Good morning, folks. Anyone still fishing?

no just watching the children playing from a distace... thinking ah i remember the days when i was young enough to bother arguing the merits.

:p

Originally posted by ffelan in this post

no just watching the children playing from a distance...

Careful now Paul, there are laws against that sort of thing....

Originally posted by ffelan in this post

...ah i remember the days when i was young enough to bother arguing the merits.

C'mon, Paul, you are only a few days - not years - older than then!

Just an insignificant on-topic post before you lot may carry on fishing, but I didn't have the car dynoed either before or after.

Before? That would have been before the car was delivered to me. And after? I would have needed to find a double RR suitable for 4WDs, and all the trustworthy RR setups I know of in my neighbourhood have single rollers, so no use for my car. So will have to trust what Huck calls the "butt dyno" and the Oettinger claim of 205-215 bhp. Not really bothered, though, and no plans to spend a full day going way down south to Holland's most reputable Scooby remapping company, which does have a 4WD RR (naturally, of course).

Having test-driven a standard car I know it feels hugely different.

Originally posted by DGW in this post

C'mon, Paul, you are only a few days - not years - older than then!

but Denis i have grown up, the kahoona's have dropped, voice deepened, started shaving etc.. (only my legs) so i cannot resort to such boyish banter.

Those who have been on the roads either in the car with, or following, our esteemed webmaster(s) will know that the remapped 4x4 is no slouch, especially when it comes to the twisty bits .... admittedly the brakes are smaller than vRS brakes, but that can be addressed

I started this thread to try and shed some light on the accuracy of claims made by the various tuners for their products so that members would be better informed when choosing which ECU tuning route to take. My intention was not to denigrate any of the various tuners, but rather to add some balance to the overt enthusiasm most of us who have been to JabbaSport show for what that firm can achieve. A by-product of this exercise, and of the dyno figures which some members have posted, is that members can see that in many cases the various 1.8T engines deliver more bhp and torque than the 'book' figures would indicate. Additionally, there are plenty of reputable tuners out there and it would be interesting to have objective as well as subjective evidence of how good their products are.

well said denis, there are many tuners and options.. and the bottom line of this is that the 1.8T is one of the better engines made over the last 20yrs when it comes to tuning!

Originally posted by Dutch4x4 in this post

..........and the Oettinger claim of 205-215 bhp.

My Ibiza "210" Oettinger when RR'd many times only ever got 192bhp max, usually 188bhp

regards

bill

In my experience, you can only compare RR results if the following have been met

1. The air pressure and temperature on both runs was identical

2. The rollers and dynos are at the same temperature on both runs

3. The fuel quality is the same on both runs

4. Tyre pressures are the same on both runs

There are probably numerous other parameters that mater.

So in essance, it's very difficult to trust dyno readings unless you want to go to the trouble of getting your engine on a bench dyno.

My two peneth

Steve

I have only just got back into the mods scene, after a long spell driving company barges ( Vento, 406's, and the new fall apart vectra, urghh!) I am getting used to the 'Turbo' scene as I used to baulk at the prospect of a Turdbo! All that lag etc., Yes I come from the bore it balance it and drink that fuel school! I have a 1360 AXGT that is anything but standard and does around 25mpg on a good day, yes it will stay with the vRS ( in standard quiet civilised form)

I had to learn the hard way, no internet forums when I started tuning that! back to civilisation, a lot has been made of Jabba and the apparent engine braking losses that are claimed, I have had a lot of experience with mods on the RR to see what improvements were gained. Remember the splitfire plugs, they were ace, a gain of 5BHP over the standard NGK plugs, both brand new, sadly no longer available as they worked even better on my mated cossie!

I found various companies made claims, such as a K&N with a bored out main jet giving an increase from 71 at the wheels up to 101bhp, net result a slower car, a stopped cheque and a sub 20 mpg, I quickly ditched that.

The point of this is that you are at the mercy as to what the RR operator wants you to believe, human nature dictates that you want the max figures and if one RR gives you a high figure you will keep on going to them as opposed to any lower ones.

I have seen loss figures of around 9% quoted, this I would doubt, as an engineer by trade, the likely hood is closer to the 15/20%. the ONLY sure way to confirm figures is by taking the engine out and putting it on a Bench Dyno, I have seen a few dissapointed faces at this, Racespec in warrington will do this for you ( or used to)

Lots of good points being made. For those of us who have had our cars cars Jabba'd, a reference run is carried out on the dyno before the car is remapped, followed by a final run when the remapping process is completed. This shows clearly what power/torque improvements have been achieved on the day.

