thorkild Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 I had my car rolling roaded yesterday at G-Force Motorsport. The result was nothing less than depressing. So I want to confirm with someone else who has same car and chip that they have better results than me. That way I can confront APR. Or even better get it converted to Revo. My results were 170 bhp and 188 lb/ft of torque at the flywheel. These are supposedly quite accurate even though they are calculated using the figures at the wheels, which is what the dyno at G-Force Motorsport measures. Just for your information it was 150bhp at the wheels, which with a 12% drivetrain loss comes out to 170bhp. I don't know if 12% is the correct figure to use for drivetrain loss on a fwd A3, but it seems to be quite common across most manufacturers. Assuming that 12% is correct, this means that the chip from APR is performing well under what they claim which is 196bhp and 230 lb/ft of torque. Any ideas? Or do you have similar experience, or have you confirmed your chip to give you 196bhp (or thereabouts)? Maybe even some of the tuning boys would care to reply? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A3Floyd Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Damn, I'd be depressed too if i'd seen figures like that! I'm gonna get mine RR'd before getting it Revo'd. i've not seen any performance graphs from Revo yet but i'd hope to see at least 170 at the wheels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lagoo Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Thorx, Did you have it dyno'd before you had it chipped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r3hep Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 were you in the right program??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorkild Posted February 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Lagoo, unfortunately not. I wish I had now though as the car is definitely a lot quicker than it was. R3hep, I don't have switching. Only the standard 1.0 bar programme. The dyno confirmed that it runs at 1 bar too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Hmmm... interesting.. if it's running at the right bar, I wonder if it's not fueling properly or the misture is wrong?? Don't know where you go to find out what's wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mollox Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 What does it feel like on the road? And just a thought - and i don't know the answer to this - but 196 is a lot for the 1.8T so i would have thought that would be the figure for the 1.4 bar prog? Assuming of course, that there are 1.0 and 1.4 bar progs like on the S3....?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lagoo Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 [ QUOTE ] And just a thought - and i don't know the answer to this - but 196 is a lot for the 1.8T so i would have thought that would be the figure for the 1.4 bar prog? [/ QUOTE ] I am sure R3REP's motor had the 1.4bar program and he managed to get the 200BHP mark so if you have the 1.0bar then mabe it isnt as bad!! Did APR state that you would get 196BHP fromthe 1.0bar prog!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Thinking about it I suppose that it does make sence: Normal 08 bar = 150bhp 1.0 bar around 180bhp 1.4 bar around 200bhp Just thinking out loud? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorkild Posted February 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 I also got a graph for fueling. The lambda value was around 0.89 across the whole range which the technician said was pretty damn close to optimal fueling mixture. Quote taken from Stealth Racing [ QUOTE ] APR's EMCS software is available for the 150bhp Golf / Bora and the later VVT (Variable Valve Timing) cars. The software for the VAG 1.8T derived cars, is available in a 1.0 bar configuration and produces 196bhp and approximately 240 lb/ft. On the later VVT motor, which also as a different turbocharger specification, the horsepower gains are increased to around 207bhp but with same torque. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know what's wrong. Maybe I should send an email to Mitchell (even if does Revo now, he will probably know what it could be). The car runs quite good. And I have a lot more boost in 2nd and 3rd gear. But knowing that it is not performing at an optimal level is annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r3hep Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Mine stands as follows... Slot 1 = stock Slot 2 = 196bhp chipped 95Ron U/L Slot 3 = 208bhp (1.25Bar) Optimax program These are claimed and they feel very nice! JPR had 1.4 running in his... but i don't think that was ever released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mollox Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 i'm no expert but I'd be surprised if 1.0 bar = 196 in a 1.8T... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r3hep Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 stock is only .5 bar (if i heard correctly!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJG Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 150BHP at the wheels sounds OK to me for a chipped 1.8T. Power losses are suprisingly high even on 2WD drive cars. When I had my A4 1.8T (2WD) chipped at AMD these were the figures they got (using 95 oct). Before. Power at flywheel (corrected): 157.5 BHP (DIN 70020) Power at flywheel (measured): 155.4 BHP Power at wheels: 113.7 BHP Power loss: 41.7 BHP Torque: 178.6 lb ft After. Power at flywheel (corrected): 193.2 BHP (DIN 70020) Power at flywheel (measured): 187.9 BHP Power at wheels: 147.1 BHP Power loss: 40.8 BHP Torque: 221.9 lb ft From your figures I would guess you are running 195 BHP or so. My personal preference is to go to a tuner who can provide before and after rolling road results. All R/Rs are different, but at least you get a comparison on the day. