The 280PS Thread

[Nick_H]

Ordered. Build week 41 :-)

 

Edit : Now 39 !! :-D

[Nick_H]

Will the Superb 280 be the most powerful, fastest car you've owned ?

[BillyJim]

Will the Superb 280 be the most powerful, fastest car you've owned ?

Yes, but not by that much.

 

The 2008 Mk.III 3.0 V6 diesel Renault Laguna Coupé ran a close second in performance if not raw horsepower. (235PS, 0-100kmh in 7.3, top speed 150 mph). Not bad for a diesel at the time and thanks to its high torque across the range it performed great in mid-range acceleration. The four-wheel steering meant it stuck to the road like s++t to a blanket on bends.

But within the first 18 months it went back to the dealer four times for behind-dashboard rattles that they never cured, and these were mega-noisy rattles like someone had left their cutlery behind the dash.

The final straw was when I discovered, after it went in for its first service, that only the locking wheel nut had been tightened on the FNS wheel, you could turn the other 4 with your fingers. When I pointed out my disgust at the potential danger, Renault's response was "We'll make a note of it". Not even an apology!

So after 18 months it was bye-bye Renault, never to return, and hello Škoda.

 

And here's a thought - the Laguna coupé depreciated 75% in 18 months, my Superb II depreciated 65% in 4 years.

 

So after four years with a decent but not spectacular performance 170 TDi I'm really looking forward to having that extra power again.

[Nick_H]

One of our neighbours had a Lagune. Lovely looking estate but it was a nightmare for him.

I've not had a family car with this kind of performance although the Scout isn't a slow car. In 1990 I had a mk2 Toyota Supra 2.8. That was a lovely car with around 170bhp but the Scout just topped it on performance !

I must admit though to looking forward to it. This is my compromise. The other option was something like an SL55 as a third car but realistically we just don't have the space....

Plus I would have to leave the Mrs behind whenever me and the little 'un went anywhere :-D

I remember my Dad saying to me when I was a kid their was no substitute for cc..... If these modern engines with so much hp turn out to also have longevity that may no longer be the case ....

[logiclee]

I wonder why the gearing is so low? 26.5mph/1000rpm is low for a modern turbo petrol.

 

Our BMW turbo petrol has 35mph/1000rpm and even the little 1.0 Ecoboost Fiesta we had for a while did 30mph/1000rpm.

 

I'm sure with the power and torque of the 280 it could have taken taller gearing, it's not like it's trying to be a Golf R rival.

 

Lee

[Zillio]

I wonder why the gearing is so low? 26.5mph/1000rpm is low for a modern turbo petrol.

 

Our BMW turbo petrol has 35mph/1000rpm and even the little 1.0 Ecoboost Fiesta we had for a while did 30mph/1000rpm.

 

I'm sure with the power and torque of the 280 it could have taken taller gearing, it's not like it's trying to be a Golf R rival.

 

Lee

But to save money they might have just taken the gearbox straight out of the leon cupra and golf R rather than build a new one with custom ratios

[logiclee]

But to save money they might have just taken the gearbox straight out of the leon cupra and golf R rather than build a new one with custom ratios

 

 

But no real need to build a box with custom ratio's just need a different final drive ratio in the diff.

 

The Superb 280 uses the standard DQ250 DSG box I believe?

[Nick_H]

2700 rpm at 70 is OK for me. Should be pretty relaxed.

 

It's the time it takes to get their that counts

[mandp]

I'm no mathematician, but my calculations tell me that the power to weight ratio of the 280 and 220 are almost identical. So, unless you particularly want 4 wheel drive, why would you go for the 280?

[Nick_H]

I'm no mathematician, but my calculations tell me that the power to weight ratio of the 280 and 220 are almost identical. So, unless you particularly want 4 wheel drive, why would you go for the 280?

Mmmm good question ! Their must be reason though or why bother with the 280 ;-)

[logiclee]

Mmmm good question ! Their must be reason though or why bother with the 280 ;-)

 

Traction.

[BillyJim]

Weight to power ratio:-

220 = 2050kg ÷ 162kw = 12.65

280 = 2215kg ÷ 206kw = 10.75

 

Torque:-

Max torque 220 = 4400

Max torque 280 = 5600

 

Just two other reasons I want the 280 over the 220.

 

(Twin visible exhausts could be another, but I didn't realise it had them until after I'd ordered!).

[Gizmo]

(Twin visible exhausts could be another, but I didn't realise it had them until after I'd ordered!).

 

pah!! ... who needs them??     :'(

[l4wrence]

I'm no mathematician, but my calculations tell me that the power to weight ratio of the 280 and 220 are almost identical. So, unless you particularly want 4 wheel drive, why would you go for the 280?

 

Because I want 4 wheel drive depends where you want to take your car I guess

[logiclee]

Weight to power ratio:-

220 = 2050kg ÷ 162kw = 12.65

280 = 2215kg ÷ 206kw = 10.75

 

Torque:-

Max torque 220 = 4400

Max torque 280 = 5600

 

Just two other reasons I want the 280 over the 220.

 

(Twin visible exhausts could be another, but I didn't realise it had them until after I'd ordered!).

 

Torque wise both the 220 and 280 deliver a maximum torque of 350NM.

 

The 220 has this available between 1500 and 4400rpm

The 280 has this available between 1700 and 5600rpm

 

Maintaining the torque at higher rpm gives higher power.

 

But upto 4500rpm the 220 should feel a little quicker as it is lighter and has lower transmission losses.

Start getting above 5000rpm and the 280 will start to stretch it's legs.

 

The torque is capped at 350NM on both models due to  drive train limits.

