Having heard people say that standard injectors can only make 230 bhp and that Jabbasport somehow fudge the figures on stage 3 cars they tune I took my VRS down to AMD today.

Interestingly, while the torque was down, the bhp was almost identical.

It's within one percent of the 266 bhp I was quoted by Jabbasport on the lowest value of three runs today at AMD.

The comments to follow this should be 'interesting'....

Well done It's nice to finally see some figures from two different rolling roads on standard injectors.

As said, it's good to see it verified by another set of rollers

I still anticipate doubters after the last rr there. Did you tell them it was modded or just watch the surprised look on the faces when it ran? Lol

Matt

Almost 284Hp. WOW

What's going to determine how much power you can ultimately make from $injectors is peak flow volume or possibly reaching 100% duty cycle (more applicable to petrol engines, since running a petrol lean can cause actual damage rather than just limit available power). I don't have enough data to comment on what the peak power on stock injectors would be.

I'm gonna play Devils Advocate for a while..........

I'm gonna play Devils Advocate for a while..........

Feel free.

You're never going to get an exact idea of any car's power, it's representative. You'll also never convince some people.

But I doubt AMD and Jabbasport are both something like 20% over estimating and yet within 1% of each other.

I personally think the results that AMDs rollers give are about as much use as a chocolate fire guard, always inconsistent variations in figures between different days with no change in mods, and in mine and many other peoples experiences 20-30hp too high. I've been saying for years the best £/bhp you can do. Is a £70 run on AMDs rollers as its good for at least 20hp lol

An example their AMD map the other day showed justin off the gti forum in a stage 2+ gti made 288hp on their rollers, yet at the rr day at jkm he made 254hp which was less than all the stage 2 cars. Same goes for the guys with 1.4tsi's. They all run 20hp above stock there but dd rollers make stock. And make 230hp at stage 2, yet are below 210hp on dd rollers. He then changed software to revo which should give 270-280hp on any other dyno, but at AMD he made 312hp, even he found that comical.... which is all the more funny as the three times he tried to beat me at inters he failed despite the alleged 100hp deficit. Imtempted to go and for their next r day just see how much I gain lol.

Im not saying dd rollers are the best, but they're called heart breakers for a reason, they don't give out comical high readings at all.If you make good figures on them, your car is running very well. Its also one of the few dynos where stock cars are nearly always around stock figures. With the added bonus that which ever dyno dynamics rolling road you go to they are always within a few hp of each other when used in shoot out mode.

If your near AMD there is another place nearby called SANSPEED who have dd rollers. Apparently their tuning capabilities are a bit wayward, but the rollers are bang on. My fabia made exactly the stated stock figure on there when I ran it with only 300miles in the clock.

Sent from my MZ601 using Tapatalk

Edited 6 July, 201114 yr by janner_Sy

My figures are from AmD too so it's nice to compare but why did it go between 267bhp and 283bhp? Was Methanol used?

I remember once mine was rollered at 163bhp and then another run at 173bhp, then 178bhp and then 195bhp or something... 4 runs and 4 completely different figures.

Who's to say it wouldn't run over 200bhp on the next run?

Then when I had my current figures... It ran 233bhp, then 240bhp, and then he stopped... Next run could have been 250bhp? Who knows?

Unless everyone uses the same RR at the same time then quoting figures is pointless but just because a few people on the internet says AmD's RR's are way out won't make me stop saying my power figure when asked. Many people quote figures from AmD/Jabba (etc) so if you find a ultimate accurate RR and it makes 220bhp then your car just looks worse compared to others quoting from AmD/Jabba.

How did you get on the rollers though? How much did you pay? I really wanna see what mine is like now.

VW Driver mag did a big article a few years back, and they looked into all things that cause the "variables" between rolling roads...eg single rollers for each axle or double rollers for each axle.......amount of "fan cooling" for the engine....tyre pressures......air temp and humdity in area.......etc......etc.

I've come to the conclusion that it's only really good for using the same set of rollers on one day to do an imediate "side by side" car comparison.......or just use the same set of rollers to do before and after and engine mods that you carry out on your highly tunned car!!!

Anyway.....

Edited 6 July, 201114 yr by fabdavrav

My figures are from AmD too so it's nice to compare but why did it go between 267bhp and 283bhp? Was Methanol used?

I remember once mine was rollered at 163bhp and then another run at 173bhp, then 178bhp and then 195bhp or something... 4 runs and 4 completely different figures.Who's to say it wouldn't run over 200bhp on the next run?

Then when I had my current figures... It ran 233bhp, then 240bhp, and then he stopped... Next run could have been 250bhp? Who knows

Exactly my point, it's representative. Why get hung up over exact figures?

Yes, meth was on auto. 267 to 283 is a small percentage variation and I very much doubt you'll ever get it spot on anyway.

Even on so called "heart breaker" rolling roads I'd be surprised to see it return the same figures for the same car day in, day out.

Guess the figures from Saturday at Santa Pod will help with other quarter mile times on another thread to compare to.

How did you get on the rollers though? How much did you pay? I really wanna see what mine is like now.

I turned up early before they opened and got on there before they started to use them for any remaps.

Paid the going rate as I had time to pop in this morning and I was curious...

Looks like you'll never get everyone to agree, but I already knew that.

Gives the hornets nest a good poke though.

Exactly my point, it's representative. Why get hung up over exact figures?

Guess the figures from Saturday at Santa Pod will help with other quarter mile times on another thread to compare to.

Looks like you'll never get everyone to agree, but I already knew that.

Gives the hornets nest a good poke though.

