JBS RESULTS

[Ess_Three]

individuals identified as dyslexic have a disorder that prevents the individual from linking the spoken form of a word with its written equivalent.

There is a difference between Dyslexic and bone idle, or thinking it's 'cool' to write like a Chav/Cruiser/Tosser.

There are plenty of Forums designed for people like that...Audi-Sport.net is not one of them.

If you don't like it, feel free to leave at any point.

carry on taking the pi$$ admin

Why thank you for the permission.
I shall.

Get a grip man...

 

[Ess_Three]

whats going on with this forum these days, it seems as if no one can post anything without being criticised and it all turns into some stupid argument.

Now, this is not aimed at anyone in pertuicular...

We see lots of power graphs on here.
There are lots of people who are saving up to buy a re-map.
These people want the best power gain for their money.
That's human nature...I did, when I was in the position.

I don't think it's unfair to ask for proof that we are all comparing apples with apples.
Now, if the graph is correct...and JBS are getting those figures...then I suggest AmD, REVO, Star, Superchips etc will soon find themselves selling very few S3 re-maps.
But, the graph doesn't look like any other graph I've seen in 6 years of playing with S3s...
So how come? Things don't add up...

Surely there is a social reponsibility in trying to stop people from being ripped off...now I'm not not saying JBS are ripping people off...but the shape of the graph just doesn't add up.
But clarification of the figures I have already politely asked for would help clear things up...but as it is, something just isn't right.

Maybe I shouldn't care...but I do.
Maybe I should let people spend their money and get false claims? But that's not in my nature.

We (users in the A3/S3 Forum) have criticised AmD in years gone by, Star, REVO and Superchips...until things were explained and things made sense...JBS are no different.

im quite sure ballcrusher has been typing more or less like this since he joined. It never was a big issue before.

...and it's been irritating me ever since.

We try to keep this Forum a step above the Chav/Cruiser forums...so please forgive me if I feel strongly about that...
I'm not going to waste my time here if the majority want it to degenerate into yet another Muppet hang-out.
But, it would appear that IS NOT what the majority desire.

 

[Sinny71]

Dyslexic or not, people are educated to different levels within this country. Some people are good with words, numbers or whatever and others have other skills. Just because someone cant spell does not make them a chav/cruiser/tosser though.

Its very easy for some to forget that not everyone has been trough uni and even school in some cases. I think its quite wrong to sit ripping the **** out of someone who simply isn't as good as you at spelling. Its ignorance if you ask me.

And as most of the words have more letters in than they should I dont think its got anything to do with laziness really.????

I personally know someone in their 30's who left school and could not read or write. At age 19 he was the youngest person in Briain to own a liquor license and his own Nightclub (still unable to read or write). In his 20's he lost everything and wound up owing a million pound after all assets were sold. He was pretty much fecked.

Since then he has taught himslf to write, has had a number of books published, is a truly inspiration speaker and is now worth a lot more than he ever owed.

Yet in his 20's, should he have stumbled upon this forum you' have ripped into him for being unable to spell.

No doubt there will be a spelling mistake in here somewhere so feel free to sting me with a 14 day ban or whatever though.

 

[Sinny71]

We try to keep this Forum a step above the Chav/Cruiser forums...so please forgive me if I feel strongly about that...
I'm not going to waste my time here if the majority want it to degenerate into yet another Muppet hang-out.
But, it would appear that IS NOT what the majority desire.

No doubt we'll see similar comments aimed at our foreign members whose first language doesn't happen to be English too. They must be Chav's or Cruisers I presume.

 

[Ess_Three]

No doubt we'll see similar comments aimed at our foreign members whose first language doesn't happen to be English too. They must be Chav's or Cruisers I presume.

No, I doubt it...having a language other that English as your first language would be a damn good reason to get things wrong...but sadly most of out non-UK users speak better English than the Chavs do...you may get gramattical errors, but in general non-UK users do not use 'txt talk'.

