a 'best FWD hatch' feature coming soon, tested on the Nurburgring. However, everyone there that weekend saw them do one lap for photos and then spend the rest of the time on local roads. Bet the article makes out as if they were on the ring all weekend.

    Chris Harris is an important opinion because he races Porches, has press credentials from a recognised good publication and now runs his own, non advertisment based press service. So he pulls no punches.

    Re: the rally thing, I'm not sure you've understood slip angles.

    re: the 911 driving style, that is simply a 911 trait, not one that can be applied the same to a front engined RWD car, nor the front engined 4WD car as in the S3. If you apply large amounts of power mid corner you'll just end up understeering doing that in an S3. I think we need to clarify mid corner, mid corner would be before the clipping point/apex and after braking. In 99% of situations you will be using a balanced throttle.

    Large amounts Power on before an apex is not normal, not unless you have a dual apex corner. Remember an apex is a clipping point, not the centre of a corner.
    In most cars, you will have braked before the corner and then you apply balanced throttle to steady the car until you are straight enough to apply full power, or feed in the power to bring the car wide.

    To go back to the roundabout analogy.

    You 'could' have your foot down all the way, as long as its situation applicable balanced throttle, but the insinuation in previous posts seem to be that people are saying you can mash the throttle. Not so.

    You're saying an S3 is faster out of corners using its haldex and importantly a turbo (how are you keeping said turbo at max torque, race cars have very complicated anti lag to do this) than a Naturally aspirated Porsche 911 with over a litre more displacement?
    I call shenanigans.
    The only caveat you could possibly have would be an exceptionally poor 911 driver or someone new to 911s, as lets be honest, you can drive 95% in your S3 but that same skill will only get you 65% of the available power, grip and control in a 911.

    Why do I need to revist my information? A Turbo is a road car, a GT2 is the race focused version thereof. It also happens to have more torque in parts and its RWD.
    So the 'race' Porsche engineering team prefer RWD.

    That said, we seem to be going away from race and concentrating on road competence.

    I personally, living in the south have rarely had issues, and on track tyres when warm, have never lost traction coming out of a corner, but that said, I imagine I drive conservatively.

    I'll re-iterate my viewpoint.

    4WD isnt generally used in sporting situations is it?

    So we can stop the pretence that 4Wd is 'sporty' and instead look upon what it is in actuality.
    Its a system designed to overcome compromise in drivetrains that takes the driver out of the system.

    Either that or I await the Caterham 4WD incarnations...
  16. jcb

    jcb Active Member VCDS Map User

    I am probably going to regret this but ......
    what do you think makes a good "sports" car?
  17. ianysm

    ianysm Active Member

    Surely a good sports car is a good compromise between a race car and road car. The rest is all debated above!!

    In proper England (the countryside with less than perfect B roads) the opinion would be alot different to the super shiny and smooth A roads of towns!

    For fun, driver involvment and feedback it has to be a front or mid engined RWD N/A car.

    For fast A-B progress in any weather, Turbo and 4wd!
  18. jcb

    jcb Active Member VCDS Map User

    Is WRC not sporting?
    most other motorsports have limitations on the use of 4WD.

    Formula 1
    9.1 2WD only

    GT Series including Le Mans
    9.1.1 4wd is forbidden

    that doesn't even make grammatical sense....
  19. ianysm

    ianysm Active Member

  20. fingermouse

    fingermouse thats me

    oh cook
  21. 1animal1

    1animal1 The Clar!! it mouves!!! VCDS Map User

    this is becoming quite an interesting thread.... i do feel theres a lot of knowledge floating about although the knowledge gained from application seems to be one sided, lots of focusing on wordings rather than generic arguments too, picking tiny things to pieces and missing the whole point (on purpose maybe).....

    facts are that we have a glorified A3 and Dave has a glorified 3Series..... you can debate this all day but the facts are exactly that..... get a grip Dave, you cant always have the best of everything, that takes money.... the sort of money that buys you a 4wd veyron:)
  22. FumaS3

    FumaS3 Member

    dude hate to pull you up pon this coz im no expirt but driving a 4wd turbo hard round corners is what there designd for aslong as you pic the right gear its easy to plant the foot and if you get realy good use the left foot to brake to get ride of lagg

    2wd = only 2 ways to plant the power and pull the car round

    4wd= 4 ways to get the power and with the quottro it also gives the wheels with the most traction more power

    its just better then fwd this is why you dont seem as many rwd sports cars now as there was lambo porch ect they have seen the light that is applyable power
  23. Ess_Three

    Ess_Three Active Member

    You are clutching at straws Dave...
    Plenty of other Journalists have experience of both road and racing and hold differing views...which are exactly that...views.