Originally posted by DGW in this post

Lots of good points being made. For those of us who have had our cars cars Jabba'd, a reference run is carried out on the dyno before the car is remapped, followed by a final run when the remapping process is completed. This shows clearly what power/torque improvements have been achieved on the day.

Indeed Denis,

and the pre-remap "reference" run invariably produces the sort of results we would expect for a given model. i.e. 190-ish Bhp for an early RS, 180 ish for a later RS (185 or so in my case) and 165 or so for a "150" 4x4 etc.

Which would suggest the Jabba RR is accurate, unless someone would like to infer that they fiddle the standard results too

The simple fact is, Jabba have a damn good reputation in the VAG tuning world, and couldn't afford to be caught "tweaking" the numbers.

Geoff, can you explain the differences between the 190bhp of the early Vrs and the later models at 180ish, mine is an 03 plate, is this any less tuneable than the early models?

I wasn't inferring any dishonesty on the part of an evidently reputable and honest Jabbasport, judging by the number of VERY happy customers on this site ( and hopefully soon to be one) they are offering an extremely good package, esp when you consider some of the 'off the shelftuning companies are offering a 10Min standard download for

Originally posted by daver in this post

Geoff, can you explain the differences between the 190bhp of the early Vrs and the later models at 180ish, mine is an 03 plate, is this any less tuneable than the early models?

I wasn't inferring any dishonesty on the part of an evidently reputable and honest Jabbasport, judging by the number of VERY happy customers on this site ( and hopefully soon to be one) they are offering an extremely good package, esp when you consider some of the 'off the shelftuning companies are offering a 10Min standard download for

Geoff,

don't forgot for that in addition to the

Adrian,

I didnt bother mentioning the SPS unit, as i was just comparing re-map prices rather than "optional extras". But as you say, when you start to factor in the Switching Boxes etc the price goes through the roof.

And quoting prices excluding VAT is a personal pet hate of mine. Its fair enough when supplying goods to a company who can re-claim the VAT, but when supplying performance add-ons to Joe Public for their cars its out of order.

My rolling road appointment has been moved to next Wednesday instead of Monday. Just so you know...

Originally posted by DGW in this post

Lots of good points being made. For those of us who have had our cars cars Jabba'd, a reference run is carried out on the dyno before the car is remapped, followed by a final run when the remapping process is completed. This shows clearly what power/torque improvements have been achieved on the day.

I read with interest and take Denis's point above to hand, as it's the net increase in power/torque after that makes it all worthwhile.

So while the standard reference is say 185bhp for an RS, the actual bhp at the wheel would be 165bhp, so therefore after a remap the figure would be say 205 at the wheel (Jabba map).

I note that APR and AMD quote a typical increase of 30bhp and 50lb of torque after the remap.

So from that I would conclude that Jabba is indeed giving a small advantage in performance terms over its competitors, along with the fact that they do indeed give the car a proper rolling road test.

In value terms there is no dispute with Jabba and I guess this is why Jabba have such a good reputation on this site.

If I were considering a remap (maybe in the future), I would be heading their way.

So from that I would conclude that Jabba is indeed giving a small advantage in performance terms over its competitors, along with the fact that they do indeed give the car a proper rolling road test.

My car was remaped on the Rolling Road at AMD. I think to look at peak power improvements also is dangerous. What about the rest of the power curve and how flat is the torque and over what rev range. Different tuners take different approaches. Take MTM. Drive one of their chipped cars. It provides a kick in the back like no other car. They use a touch of overboost. I love that, but some like a more progressive build up of power, from what I have seen Jabba and AMD are more like that.

Its horses for courses.

Jonathan

I was under the impression that Jabba will give you any characteristic you ask for.

So I you wanted maximum power with a big spike in the middle then that's what you got, or if smooth torque was your preference they were able to delivery a reasonably flat curve.

Yep...as long as your able to say/describe what you want, Mike will do his best to provide it.

Not good enough just to say "same as standard but more".

Very true Adrian, you need to tell him what you want and why.

Thats why my power curve is different to most others, with higher torque requests than all the others and in different places to all bar one other (who got theirs done after I'd had mine done). My performs OK (better than standard) up to about 3800 then it kick, all the way to about 6500, you only need to look at my curves Shame their printer greyed out my numbers Its back in this week for a little "tweak" which shoul prolong both the peaks and move them up a wee bit

Nice curves Jon

That non standard turbo must take some spooling up