You don't read too good do you?
I have already stated that this isn't an English lesson...all I'm asking is that people try.
Because, for some - like me evidently, who isn'r 'down wiv da homies' - find it difficult to work out what's being asked...and therefore it's hard to offer comments or advice.

It's really not difficult is it?

If this is too much to ask, feel free to find a less 'high brow' forum to play on.

 

[Ess_Three]

Dyslexic or not, people are educated to different levels within this country. Some people are good with words, numbers or whatever and others have other skills. Just because someone cant spell does not make them a chav/cruiser/tosser though.

How very profound.
But someone who chooses to speak like a Cruiser/Chav will be treated like one.
Life's so unfair, huh?

Its very easy for some to forget that not everyone has been trough uni and even school in some cases. I think its quite wrong to sit ripping the **** out of someone who simply isn't as good as you at spelling. Its ignorance if you ask me.

Shame...
I didn't go to Uni either...but I have a basic grasp of the English language...despite coming from north of Hadrian's Wall where English would be condiderd by many to be a second language.

And as most of the words have more letters in than they should I dont think its got anything to do with laziness really.????

Ahh...so you are re-writing the English language now are you?
Is it too hard to write 'with' instead of 'wiv'?
I don't think so.

A basic attempt at a sentance would be good too...or is that a bridge too far?

 

[Sinny71]

No, I doubt it...having a language other that English as your first language would be a damn good reason to get things wrong...but sadly most of out non-UK users speak better English than the Chavs do...you may get gramattical errors, but in general non-UK users do not use 'txt talk'.

Text talk is something entirely different and I'll agree, its not the easiest thing to understand. I am guilty of that myself and it is something that can and should be changed.

You don't read too good do you?

Is that gramatically correct?

Ahh...so you are re-writing the English language now are you?
Is it too hard to write 'with' instead of 'wiv'?
I don't think so.

I did say most of the words. You don't read very well do you?

It's really not difficult is it?

That's the point I am trying to make, for some people it is difficult..!! I totally agree that the text talk should be cut down to help those who aren't familiar with it.

Oh, by the way...
'Straight through' spelled like this: strait threw (in your signature)
Priceless...

Best laugh I've had in ages...

But, ripping the **** out of someone who can't spell as well as you is hardly classed as advice or constructive critisism.

Fancy a 14 day ban?
Read the rules...before you start throwing insults at an Admin user with access to a 'ban' button.

And what's all that about?? Its ok for you to insult someone because you are the Administrator but heaven forbid anyone else do it to you. Rules are rules after all.

The main point I am making is that all you had to do was point something out, or as an Administrator, pm the person you weren't happy with. But no, its far better for the site, for you to rip the **** where everyone can see it. That really shows the forum at its best doesn't it??? Just because someone cant spell, does not make them a chav or tosser. Just as I mis-spelt plenty, you did too..!!

And coming from just below Hadrians wall, most would say English isn't my first language either..!!

 

[Ess_Three]

Is that gramatically correct?

Do I care?

I did say most of the words. You don't read very well do you?

I read just fine...
I'm not going to waste my time playing stupid games with you.

That's the point I am trying to make, for some people it is difficult..!! I totally agree that the text talk should be cut down to help those who aren't familiar with it.

Well lets start with the 'txt talk'.
Spelling errors are no biggie...what is a big deal is someone who throws a load of utter tosh down in 'txt talk' and abreviated ******** expressions and won't make the effort to make the posts more readable.
We (in the UK) are not taught how to write like that...it's a consious decision to write like a Chav...
Accordingly, the response will be address as if to a Chav.

But, ripping the **** out of someone who can't spell as well as you is hardly classed as advice or constructive critisism.

Diddums...
Anyone who refuses to try to word things in a language that the majority of users can understand - that means not 'txt talk' or 'gangsta' for the hard of understanding - despite being asked to do so, will reap what they sow.

As I've said before ...feel free to not read, not reply, or leave any time you feel ready.

And what's all that about?? Its ok for you to insult someone because you are the Administrator but heaven forbid anyone else do it to you. Rules are rules after all.

