My 2 dyno's of choice would be JKM first or Surrey Rolling Road second.

Both give comparable figures on the same cars.

So it's a street race you want eh? I don't know about you, but I live my life a quarter mile at a time...

Interested to hear what Carl would have to say. When did he have APR and did he do back to back rolling roads when he switched or are we using the butt dyno to quantify the performance differences?

Evan one of two things is happening. Either those figures are massively inflated and that Dyno needs calibrating. Or that is a code you won't release to the general public.

I have had 3 versions of the APR 2.0TSi code and NONE got anywhere near that figure. I even had your fabled LP3 high output map and that made not one iota of difference. Well certainly not the 30bhp & 30lb/ft you guys claimed. I have not seen ANY APR car get that far on on stage 1.

My car with the following mods:

APR Stage 1

ITG Intake

Neuspeed TSi Turbo Discharge pipe

Neuspeed TSi Hi-Flow intercooler pipe

Audi S3 intercooler (the Alloy end tank version)

The car made the following power With version 1 of the code i got 237bhp and 280lb/ft (with just the map i got 232bhp/270lbft - standard i had 200bhp/210lbft) Keith Lucas flashed the car with a new so called hi-output better version and the car made 240bhp and 285lb/ft. So a grand total of 3bhp and 5lbft!!! Same car, same dyno, same day. I got given some claptrap about letting the car settle with the code. All my dyno runs were done at JKM.

I was having DSG issues and Greg came to my house to flash an updated version of the LP3 Hi-Output map, which solved the DSG issue but didn't make the car faster. I was then getting massive timing pull issues on the 98ron map using the ITG intake. I had to revert to a panel filter and the 95ron map to curtail this. I'm talking -8degs timing retardation sustained over 3000rpm of the rev range on all 4 cylinders. I sent email's to Greg. Arin and Keith and no one replied (which i found odd as APR worked with me to solve the DSG issue) i left it a couple of months with 2 gentle reminders in between. I even included about 15 logs done in various gears to prove it wasn't a one off. So due to this i went to REVO.

Now i don't care what figures you decide to spout or what dyno printouts you pull out. APR & REVO are fairly even when it comes to real world performance on Stage 1. However i would say that in mode 3 the REVO is probably a bit quicker in gear. That's from my experience of the APR & REVO on the same car with the same mods and same driver.

I have only ever seen 1 car with REVO Stage 1 make 285bhp & 325lb/ft and the car was a test car and the code was massively altered before being released. As said i have never seen APR get anywhere near that. Now you will undoubtedly be able make a car make that power. But wether it could do it safely and remain a daily driver, i doubt it. We were all fed this spiel about how APR were coming to the UK to try and develop the competition and give consumers another choice. Well from what i have seen you only seem interested in pumping out the standard code to make money. The only other time you want to know is if it's a big bhp project.

I haven't dyno'd my car on REVO yet. TBH i probably won't bother. I have done the comparisons by looking at how the car performs on the road. I just wanted a smooth safe power delivery with more than what the car came from the factory with. APR couldn't do that and i even offered numerous times to assist and use my car as a mule. But as i said earlier you only seem interested in big bhp projects. So i went elsewhere.

To anyone reading this i am NOT trying to start an APR vs REVO debate. I have posted my opinion based on my own experiences of both codes. I certainly aint interested in a street race. If anyone is in any doubt just have a look at the 1/4mile leader boards around. They will give you all the info you need.

Carl

Edited 22 September, 201213 yr by vRS Carl

Sorry, did I miss the point where this thread changed from one praising Shark, to one disputing issues between Revo and APR?

Indeed! Can we get back to the thread now chaps?

Here is where we are at.....I was in at Shark yesterday to get an updated map. I was getting some error codes after the last mapping session to do with the boost requested and the actual boost being different. "negative deviation" as Rob described it.

