Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

1. I was gobsmacked that he could catch up with acceleration (when I was leading)...

Not that difficult.

As others have said, it's really easy to wind up the wick on these things with no hardware changes.

A mate of mine in the UK has a Seat Leon Cupra (same Golf V platform). With an ECU reflash and stock everything else, he's pulling 220kW at the flywheel and more torque everywhere. He took me for a ride in it, and its a weapon.

On a rolling start, "chipped" Golf platform turbo cars have the ability to embarrass much "finer" machinery. It's nearly always on boost, pulls all the way to the limiter, and makes very good power for the size.

The vRS also has some pretty nice suspension. If the front end wasn't uglier than a sack full of poo, it'd make a good "stealth daily" for someone who wanted a Golf GTi without the lairiness.

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Not that difficult.

As others have said, it's really easy to wind up the wick on these things with no hardware changes.

A mate of mine in the UK has a Seat Leon Cupra (same Golf V platform). With an ECU reflash and stock everything else, he's pulling 220kW at the flywheel and more torque everywhere. He took me for a ride in it, and its a weapon.

On a rolling start, "chipped" Golf platform turbo cars have the ability to embarrass much "finer" machinery. It's nearly always on boost, pulls all the way to the limiter, and makes very good power for the size.

The vRS also has some pretty nice suspension. If the front end wasn't uglier than a sack full of poo, it'd make a good "stealth daily" for someone who wanted a Golf GTi without the lairiness.

was thinking the same thing too about the golf cars in particular the Volkswagen 1.4 Litre TSI Twincharger...don't know if it'll keep up with a v-line (no bus joke intended) but an interesting motor nonetheless.

For those interested, here's the dyno graph of my mate's Cupra.

Stock standard hardware, ECU remap.

post-20773-1255433578_thumb.png

217fwkW with a mechanically stock car is nothing to sneeze at. That's more power and less weight than a bolt-on NA Z33/V35.

The thing hits almost peak torque at about the same level our engines do, and holds it for the same rev band. Unless you caught an owner cruising at low speed in a high gear and you both decided not to cog it down, we'd pretty much get munched.

For those interested, here's the dyno graph of my mate's Cupra.

Stock standard hardware, ECU remap.

post-20773-1255433578_thumb.png

217fwkW with a mechanically stock car is nothing to sneeze at. That's more power and less weight than a bolt-on NA Z33/V35.

The thing hits almost peak torque at about the same level our engines do, and holds it for the same rev band. Unless you caught an owner cruising at low speed in a high gear and you both decided not to cog it down, we'd pretty much get munched.

I recognise that RR graph ;)

Although what he is not telling you is that the car comes as std with a K04 Twin scrol Borg Warner Turbo whereas the Skoda will probably have a K03. Max headroom on that is around the 310hp mark with the same torque. The 30th Edition GTI, Audi S3 and Leon Cupra with the K04 have max headroom of something a little shy of 400hp on std internals. The Audi can get to around 450PS as it has a closed deck, but the weight and drivetrain losses (which are not bad at around 22% for the quattro) hold it back a little.

And the cost in old world money? Realising this is in Rip Off Britain, around £2000 and you have at full boost by 2.7k, with a minimum of 300 ft/lbs from 2k to the redline at 7.1k. :D:D:)

(Apologies for not converting from hp to kw, not sure of the math, sure that scathing will correct me :))

i own a is250 its actually quiet fast and very responsive..

I'm sure it is but I've seen people selling their IS250 as 2.5ltr is just not enough grunt and moved to V35 or something else...

Don't get me wrong I was strongly considering the IS250 before buying the V35....

problem is I won't settle any less than Sports Luxury variant and last year they were all asking $60k for even a 2nd hand ones.

$60k vs $30k-ish V35 - I will take V35 any day...

my mate bought a is250 a few months ago, had a test drive and it wasnt bad...not as good as the v im afraid but is very luxury and a refined ride. however i would choose the v, more of a sports luxury and unique...well at least for now until the market swarms with them hence the reason why ive stayey with this car for almost a year now i used to change cars every 2-3months.

well I can't afford to burn money by changing car every 2-3 months :-) not with a mortgage and a toddler growing up.

I would have to stick with v for a few years considering sports luxury is250 is still over $45k these days for a good example.

and coming from a 230rwkw r33 turbo, i needed a stepping stone down the power ladder, cos i'd definitely would die of boredom

if I get something less than stock r33 power all of a sudden :-)

V fits the bill, power wise (206kw not bad), half the price of is250 sports luxury back in 2007, engine is non-turbo so I don't

get tempted to spend money in the engine bay, and in a few years when I decided to step down the power ladder again and

can afford to buy a more common shopping trolley euros/luxury with sub-150kw I might just be very content, cos I have been

seasoned with such a 'slow' car.

want to blow Skoda's or whatever away in a family wagon?????

Go with a M35....the wife will love it!....you'll love it!.... basically the V35 with alot more go top end and more room.....it's just f#$ked out of the hole(till 20km's anyway).....but we are working on it.

P.S. Yes it does go around corners.....I did a 1.56 around Eastern creek in mine(shutup Andy...lol).

it's gotta be in 100% UNMODIFIED condition though...

how would it handle with no boost increase, and stock shock & springs?

Damn good question......lol!!!......from experience!...the AR-X was like a bus on cross-pliers standard.....that being said it was still far better than a Liberty, or an Holden Adventurer.....it's just got a weight issue(It's a fat cow in other words...1,780kg's dry weight)

The RS or RX are pretty good straight out of the box(alot lighter too)....with a good set of pads and tyres(not semi slicks either) I reckon I could crack 2 minutes at EC.....no way with an UNMODIFIED AR-X though!!!...but if it rained the AR-X would be quicker.

and another 'killer' question is: is it a 7 seater?

I have seen pics...but it's pretty much the same setup as a Commalcon wagon....which is crap.

Edited by Jetwreck

do what i did ...STROKE it 221RWKW NA power ready for forced induction and the cost ... 8500 incl labour mind you the weakest thing in VQ35DE is the Harmonic balancer .. like the RB26's .. it uses the same style... my mods are not wild all it is is a forged rebuild with CP flattop pistions , apr harmonic balancer, cam is standard , billet cam gears. My auto is on the way out soon to SA for a rebuild and a 3500rpm stall converter , unfortantly i cant afford a TT install at the moment otherwise id do it in a heart beat.. im running a autoronic ecu copgybacked to the stock one just controlling Air / fuel and timming curves

If you have the VQ35HR dont bother stroking it or forced induction i have heard they dont respond to well to either of the things ..

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...