I suggest you re-read rule 7:

"7. Pornographic, racist, threatening, harassing or obscene messages and/or images are not permitted and will be deleted."

...and ask yourself if the smart ***** picture posted was justified?
Many people find it offensive...
I don't mid a good old heated debate...but I don't see the need for that.

Oh, and I'm not 'the Administrator'...I'm one of a team.
A team who agrees with the stance we are taking.
But if it makes you feel more of a man to aim your comments at me...you go for your life.
I'll not loose sleep over it.

The main point I am making is that all you had to do was point something out, or as an Administrator, pm the person you weren't happy with. But no, its far better for the site, for you to rip the **** where everyone can see it. That really shows the forum at its best doesn't it??? Just because someone cant spell, does not make them a chav or tosser. Just as I mis-spelt plenty, you did too..!!

You know, sometimes the tone of the thread dictates the tone of the reply.

You can flog this particular dead horse if you wish...but the fact remains that from now on, we will be less tolerant of 'txt talk' on Audi-Sport.net.
The 'we' is the Moderators and Admin team.

That's the way it is...sorry if trying to set a high standard offends.

 

[Sinny71]

Text talk is one thing, and I have said more than once I agree there. What I commented on was you ripping the **** out of someone for bad spelling. Most, nearly all of his incorrect spelling was nothing like text talk. So that is a totally different issue.

I suggest you re-read rule 7:

"7. Pornographic, racist, threatening, harassing or obscene messages and/or images are not permitted and will be deleted."

...and ask yourself if the smart ***** picture posted was justified?
Many people find it offensive...
I don't mid a good old heated debate...but I don't see the need for that.

Yet rather than delete said image in line with rule 7, you thought it far better to just hurl insults. Strange??? And in your post you do make mention of a ban for insulting an Administrator with access to the Ban button. No mention of the pic???

If you want to deal with text talk deal with it, but dont make yourself look like an idiot by just bad mouthing someone because he doesn't spell like you. To tackle the text talk, identify it first. Text talk is an abbreviation of words, not the adding of further letters or putting them in the wrong order. And some text talk or slang does make it into the English dictionary. Chav is in there.

That's the way it is...sorry if trying to set a high standard offends.

As I have said, I'm all for high standards, but taking the **** out of someone and giving them abuse hardly fits with that, or does it ????

 

[Ess_Three]

I'll give you my final words on the subject and from this point forward, anything not related to the subject WILL be deleted.
This is getting us nowhere...

Text talk is one thing, and I have said more than once I agree there. What I commented on was you ripping the **** out of someone for bad spelling. Most, nearly all of his incorrect spelling was nothing like text talk. So that is a totally different issue.

How do you suggest we ask someone to re-write their post in a language most users will understand?
Maybe you can tell me?
Because taking the micky doesn't appear to work.

Also, the original request went like this:

"Any chance you can re-write that in English?
You have a computer, not a mobile phone...so you have a full keyboard...I, for one, find all this txt talk ****** too hard to read."

(Except that I had a typo in there...so even I make mistakes - shock horror!)

The response was uncalled for.
You respond in a confrontational manner...you'll be treated as confrontational.

I could have removed his post, removed the image, warned him, or banned him...any of the above would have had people like you complaining it was uncalled for.
So what to do?
Leave things be?
Take a hard line?
Try a gentle micky-take?
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I've got big shoulders...I don't care if people don't like it...but one thing we are not going to do is let this forum go to the dogs (still one step above the Chavs/Cruisers/Gangstas though)

Maybe you have the answers?
Feel free to PM me the solution.

Yet rather than delete said image in line with rule 7, you thought it far better to just hurl insults. Strange???

As explained above...Mods/Admins are always wrong...you take a hard line and moderate...you are wrong. You leave it, you are wrong.

I think that's enough on the subject.

 

[Sinny71]

Point taken....pm sent.

 

[auroan]

Sinny71, ballbreaker said he was too lazy to spell, not that he couldn't.....