    If you want to hold DR or Chris Harris as gospel...that's fine by me.
    Personally, I'd suggest you get some time behind the wheel of both and make up your own mind. As I have.

    I'm quite sure I have an understanding of it.

    Each car has traits...
    On a well set up S3, when you have enough torque (high boost, aggressive delivery) and mash the throttle just before the apex the front starts to understeer under power (push wide) which causes the Haldex to dump the torque rearwards (not very smoothly, I may add) which kicks the rear out. You unwind the lock, and as the Haldex now has the rears slipping, it sends some back to the front...giving you a 4 wheel 'power slide' from Apex out...

    That's how my S3 could be driven by me and every subsequent owner.

    You can't get as much power on, as early in a RWD car...or in a FWD car!

    On an S3 you can open the taps before the apex, assuming you have the chassis to find the grip - which is no small ask.

    On my Golf, I can open the taps before the apex too...in fact, it's the most efficient way of getting round a corner...but a Quaife diff and -2.0 degrees of -ve camber help there. In that, you turn in under power and use the diff to pull you through, pas the apex.

    Jeeza Dave...I know what a damn apex is.
    And 'bormal' or 'traditional' is fine for 'normal' or 'traditional' cars with 'normal' or 'traditional' driving styles...all i'm saying is that there are times, where the driver will find that they can get a better result from the car by driving in a 'no n-normal' way.
    It may be harder on the car, it may rely more heavily on physical tyre grip...but so what?
    If it's quicker...you do it.
    Can't you see that?

    I believe you can - corner, driver and chassis dependant.
    The S3 has too much physical grip for the torque...so even when mapped, you are only just able to break traction on all 4 wheels...so if you don't break traction, you can take liberties with the throttle as you have the grip to use the torque.

    An example...
    If I ran my S3 at 320 lb-ft, I could get on the power really early (pre apex) and it was utterly planted everywhere.
    At 332 lb-ft it wasn't...it used to break traction in a non-oprogressive manner...and was slower point to point as you were fighting the chassis/grip.

    So at 320 lb-ft it was easier to drive, you could use more throttle angle, earlier and it was faster point to point. Cheating? No...being smart.

    You are seriously not seeing this?
    S3 and C4S = same weight.
    C4S = longer gearing
    C4S has 275 lb-ft at 6000RPM (roughly), S3 has 320-332 lb-ft at 3500 RPM.

    On a back road...out of a corner...in the S3, in 2nd/3rd.
    Get on the throttle hard as you turn in, boost rises, apex on full torque, rear slips out, opposite lock, keep the throttle pinned and grab the next gear.
    C4S comes through the same corner at 4000RPM, off peak torque, with longer gearing and takes a few seconds to 'get on cam'...all the distance the C4S takes out of the S3 on the brakes, is lost as the S3 leaves it floundering out of the corner.

    Believe me, I don't like it.
    But David R driving my old S3 left me sitting too many times out of tight corners and off roundabouts.

    Given a short length of road, the C4S will catch up and rocket past...but out of tight corners, a well set-up S3 with high torque is a formidable beast.

    I would like to.
    Sadly, I am someone who can find fault in the car I own....and can accept that my 911 isn't the bestest/fastest car in the whole wide world ever...
    It happened. Several times.
    It's simple physics Dave.

    It's down to weight, grip and torque multiplying using the gearing...it doesn't take much of a genius to work it out.

    I agree.
    The S3 is a very easy car to drive fast...but dull as dishwater.
    The 911 harder but more entertaining.
    My old S3 may have been quicker 20% of the time...but it was dull 100% of the time.

    I'm not surprised race teams like RWD...lighter etc.
    But this isn't a race car discussion.
    It's about road cars...as I said, I don't race, I drive on the road.

    I would imagine 99% of people on here will own a road car...so I'm not surprised.

    Fair comment...
    I live in the north, where it's wet a lot, and has bumpy, crappy roads. 4WD is quicker point to point.