He explained that the new TSI Ecus are very picky and so any variation in boost can trigger this. I had a TFSI before and I remember that when logging requested vs actual boost, you would often get occasions where they wouldnt match by as much as 100-150 mbar. On my TSI the logs show it was out by just 50-100mbar but still putting out an error.

As I didn't have the intake, it was getting to 5000+ rpm and then not getting enough air to provide the boost and giving an error. On a TFSI that would have happened but with no code.

So Mikko agreed to do me a new map that tweaked the threshold so this code would stop coming up.

That aside, I'm still not 100% sure where I am at regarding the power output. I managed to scour the Internet last week and found 2 sets of logs from TSI cars with Revo stage 2. Their logs show a requested peak boost of 2550 mbar, which the cars meet in the actual figures.

Now boost is not everything as timing is obviously just as important but all the logs I have from my car running Shark's map show a peak requested boost of 2250 mbar which my car is reaching apart from the top of the rev range. To give you some comparative reference as to what that means, my previous TFSI stage 1 map was also requesting 2250 mbar.

So the power is not down due to a fault, the map is not requesting much more than a stage 1 map from what I can see. Although I don't have any timing logs to compare and so this is not a like for like comparison.

This is likely down to a miscommunication between me and Shark that I am trying to get to the bottom of.

Basically, I booked my car in for a custom map.

The guys at Shark told me that due to the lack of an intake it would not be a 100% stage 2 map as it wouldn't be able to deal with those boost requests and they they would just dial back the boost a little at the higher rpms. I was ok with this as based on past experience, I figured that intakes don't do much and so I'd rather save the noise and do without the 3-5bhp the intake might make.

Here is where it gets tricky, I paid for a custom map but looking at the figures from the dyno and the boost logs I have showing 2250 mbar.....I am inclined to believe that the boost is so reduced that it is essentially closer to a stage 1 map......my car is making pretty much the same power as Sharks own MK6 golf on stage 1.

So far Shark have been pretty good and have been talking to me about sorting this out. However, this week has been tough as Ben and Mikko have been away. Mikko did my updated map from Finland.

Another tricky thing is that I live 130 miles away from Shark and so I can't just keep popping down until they get this right.

Unfortunately I had no response from Mikko on email and Rob couldn't get any info from him either and so I have no idea if the new map is the same as my old one but with the negative deviation threshold altered. Also as Rob was on his own, I couldn't get any new dyno figures :(

Rob thinks that Mikko may have tweaked this for more boost but the weather was so bad that any full throttle acceleration just spun the wheels. I was even getting spin in 4th!

I need to either hear back from Shark regarding what they did to this new map, or get some VCDS logs done to see if the boost has changed. I'll update once I know what is going on.

Ron

Ron,

Do you have a log of your actual vs. requested book pressures? Not all stage 2 maps are going to make most of their gains via max requested boost and maybe Sharks is one of them. Have you logged N75 duty cycle to compare those differences? Either way, your car is making some impressive power at the stage 2 level so I wouldn't get too hung up on max requested figures.

And Carl, thank you for the very comprehensive breakdown. I'm sorry to hear things didn't work out as expected while working with Greg and Keith, but I definitely want to discuss it further--something about those figures with those calibrations doesn't sound right to me. Please expect a PM to avoid more thread derailing

Edited 23 September, 201213 yr by Evan@APR

Ron,

Do you have a log of your actual vs. requested book pressures? Not all stage 2 maps are going to make most of their gains via max requested boost and maybe Sharks is one of them. Have you logged N75 duty cycle to compare those differences? Either way, your car is making some impressive power at the stage 2 level so I wouldn't get too hung up on max requested figures.

Hi Evan, I think you may have misunderstood which figures are mine.

I do agree that max boost is not everything for sure and I'd rather run less boost and make the same power. For example, I had an IHI vf34 powered mk1 that Jabba built and mapped. It made 340bhp from 1.3bar boost but one of the previous owners then had it remapped by RS tuning who got 325bhp from it with 1.7 bar, however it did run better with the second map (smoother) although 1.7 bar blew the turbo in the end after 50k miles.