So, in reality your having a go at the mods was a little un-justified.

Anyway........

Where's this posting from JBS that keeps getting mentioned ?

 

[Sinny71]

I wasn't 'having a go' at the mods. But discussed this with Ess Three into the wee hours. No harm done.

 

[Forge]

where's the Love u-all ,

 

[TDI-line]

Just out of interest, but how much did the phase 2 upgrade and intercooler cost for your S3?

 

[Ballcrusher]

i was bought the forge /intercooler/silicone/007dv for xmas and i think the mapping was £550 i had a load more stuff done when i was there FULL SERVICE/QUICKSHIFT/WINDOW WASHER PUMP i cant believe its lead to all this just for posting my results i wasnt the first one to throw insults but sod all that its getting old now. cheers to all for sticking up for me.im not here to make enermys just friends im happy with what jbs has done to my car more than expacted pulls all the way to the red line ive took it up to 150mph with plenty more ON A PRIVATE ROAD WINK WINK.

P.S COSE I CANT SPELL 100% DOSNT MEEN YOU CANT UNDERSTAND WHAT IM WRITING BUT

 

[Ess_Three]

So how about answering the questions I had about your plot further up the thread?

I can't make out some of the figures...if you could fill in the blanks, maybe it'll make things easier to understand?

 

[Ballcrusher]

heres the best i can do scana is plating up

 

[Sinny71]

I'll admit I'm a bit of a muppet and dont know much about such printouts. To me its a few numbers, and pretty lines. Some of the moe technical guys may be able to help explain something to me though.

What is the Torque measured in?? Is it Nm or lbs/ft, and what is the difference as you see both cropping upfrom time to time..??

 

[S3Steve]

1 lbft = 1.356nm

 

[Sinny71]

Cheers for that.

 

[S3Steve]

If you want to convert one to the other there is a convertor here

http://www.tdiclub.com/misc/conversions.html

 

[Sinny71]

Ok. The power graph does not seem to mention what unit the torque is measured in. Is it possible that its Nm as opposed to lbs/ft.

That would give a figure of 243lbs/ft or thereabouts. I dont know the engine but is that a more realistic figure???

 

[Ess_Three]

heres the best i can do scana is plating up

That's better...
Cheers.

That's much better to read...

Pity it doesn't show boost...although I still have my doubts as it lists the boost setting as 1.2.
Do you know if this is 1.2 bar?
Or a 1.2 version of the map?

It still seems too flat a torque curve to have anything over about 270 lb-ft....in my experience.

Do you know if that is corrected to DIN standards?
It looks pretty close...the barometric pressure is close enough to 1000mb.


A few things don't add up though:

The speed. was the run done in 6th? If so, the gearing is having an effect...should be done in the gear closest to 1:1 for accurate results.

The fact that it was done in 2wd...that'll throw things off...especially the corrections, when compared to the actual on-road (4 wheel drive) readings.

The boost...it's simply not possible to get 330 lb-ft without spiking the boost, and getting an associated torque spike...your plot is too smooth.
Do JBS have a boost curve on file they can access?

 

[Ess_Three]

Ok. The power graph does not seem to mention what unit the torque is measured in. Is it possible that its Nm as opposed to lbs/ft.

That would give a figure of 243lbs/ft or thereabouts. I dont know the engine but is that a more realistic figure???

I doubt it...even early generation S3 remaps were producing 260+ lb-ft of torque..a good one, with an aggressive boost curve will be seeing 280ish lb-ft.

To get over 300 lb-ft you have to be taking liberties...

And to get 330+ you need to do a lot of work...
Some bolt ons, some replacement parts...and one ever-so-dodgy mod.

Also, at 320 lf-ft of torque (approx 1.7 bar peak) you saturate the MAP sensor and hit limp mode.
That's the way it is...the MAP sensor goes up to something like 2650mb Absolute (1000mb atmospheric + 1.7 bar ish boost) and saturates...tripping the ECU into limp mode.
That's just the way it is...