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorkild Posted February 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Obviously you are right David, but that's a bit late for me now. You might be right about this, but why would the technician say that fwd cars normally have a 12% drivetrain loss if it's not true. A couple of websites operate with 12-15% on VAG cars so it seems likely. In your numbers quoted, your loss is close to 28% before and then closer to 22% after tuning. I am confused...how could the drivetrain loss change? Or is it the number which doesn't change, meaning the loss of power is more or less constant? Any mechanical engineers around that have half a clue about how an engine works in terms of power loss from flywheel to wheels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJG Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 I must say that when I looked at my A4's numbers the power losses do seem high. You ought to see the losses on 4WD cars! Can't remember exactly what they do, but AMD meassure the losses on each run (dip the clutch and coast down? Not sure). But I think the losses are generally constant because they are due to transmission, tyres etc which aren't changing. The rule of thumb 12% or whatever can't really be true can it. If you took 2 engines one with 200 BHP at the flywheel and one with 100 BHP at the flywheel, but otherwise identical and RRed a car with one fitted then put the other in and RRed with that in would you expect to have twice as much transmission loss with the 200 BHP engine. Don't think so. I would expect that at a given RPM all losses would be the same (remember we know our enginess at the flywheel figures and these take into account internal losses). But what do I know Bottom line is that if you took your car to AMD and got 150 at the wheels then their results would show you had about 195 at the flywheel. Where you happy with your car before you had it RRed? David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorkild Posted February 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 before RR: after RR: it's amazing what a piece of paper will do to you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJG Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 I know what you mean! Ignorance is bliss (Just kidding!) Seriously I would imagine your car is fine. APR have a good name and a lot of happy punters. My quick test of whether my car is on form is to measure the time taken to accelerate from 50-70 in top gear (There was a rather long thread on the old site about this!). Easier on the car than a 0-60, with less driver skill needed! You should be able to find some figures for the standard car, or get someone else with a chipped car to test for you, and compare yours. 50-70 in 5th my heavier A4 1.8T was 10s standard and 8s chipped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorkild Posted February 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 Sounds like a good idea. Cheers for that! Does anyone want to help me out and get me some 50-70mph times in an A3 1.8T? Both with and without chip would be excellent! I shall be grateful forever... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted February 6, 2003 Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 I'm seeing my old AmD A3 this weekend so could try and get some figures if I have time. Remember that all RR's are different and will produce different figures on different days due to weather/temp etc. I got 180BHP from an independent RR but that was the 3rd sucessive run as the bloke forgot to turn the logging on the PC How hot was the car and did you do more than 1 run? Does it still feel fecking quick? That's all that really matters Cheers Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorkild Posted February 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2003 That would be great Ben! I know RR are all different and that, but all the other boys who their cars done got respectable figures. Mine was however the only fwd car he did, so it would be different. I suspect that the drivetrain loss he told me is incorrect. The car was just the right temperature, and it was the first run. The second run it got too hot and the it decreased to 147.3bhp at the wheels. I guess it does feel just as quick I think, but it's just like in my head the car is only as quick the piece of paper I had produced at the RR.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kntgsp Posted February 9, 2003 Report Share Posted February 9, 2003 I have the APR performance chip. The results are not 196hp and 240 ft/lbs. of torque. I have had my car dynoed and APR itself confirmed my results. for a 2002 jetta 1.8t, the upgrade produces 209hp and 245 ft/lbs of torque. Those are the numbers straight from APR and my own dynoed results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snez22 Posted February 10, 2003 Report Share Posted February 10, 2003 my non dbw a3t was RR'd when i had it apr chipped. looking at the graph now. power at flywheel 195.1bhp at wheels 164.6bhp. torque 223lb ft. apr only did a 1.0 bar for t sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted February 10, 2003 Report Share Posted February 10, 2003 Thorx mate, What gear do you want the 50-70 times in? My brother will crudely time one for you. Cheers Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorkild Posted February 13, 2003 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2003 Sorry for the late answer Ben. I moved this past weekend, and haven't got any internet connection sorted yet. I'm actually in an internet cafe trying to decide which provider to go with right now. I reckon PlusNet, Pipex or Eclipse are the frontrunners. Anyway, back to the issue. 5th gear would be great. Although do one in 3rd as well. The guy at the dyno said that 3rd was the most reliable gear to do testing, so both would be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now