having the R36 remapped to 333 bhp and 500 nm of torque (along with DSG) as standard is "normal" now too!

You have 500nm of torque on that engine with just software? Id expect 295lb/ft to be about the max you could get. :think: but I don't actually think they'd be a million miles between the newer lighter VRS when mapped and a normally aspirated R36 when mapped tbh. After being disappointed with my mk2 VRS I may at least take a test drive in a mk3 but my feeling at the moment is that id just miss the awd capability to much. :(

Newton metres is what I posted on. The R36 has a torque limiter on . Trust me the Vrs is no match for the R36. A mate at git international got o to 60 4.84 standard

Newton metres is what I posted on. The R36 has a torque limiter on . Trust me the Vrs is no match for the R36. A mate at git international got o to 60 4.84 standard

Yes, you quoted that it now had 500nm which is what I questioned. As standard it has just 258lb/ft torque which is around 349 Newton metres of torque. Hence, if you say you now have 500nm - you've gained just over 150nm (or 110lb/ft torque) which is amazing given the fact it's a normally aspirated motor. I'd expect in the region of a 25-30nm gain, not 150nm as you state.

Me too...The Porsche Boxter/Cayman idea has been quashed by SWMBO!!!

Shame - those two are in a completely different universe, let alone planet, in every way for driver enjoyment to any Skoda vRS or Golf - but of course they are out and out pure sports cars, not sport saloons. It's Boxster by the way....(there's an S in the middle)!

Edited 9 May, 201313 yr by Timoctav

Yes, you quoted that it now had 500nm which is what I questioned. As standard it has just 258lb/ft torque which is around 349 Newton metres of torque. Hence, if you say you now have 500nm - you've gained just over 150nm (or 110lb/ft torque) which is amazing given the fact it's a normally aspirated motor. I'd expect in the region of a 25-30nm gain, not 150nm as you state.

Normally aspirated engines simply will not generated 40% more torque from a map. It's physically impossible. It's just about doable on turbos where the boost is uprated to force more fuel and air into the engine, but on a non turbo about 10 to 15% is the maximum.

Not just a map a software dsg map too ( to remove the torque limiter ) the R36 has as standard a limit on the torque , my point was a normally aspirated vrs m2 or m3 would not stand a chance with a R36, my remapped vrs with 333lb ft of torque and uprated suspension maybe ( as was mine ) , but traction of the line, especially when wet, and braking the vrs has no chance , even more so when the R36 is mapped

Not just a map a software dsg map too ( to remove the torque limiter ) the R36 has as standard a limit on the torque , my point was a normally aspirated vrs m2 or m3 would not stand a chance with a R36, my remapped vrs with 333lb ft of torque and uprated suspension maybe ( as was mine ) , but traction of the line, especially when wet, and braking the vrs has no chance , even more so when the R36 is mapped

There's never been a normally aspirated VRS produced in either mk1, mk2 or mk3 so that's some very unfair reasoning.

The software DSG map doesn't give your engine an additional 150nm of torque, infact it will literally give it nothing extra as the torque limit change is just a simple way of changing the software control element of the gearbox specifically, allowing it to handle more than the factory originally intended, usually to around 500nm - irrelevant in your case due to your car only putting out 258lb/ft torque standard and perhaps 20lb/ft extra after the engines ecu remap. So in effect, the car you are comparing the Octavia to, doesn't have 500nm of torque, it probably has less than 380nm being realistic. Also, the new VRS is a bit of a light weight compared to the almost 1800kg of an R36, over 400kg lighter in fact and they both have 258lb/ft as standard (realistically over 300lb/ft when the VRS is mapped) so really not even in the same class to begin a comparison.

265 lb or 360 nm is standard later revisions, like mine, last built , and now 331 lft ( or 448 ) ( with hardware) so yes a bit of an exaggeration ,sorry I misread your earlier post I was on the phone, missed the mapped bit about the vrs,I thought you said standard .Yes my mapped vrs had 333lb ft of torque and 244 bhp but the torque was less linear and in a huge lug so much more of a push when booting it ,but I really could not give it the full beans until I was in third or I got wheelspin.On the move and in gear the vRS is probably faster, but in the wet and traction off the line and braking and high ride height is where it is held back. I like others would wish the vag parts bin was available to all models, so scout drivetrain in a vrs would be awesome

265 lb or 360 nm is standard later revisions, like mine, last built , and now 331 lft ( or 448 ) ( with hardware) so yes a bit of an exaggeration ,sorry I misread your earlier post I was on the phone, missed the mapped bit about the vrs,I thought you said standard .Yes my mapped vrs had 333lb ft of torque and 244 bhp but the torque was less linear and in a huge lug so much more of a push when booting it ,but I really could not give it the full beans until I was in third or I got wheelspin.On the move and in gear the vRS is probably faster, but in the wet and traction off the line and braking and high ride height is where it is held back. I like others would wish the vag parts bin was available to all models, so scout drivetrain in a vrs would be awesome

No doubt about off the mark traction, my last stage 2+ mk2 VRS struggled with 340lb/ft and 285bhp also and took far too long to properly hook up hence Ive gone back to something with awd but theres no doubt in my mind whatsoever it was quicker than the R36 once into third. Who's remap software are you running btw? Even Revo still only quote an additional 25nm for a remap (you're still claiming 88nm).

There has been speculation surrounding the new VRS being available as an awd vehicle. Id say that this time around theres a greater chance of that than any previous one so who knows right now. Personally I still think its unlikely though so im putting more interest in the more run of the mill awd Octavia Mk3 models currently.

There's no question, if you have a powerful car ( anything more than200bhp) then you need rear or four wheel drive. Too much understeer and issues getting the power down quickly enough. Torque steer is also an issue. I haven't driven the latest Golf with it's trick differential which is reckoned to be very good however.