I know how to get round it...because I had a little electronic box built my a cleverer man than me to 'solve' the issue...but I'm intrigued as to how JBS have managed to avoid the saturation of the standard Audi MAP sensor?


In my view, you don't get over 310 lb-ft without lots of work...
320 takes cheating and putting your turbo's life in danger...
330+ takes electronic skullduggery...

Unless JBS have solved the problem?

 

[Ballcrusher]

ive spoke to james at jbs and he said it peeked at 1.6 bar and when the boost drops of it stays at 1.2 bar i think ive got it right or wrong lol something along them lines all i can say is im happy if people think its all crap so be it money well spent

P.S all can say is i asked jbs to go all out when mapping and they told me they dont recomend it that it aint worth blowing it up and they wouldnt be held responsable but i said i will not blame them if it does so on my orders they maxed every thing they could on MY ORDERS

dont dig me out again over me spelling LOL

 

[Ess_Three]

ive spoke to james at jbs and he said it peeked at 1.6 bar and wen the boost drops of it stays at 1.2 bar i think ive got it write or wrong lol something along them lines all i can say is im happy if people think its all crap so be it money well spent

In my experience, 1.6 bar peak gives about 305 lb-ft of torque.
I have the graph for mine at 1.6 bar ish peak...so I'll dig it out.

Holding 1.2 is also a bit low in my view, to give nearly 280 BHP unless JBS take real liberties with the ignition mapping.

Do you run it on Optimax/V-Power?

At the end of the day, if you are happy, that's the main thing.
But I still have my doubts...

Don't take it personally...we've challenged all the tuners in the same way...

 

[leecs3]

have a look at this 291bhp on a k04. Completely different torque curve, power is gone by 5,500rpm.

 

[Ballcrusher]

well if anybody can tell me wheres a good 4wd rolling road and who knows
about S3s set up let me please.im based in central london

regard
jim--aka bad speller lol

 

[Ess_Three]

have a look at this 291bhp on a k04. Completely different torque curve, power is gone by 5,500rpm.

Who's curve is that Lee?

Is that running standalone management?

The torque curve still looks too flat to have what his chart shows...but the power is exactly as you'd suggest...dropping off fast higher up.

 

[Ess_Three]

This is what I'd expect a modified S3's power/torque curve to look like, if it's making big torque on a K04:

 

[leecs3]

Who's curve is that Lee?

Is that running standalone management?

The torque curve still looks too flat to have what his chart shows...but the power is exactly as you'd suggest...dropping off fast higher up.

its a dubsport map, think they run emerald 3D. They do get 290-297 out of them but back them off to 275 for safety.

 

[DavidR]

its a dubsport map, think they run emerald 3D. They do get 290-297 out of them but back them off to 275 for safety.

Ouch! The figures are certainly possible on stand alone management, but the dangers are high! The OEM ECU backs the boost of dramatically after sustained use on the higher power maps - great for safety but not so great for track driving. Bypassing these safety measures can increase the power but at the expense of detonation... Be careful...

Back to my initial post re doubting these graphs - in the few days I've been away Glen has explained more eloquently (!) than I can the differences in power / torque at various stages of modification.

Looking at the posted JBS graph, it's simply not possible to sustain the reported torque at that RPM figure.

The point of picking these things up is not a dig at the poster, but a dig at the tuner for producing such dubious graphs and a cautionary word to potential customers. You cannot beleive all the hype all of the time.

I remain perplexed how the figures and graph shapes have been created - however, the graphs confirm my initial suspicions that all was not as it should be. I'm with Glen on this one, I would guess that a realistic figure for the car would be 260ish BHP and 280ish lbft maximum.

The FMIC does not create power. It potentially sustains power for longer. My S3 had a front mount and side mount intercooler and I'm still convinced it dropped about 30bhp and 50lbft after 10laps round knockhill due to intake temps rising and ECU reining in the boost and ignition timing...