    Not if you choose to ignore Rallying, no.

    Take your head out of your **** Dave...
    That statement is just stupid.
    Go tell Lambo, Porsche, Mistubishi, Subaru etc that.
  24. jcb

    jcb Active Member VCDS Map User

    Dave ......if 4wd is so **** for racing why are most FIA controlled race series RESTRICTED from using it?......
  25. 1animal1

    1animal1 The Clar!! it mouves!!! VCDS Map User

    this makes sense Glen as i had a play with an 03 911 last weekend off a roundabout, i chased him off 1 roundabout and he let me overtake, for him to chase me off another...there seemed to be nothing in it, i pulled a slight lead off the roundabout but he nudged back by the time we reached just legal figures (i assumed he wasnt the best driver) and in the end he pulled up along side and gave me the thumbs up
  26. Ess_Three

    Ess_Three Active Member

    Don't get me wrong...I'm not for one minute suggesting any old S3 with a re-map is a 911 beater. They aren't.

    What I am saying is that a well sorted S3, with suspension able to put the power down (not standard) and an aggresive enough remap, driven in a certain way, CAN get the torque down hard enough and early enough to pull away from a 911, even a 4WD 911, out of a tight corner.

    I'd say that out of 2nd gear corners, especially in the wet, my old S3 would pull out 8-10 car lengths up to approx 80 MPH. After that, it would be reeled in and passed quite easily.
    On a standing start, the S3 was nearly a second slower to 60, and more to 100.
    But, on the right road, in the hands of the right driver, the S3 will open the gap.

    This was proven several times with David R driving his (my old) S3 and me chasing in my C4S.

    But, I'll say again...
    The S3 has to be set up correctly to do it...it has to have suspension to provide enough front end grip to not understeer, and to give plenty of rear end traction, as well as enough torque to really make the chassis work.
    Get them all sorted though, and the S3 is formidable on point to point duty.

    I have no problem saying that a 'lesser' car is, at times, quicker than my 'proper sportscar'.

    Although...judging by some of the posts above, mine isn't a proper sportscar at all...so maybe that explains it.
  27. 1animal1

    1animal1 The Clar!! it mouves!!! VCDS Map User

    na i know what your saying Glen, my guess was that the guy (like a lot of fast car drivers) didnt know how to use it effectively.... i tried just to see out of curiousity

    that said i was chuffed but would still expect to lose in most scenarios dependent on driver obviously
  28. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

    This is interesting, exactly where are you getting the 320ft.lbs vs 332ft.lbs figures? Worldsmostaccuratedyno ltd?
    You are saying that 12ft.lbs difference, barely 4% difference in torque and you were able to see the difference in it breaking traction. 4%!!! The dyno is likely out 4%. How did you test that, atmospherics, temperature, flow and even dyno accuracy isnt going to ensure you can comparatively show results there.
    Even if the situation was true, then you must be either running on the very limits of the tyres at your 320ft.lbs and I mean the very limits, or there was another factor.
    You know race teams have swathes of engineers, some amazing telemetry and some of the best drivers and even they would spend a considerable time coming to that conclusion.

    Now again your figures seem odd. However, I dont know Porsches very well, but a Naturally Aspirated larger displacement engine as a general rule tends to have a very flat torque curve. And google seems to suggest indeed they do. So much so that maximum deviation is around 40ft.lbs on the examples I found. Also it seems to suggest that the torque curve between 4000rpm and 6000rpm is almost flat. This also ties in with similar displacement and power engines such as the BMW 6 Cylinder M series. You can draw the torque curve of an E36 M3 with a ruler left to right.

    Given that one rev matches with heel and toe, and that your redline is probably similar to mine around 7200rpm, 4000 is most likely the lowest you will be on semi fast corners. However, according to the figures this is fine, as your torque is the same. Unless of course the gearing is very poor in the C4S I feel your example isnt correct.

    You also have to factor in you've provided some figures, and an example but you then try to apply that to every situation. Are you saying every corner is the same, that you'll always be at 4000rpm in a particular gear? We both know that every corner is different and some corners will be 2nd, some will be third, 4th etc.
    That an S3 will always be faster out of corners?
    Your example doesnt stand up to rational thinking.