I can do logs all day long and put them up here but I want to give Shark the chance to resolve my issues as they have been good overall, just not delivered what I had hoped for.

Cheers

Ron

It appears I have misunderstood. Apologies! Best of luck with your remap Hof

Edited 23 September, 201213 yr by Evan@APR

Hi Ron

If you want to give the office a call to discuss, both Mikko and I are in the office and can help. Obviously I've been away so have tried to pick up the ins and outs of your query but it would be nice to discuss it with you directly.

Hopefully you've seen the result above which shows how effective and smooth our Stage 2 software really is.. of course every dyno is different which is why all figures should be taken with a pinch of salt, but it's pointless gathering data from several different dynos and trying to compare. If there is an underlying issue with your car then we are as keen to get it resolved as you are.

Regards

Ben

Just a bit of an update on this one.....

Ben and the guys updated the map on my car to account for the intake.

I havent been on the rollers as on the day my updated map was done, the rolling road wasnt available but I have been able to get VCDS logs.

My mass airflow reading has jumped up from 198 peak to 226 peak so that is a pretty big jump!

Looking forward to getting it on the rollers at some point.

thats more like it, my MAF peaks around that, occasionally a little higher, so I would say you are in the ballpark for 280-290hp :-)

Be interesting to see your graphs against my Revo ones once u get chance to get it rr'd hofmeister..

Yeah, I was hoping I would get a new set of graphs when I went but they didn't have time to dyno. Will have to wait until the next RR day now.

Did some more logs today as the roads are dry, I wanted to test to see if the intake really was making a difference of that level. I did back to back logs with the intake on and then the standard airbox on. With intake the max airflow was 228 but with standard airbox on, it was 194. Plus the car actually felt slower.

So while I have always been a believer that intakes don't do anything, and stand by that for Normally aspirated cars...... On a turbo car that is mapped for an intake like the TSI, it makes a pretty big difference!

Will post dyno plots when I get them.

Pretty impressive Ron. Makes you wonder what differences would be seen between a variety of different intakes, although your ITG is regarded as one of the best so guess you'll be sticking with that.

well my figures are very similar to that and Im running an APR Carbonio stage 1 & 2

Hoff, did you ever get to a Dyno?

No, hardly driven the car since Shark tweaked the mapping, It is in the process of being for sale now as I've been given a MK7 Golf 2.0tdi GT as a company car.

I see the power starts dropping off at 5000 rpm is that usual for this engine.

I have seem diesels with hybrid turbos pulling to 5000rpm.

John

I see the power starts dropping off at 5000 rpm is that usual for this engine.

I have seem diesels with hybrid turbos pulling to 5000rpm.

John

That dyno chart is without the intake, the standard intake can't flow enough to make peak boost once over 5k, it pulls much better up top with the ITG.

I see the power starts dropping off at 5000 rpm is that usual for this engine.

I have seem diesels with hybrid turbos pulling to 5000rpm.

John

Im still making 290hp and 310lbft at that point, the stock turbo simply can blow hard enough to maintain anymore. if I change to a Hybrid turbo you are talking power to 7000rpm and figures over 400hp/380lbft.

I had the ITG on my vRS (2.0TSi) and on the same day on the same rollers the car made 1bhp difference over OEM with ITG Panel filter. So maybe with higher boost setups you get better but I've reverted back to the OEM box with an ITG panel filter in and the car feels no different.

thats very interesting, with my intake the difference is very marked, even when logging the MAF reading is noticably different (cant recall figures now) If I could be bothered to remove the intake I would love to log them both back to back to compare.

I too was surprised. I was also getting a high pitched whine during acceleration. No idea why as I checked, rechecked everything was fitted correctly and even replaced the turbo discharge and intercooler pipes with neuspeed ones. Doesn't do it with the OEM Intake and a search of google shows other people have it to on the TSi engines.