Enjoy the car - I'd be interested to see the power it makes on a different roller. I'd be interested too in hearing JBS's opinion of all this. If they have sold you a 280+bhp 300lbft+ modification then you have a right to complain.

 

[macca]

i think everyone is getting too tied up with figures, best thing to compare car to car is by driving them!

a 400bhp car is not always faster than a 350bhp car of the same for instance, it's how the power is delivered for the purpose you want to use it for and how the chassis etc can hold up.

i have experienced some very nice bhp figures on cars i have had before, but not for very long!

also some of my lesser powered ones have performed surprisingly fast and be reliable.

i am still undecided who will be mapping my a4 when i get round to get the new engine in, i have spoken to a few tuners and haven't had one that stands out from the others.

 

[DavidR]

i think everyone is getting too tied up with figures, best thing to compare car to car is by driving them!

100% agreement.

The problem is we all look through the forums 1st as driving a car with all the major tuners maps in them is almost impossible. We inevitably listen to advice posted here and on other sites. If one tuner is claiming big power gains compared with others then where do we put our business?

Personally, I'm fed up reading crazy figures for cars that have been pulled out of the blue sky. Why? Because I feel sorry for the less well informed that spend their hard earned on somthing that doesn't deliver...

a 400bhp car is not always faster than a 350bhp car of the same for instance, it's how the power is delivered for the purpose you want to use it for and how the chassis etc can hold up.

100% there also.

Why is my 911 so much faster than my S3 although the 911 only has 10 more horsepower and 70lbft less torque with similar weights? All about power delivery and sustainability at high rpm (plus, I guess, the aerodynamic advantage of the Porsche)

We drove on a porsche club GB meet a year or so ago with cars ranging from 2.7 Boxster to 996 C4S - on the road there was nothing in it to write about.

i am still undecided who will be mapping my a4 when i get round to get the new engine in, i have spoken to a few tuners and haven't had one that stands out from the others.

For what it's worth, Star Performance in Scotland are custom writing codes for these engines allowing you to specify the nature and type of power delivery - they make less headline power than some, but feel superb on the road. That's where my money would go.

 

[S3Andy]

well if anybody can tell me wheres a good 4wd rolling road and who knows
about S3s set up let me please.im based in central london

regard
jim--aka bad speller lol

http://www.powerengineering.co.uk/acatalog/home.htm

Or


http://www.pts-tuning.co.uk/pts/content/view/28/50/

I have used both more than once

Done RR days with loads of cars and results were good(Standard made standard power)

 

[Ballcrusher]

cheers andy

 

[macca]

thanks for reminding me about power engineering, i have heard nothing but good stuff about them, unfortunatly star performance are at the other end of the country to me, so will probably be out of the game, though i did email them about atp turbo conversions.

as for inflated power figures, yep it gets my goat. i took a bmw 318is i had to a "chav" meet, this had 140bhp out of factory, i had aftermarket ecu custom mapped along with usual mods and the maf taken out, this gave me 160bhp on rollers. some young spotty teenager comes upto me and said his standard but chipped 318is had 155bhp on rollers. i tried to explain that i wouldn't have spent £2k plus if that was the case,

then i supercharged the thing and got 210bhp, low and behold everyone said this was crap and that i should have loads more power. however my car used to keep up with the 328's and on track gave m3's a bit of a run, i don't really care what the rollers say, as long as the engine is mapped well and not overstressed. i have recently got built a 1.8t engine with stronger rods, pistons cams etc etc before even thinking of a remap, why??? i want it to last, i want no ******** figures either. i would like to think with a gt3071 turbo and other mods i could get 400bhp, but even if the rollers said 250 i couldn't care less.

mini rant over,.

 

[Ballcrusher]

as i said im well happy with me results 100% at pod today flat 14 and with 19"reps cant be bad as before i got 14.6 with out the mapping as you said as long as your happy thats all that counts WISH I HAD 400BHP GODD LUCK WITH THE REBUILD

 

[S3Steve]

14 dead is a good time mate, do you think there is more to come?