    I agree, I'd wager no-one has the perfect car, race teams and manufacturers have been trying to make one of these for as long as racing and manufacturing has existed.

    Which is pretty much my point. The S3 isnt magical, and this example people like to sit on of 'a wet roundabout'
    Well, I don't live in these constantly wet, poorly surfaced roads of Aberdeen, and nor do 99% of this board. So people really should realise that in average conditions, they simply cannot claim a huge benefit from the haldex system. Its not magic.
    I might even have to pop out next time its wet with Jampublic and his remapped S3 and try out everyones theory.

    Lets do that, lets ignore rallying. So its restricted in Le Mans, and in Formula 1. Why would that be, is it because its not 'sporting'?
    I really dont know.
  29. Ess_Three

    Ess_Three Active Member

    Ahh...this is the part where your argument has gone Pete Tong, so you try to get out of it by pulling other parts apart.

    Right...320 lb-ft = my old S3 on ANY dyno you put it on, with a standard N75.
    332 lb-ft = my old S3 on ANY dyno you put it on, with a N75 H.
    Are you getting where it's going?
    N75 = not only more boost...but a more aggressive delivery.
    Hence, traction, or breaking traction.

    Calibrated MAHA Dyno accuracy is +-5%.
    Back to back testing, 10 mins apart, on the same dyno, same fuel, same operator = a difference. Repeatable...
    I can produce Dyno Graphs...can google?
    These are DIN70020 (I think that's the standard) compensated...as you'll know that means atmospheric pressure and ambient temperature copmpansated.
    And if the car hasn't moved, the ICs are good enough for it not to heatsoak and it's on the same fuel...the results are just about as repeatable as it's possible to get on a chassis dyno.

    But, you feel free to discount the argument by clutching at straws Dave.

    Spot on.
    At 320 lb-ft you are right on the edge of the tyres managing to transfer meaningful torque to the road, with the Haldex working against slip.
    No other factors...
    320, full throttle off roundabouts, easily...
    332, full throttle makes for a ragged chassis with too much slip.

    It could break traction at 321 lb-ft or 331 lb-ft...I really don't know. And you know what...I don't care.

    Race teams eh?
    Don't know...don't race.
    But anyone with any driving talent could tell what was going on...ask 3 of the 4 owners of it so far and they'll tell you the same.

    Google obviously insn't telling you the full story.
    I'm fully aware of how *my* engine delivers it's torque. I'm also aware of the gearing...

    And at 35-40 MPH, out of a tight corner in the S3, it's right on 320+ lb-ft, in 2nd.
    The C4S isn't as it'll do nearly 80 in second before the limiter at 7600 approx.

    The gearing on a C4S would seem suitable for it to do what it does...but next to the bestest most uber-car in the world ever - the mighty E36 M3, obviously it will be poor.

    Poor attempt Dave.
    Read it again...
    Some, not all. I thought the description of tight, wet, 2nd gear corners sort of ruled out 3rd, or 4th....and revs much over 4000RPM. No?

    I'd agree...it's not magical.
    But you have all but admitted that on such roads there is an advantage to be had.
  30. jcb

    jcb Active Member VCDS Map User

    because it offers a competitive advantage...as it did in rallying
  31. Ess_Three

    Ess_Three Active Member

    Actully, I'll add something here...and you can make your own mind up about the results.

    When I owned the S3 it was on a not very special set of Avon ZZR tyres...which were fine if a bit squeally.

    David R fitted Toyo T1Rs and completely bugg*red up the feel.
    The Toyos didn't slip as progressively or as early...so on full boost (full torque) it wasn't as easy to control.
    (back to grip vs slip)

    Draw your own conclusion from that...but on the road...it wasn't as mobile or as much fun.

    Perhaps the old Avons were less fit for 320 lb-ft than the Toyos?
    That was noticable too.

  32. fingermouse

    fingermouse thats me

    i vote this the thread with the most quotes ever ..............
  33. jcb

    jcb Active Member VCDS Map User

    not so much a thread as... "The Glen and Dave show"
    Popcorn anyone?
  34. james0808

    james0808 Active Member


    Doubt it.:nyah:
  35. vetch

    vetch S3

    I would just like to apologise to everyone for starting this thread. :tapedshut:
  36. Dave_Bayern

    Dave_Bayern Slipping at 3.5Krpm

    Ah-Ha. Fair enough. What you originally said was that you could tell the difference and that you lost traction between 320ft.lbs and 332ft.lbs. Thats nonsense. However, I fully agree you can tell the difference between the N75s. The N75J is a much more aggressive delivery of said torque. So in reality, it was nothing to do with the figures, but all to do with the delivery. I wasnt clutching at straws, merely pointing out the stupidity of the previous incomplete statement.