1. YES

2. OOOOOHHHHHHH YYYEEEESSSSSSSS!!!!! :yes:

3. YES

4. NAUGHTY!!!

This post has been sponsered by Churchill!!!....OOHHHH YYYYEEESSSSS

Edited 6 July, 201114 yr by fabdavrav

My figures are from AmD too so it's nice to compare but why did it go between 267bhp and 283bhp? Was Methanol used?

I remember once mine was rollered at 163bhp and then another run at 173bhp, then 178bhp and then 195bhp or something... 4 runs and 4 completely different figures.

Who's to say it wouldn't run over 200bhp on the next run?

Then when I had my current figures... It ran 233bhp, then 240bhp, and then he stopped... Next run could have been 250bhp? Who knows?

Unless everyone uses the same RR at the same time then quoting figures is pointless but just because a few people on the internet says AmD's RR's are way out won't make me stop saying my power figure when asked. Many people quote figures from AmD/Jabba (etc) so if you find a ultimate accurate RR and it makes 220bhp then your car just looks worse compared to others quoting from AmD/Jabba.

How did you get on the rollers though? How much did you pay? I really wanna see what mine is like now.

So you would rather quote a fantasy hp figure then look stupid when someone running a lot less drives off, just to Willy wave some figures.

What im getting from your post is you would rather quote your highest figures possible so that it doesn't sound slower than other peoples. I find that amusing personally as whether you say its got 220hp or 270hp its still the same on the road where it counts so why quote the highest, your just setting yourself up for a fall.

I quote lower as for 1 im not a dreamer or willy waiver and 2 I don't look like a tube when someone else car is quicker with less power. Each to their own though.

Sent from my MZ601 using Tapatalk

Reference the dyno dynamics rollers 4 separate dyno dynamics rolling roads returned figures of my stage 2 octavia within 4 hp of each other. Same with the fabia, 2 seperate dd rollers within 2 hp if each other

Sent from my MZ601 using Tapatalk

So you would rather quote a fantasy hp figure then look stupid when someone running a lot less drives off, just to Willy wave some figures.

What im getting from your post is you would rather quote your highest figures possible so that it doesn't sound slower than other peoples. I find that amusing personally as whether you say its got 220hp or 270hp its still the same on the road where it counts so why quote the highest, your just setting yourself up for a fall.

I quote lower as for 1 im not a dreamer or willy waiver and 2 I don't look like a tube when someone else car is quicker with less power. Each to their own though.

Well AmD's RR read out 163bhp for my car so should I quote that?

If I was to say it made 220bhp and there's numerous of people running 240bhp+ with the same setup then everyone would be saying the map isn't right or whatever. It would be considered a slower/less tuned car than someone running 240bhp (and being faster on the road).

I think everyone quotes the highest figure, who would quote the lowest figure if you have proof that your car ran the higher figure? :wonder:

If ever I was asked what power mine was making i`d give the lowest power for exactly the reasons janner says, its even more funny when the 200bhp skoda leaves the "250 bhp" ford/vauxhall etc All of a sudden its their car that everyone thinks isnt running right.

Matt

Seems retarded but OK my car is 163bhp.....

So you would rather quote a fantasy hp figure then look stupid when someone running a lot less drives off, just to Willy wave some figures.

Sent from my MZ601 using Tapatalk

If people have "verified" proof they will always quote the highest figure, and why not?, you should know that!

Even for 0-60 times at Santa-pod there are "Variables"......The excusses include any of the following.....my foot slipped, it was raining, the tyres were not up to heat, I 4ucked up a gear change etc..etc...

Out in the "Real Word" of driving on our roads the ammount, or lack of power in any car is meaningless if you don't know the road and have zero skill!!!

This is why the fastest thing on our roads is a local delivery driver in a "works" white van.....try catching one of those!!!!!

Sent from a standard laptop with a QWERTY keyboard and NOT a willy waving MZ601 using Tapatalk!!!

Seems retarded but OK my car is 163bhp.....

Want a race?

I'm off the AMD again once I've taken a turbo hose off... so I can claim 60 bhp and then surprise you.

Sent from my office computer. I've got a bald spot on my space bar. NOT a willy waving MZ601 using Tapatalk!

If I had such random and varied figures from a specific dyno the arms bells would be ringing in my head to let me know im wasting my hard earned cash by using their rollers. What I would do is find a rolling road with some credibility and get it confirmed elsewhere. I know I wouldn't be quoting your highest figures, that's for sure.

As said prior I only ever use dyno dynamics rollers for comparison, and only ill only use them for a comparison if I have the before and after curves. That and the fact that they are consistent on their results irrelevant of which tuner you go to them.

I personnaly find it amusing when guys quote big figures, especially at track days or 1/4 mile when they spend the whole day trying to catch you in your lower powered car.

Sent from my MZ601 using Tapatalk

If it was clearly wrong then I would class it as a accurate reading and disregard it, But fluctuations between rollers of 10/20/30bhp then yeah, I say the lowest. Rather that than look a bellend when I get beaten by a lower power car

Matt

Out of interest, did anyone notice that for nearly all of the curve both the bhp and torque shown is nearly identical on every run? The only small variation is a right at the top end for a few rpm.

Just thought that may be worth mentioning, even though it's "representave".

Sent from a standard laptop with a QWERTY keyboard and NOT a willy waving MZ601 using Tapatalk!!!

Brilliant hit a nerve have we lol

I believe this is for you

Sent from my MZ601 using Tapatalk because I can

Edited 6 July, 201114 yr by janner_Sy

Brilliant hit a nerve have we lol

Sent from my MZ601 using Tapatalk because I can

No you haven't hit a nerve... :wonder:

I just think it's a bit strange that people have to specify how they are sending an email....thats all!!!