 

Lee

[Nick_H]

Thanks Lee. What sort of power gains do you think we could see from a stage one map and would the transmission be able to cope ?

[l4wrence]

I'm not sure if people are 'getting' the 280. It's not a sports car. It's certainly not been marketed as one and if I wanted a 'sports' car, this would be far from my first choice. I'm sure 220 and 280 do have similarities but not 4x4. In fact, if they did a 4x4 220 I'd likely get it. I want comfort, stealth power and 4x4 grip in a big car for Europe wide travel to accommodate a growing family + dog. Practical and powerful, it seems to meet both our needs. Someone wanting to map a 220 or 280 superb is buying the wrong car IMHO.

[Nick_H]

Didn't say I wanted to map it l4rence I was just interested. I've never mapped a car yet .... Don't know really where you are getting this ' people aren't getting it and think it's a sports car' from ?

It's a huge estate car ? Having owned sports cars in the past with considerably more power and performance than the 280 Superb I think I can tell the difference ! :-)

But don't worry I'll let you know if I'm disappointed when I take delivery of mine in October :-D

[BillyJim]

But up to 4500rpm the 220 should feel a little quicker as it is lighter and has lower transmission losses.

mandp raised the question why choose 280 over 220 based on a flawed equal power/weight.

The 220 is effectively pulling 114kg more than the 280 which is why the 0-100kph is a second faster for the 280. But using your argument it should be the other way round.

 

I'm not stating one car is better than the other, nor implying it's a sports car, but simply answering why I chose the 280 over the 220.

In fact you beat me to one of my reasons, the new Gen5 Haldex (designed specifically for VAG) was a major plus factor in my decision.

[logiclee]

The 220 is effectively pulling 114kg more than the 280 which is why the 0-100kph is a second faster for the 280. But using your argument it should be the other way round.

 

 

No,

 

I said that upto 4500rpm both engines are producing the same torque and power, infact the 220 gets to maximum torque a little quicker than the 280 as the smaller turbo spools up quicker.

As below 4500rpm both engines have the same output and the 220 is both lighter and has lower transmission losses it will be quicker and a little more responsive from tickover to 4500rpm.

 

A 0-62mph dash is completely different as you will be using full power and full rpm where the 280 has the advantage of more power. And of course with a 0-62 dash the 280 also has the advantage of 4X4 traction off the line which will be most of the 1 second advantage.

 

Lee

[Zillio]

I'm not sure if people are 'getting' the 280. It's not a sports car. It's certainly not been marketed as one and if I wanted a 'sports' car, this would be far from my first choice. I'm sure 220 and 280 do have similarities but not 4x4. In fact, if they did a 4x4 220 I'd likely get it. I want comfort, stealth power and 4x4 grip in a big car for Europe wide travel to accommodate a growing family + dog. Practical and powerful, it seems to meet both our needs. Someone wanting to map a 220 or 280 superb is buying the wrong car IMHO.

I was kind of hoping it would be a bit sporty, looking at the 280 or the Octavia vRS.

[l4wrence]

Nick_H, my post wasn't specifically all about your previous post, it did't mean to come across as having a dig at anyone. Just voicing my opinion.

 

Zillio, I've also been either looking at an Octy vRS or Suberb 280. One of my requirements was power and plenty of space. Both those cars fit but for various other reasons I wanted 4 wheel drive, blind spot indicators and other things the Superb could offer that the Octavia couldn't. Also when I was fully speccing the Ovtavia the price wasn't too different from the Superb.

 

For sporty driving I think the Superb suspension is going to let it down, even in 'sport' mode. The vRS is more for the drive but other priorities for me means I think overall the Superb 280 is a better all round fit for my needs

[logiclee]

Thanks Lee. What sort of power gains do you think we could see from a stage one map and would the transmission be able to cope ?

 

The Leon already has maps available to 350PS and 475NM.

 

http://www.sharkperformance.co.uk/mapdetail?Seat-Leon-5S-2012--2.0-TSI-Cupra-280bhp

 

While this exceeds the rating of both the manual and DSG gearboxes many have run more than 350NM on the DQ250 gearbox for many miles without an issue but obviously you are taking a risk.

 

Lee

Edited 2 September, 2015 by logiclee

[Nick_H]

Thanks for that interesting ! 160 was enough for me so I'm sure i'll be more than happy with 270+ :-)

[ColinD]

Where as, if I had the 4x4, I'd map it

 

On my MKII 4x4 I had roughly the same legs mapped as a passat std fwd. That is until you add rain, sleet or snow, yes, yes can't use all that power in those conditions. Except you can and those conditions are fairly normal the further north you typically drive /Preeching done.

 

For me power and traction has always been a compromise for two things. The order varies, but specifically overtaking time and cornering.

 

Overtaking times extends to junction time too, so getting out safely rather than omg that was close, he was coming much quicker... etc but also overtaking lines or shall we say fast roadblock, you know the 40's in 30 and 40 in 60 folks with a train behind.

 

The superb, in fact I'll be so bold as to say, any VAG sans porsche GT#, but even then :S, isn't about performance & handling really it's a magic trick. That's true performance and handling are the realms of specialist marques, everything else is a compromise in some way, an illusion. It's comfortable A to B via Z and security of having the ability to use it if not the knowledge of how; which is the camp I'm in, or when not to use it

 

We don't need 270hp, I get by on 70 now... until I get to a compromising dangerous overtake... thats when I want 4x4 and as many ponies as you can fit please.

 

270 = safer & relaxing

70 = cunning & squeaky pants

 

 

So envious of you lucky lads, it's a really nice car too regardless of the exmoor pony, shetland pony or red rum block.