    Interestingly, although you have lots of information on your car, and the way it handles, seems like it might be a bit of a one off, not one single person claims the same handling, or power delivery that you claim of your old car.

    Fair enough, you know your car better than I do, but every single non turno Porsche dyno graph shows a near flat torque line across the entire rev range.

    I'm quite happy to admit there will be an advantage to be had in some situations with the S3. But my particular issue is with people talking about this wet roundabout situation. I dont think there is an advantage anywhere near as big as this board likes to trick itself into believing. Interestingly, you dont see these claims on the VWVortex boards and the Haldex equipped VWs on there. And the states has a far greater range of roads and climates than we see, so one would imagine they would have at least a similar opinion if that advantage was SO great.

    jcb - I'm sure it does offer a competitive advantage, race teams have hundreds of thousands to spend making a good 4WD system. Bugatti made a decent one in conjunction with Haldex for the Veyron.
    The point I have been making all along however, is that the S3 one probably does a decent job of making the awful S3 understeering chassis seem better than it is, and in actual fact the Haldex diff fitted to the S3 is utter pants.
  37. A3Tom

    A3Tom Smell my finger.

  38. Lenny Benford

    Lenny Benford snowed under

    3 shredded wheat for breakfast today then. :)
  39. jcb

    jcb Active Member VCDS Map User

    No what you actually said was:

    And you are wrong
    a) ignoring Rallying
    b)4wd is only absent from F1, GT Series and WTCC because they are NOT allowed to use it.
    If they were you would see 4WD cars in every form.
    c) this restriction clearly implies a competitive advantage.

    Therefore: 4WD can equal "sporty"... whatever that is...

    but I agree with one thing, Haldex is pants!
  40. Ess_Three

    Ess_Three Active Member

    The statement is neither incomplete or nonesense.
    You need to see the boost graph/turque curve to see it, but the J valve adds torque by way of a boost spike and affects the rest of the rev range to a smaller degree...it did NOT affect the torque curve to any appreciable degree pre-peak torque....we are tsalking about a few 10s of RPM perhaps and I'm sure you'll agree, not noticable.

    Not delivering it earlier, not more aggressively.

    It just meant an already agressive torque delivery was just too aggressive to pleasant everyday road driving. Fun...but often slower.

    Hard to explain without having the vast pile of dyno charts in front of you...

    Let me make something really clear. My S3 wasn't a one-off. It wasn't an enigma or anything mythical.
    Its a standard S3 modified using off the shelf parts and knowledge gained from 15 years of trackdays, sprints and hillclimbs, by someone that understands chassis and handling. That's all...
    I can say that most - if not everything - I did to it was documented on here, for anyone to copy and presumably get the same results...bar, perhaps the map.

    It was what it was...not perfect, but damn good. And dull.

    It's still around...the current owner is on here somewhere.
    Alternatively, David R is around, he races karts so knows what's what with handling...ask him.
    Or DJMotorsport...he races cars, so knows what's what with handling...ask him.

    I could build another to the same spec tomorrow...and get the same results.
    I could do the same to ANY S3 on here...it's not hard. You just need to understand what's missing, know what you want to achieve and find a way of doing it...
    I'm only a bloke with an interest, a reasonable understanding and a good garage full of tools. Nothing more.

    You give me ANY S3 on here, with enough cash to buy the bits, and a month or so to do the work, and I'll show you another S3 that does the same.

    It's not magic. It's engineering.

    Are you discounting gearing?
    A car geared to 75-80 in 2nd, with 270 lb-ft against a car geared to 57 in 2nd, with 320+ lb-ft of aggressive turbo'd delivery, both weighing the same...seems obvious to me.

    Maybe not...maybe so.
    But VWVortex has lots of big power, uber low cars that have never seen a corner...so horses for courses.

    There is an advantage at times...driver, car and weather dependant.
    Let's leave it at that, eh?

Share This Page