2 hours ago, Jaco2k said:

wheelspin

See my post above,proud of that given official figure is 9.9,and I still recon even that's deeply impressive for the weeny engine especially considering it returns serious economy as well

There is a world of difference from a car with the tyre pressures set for 4 adults in the car and luggage and there is luggage in the boot and the TC on and flooring it and getting to 70 mph or 100 if the stretch of road is long enough.

Taxi Stylee.

Or sitting on a good grippy road surface with just a driver in the car, tc off and go when you want.

 

Santa Pod in pretty level and inland.

Crail is at the coast and used to be a 1/4 mile uphill. 

 

0-62 times down hill slightly with a tail wind and much like a 1/4 mile downhill with a tail wind, likely better than a bit uphill with a head or cross wind.

Edited 18 October, 20187 yr by Offski

Normal sat nav GPS doesn’t react  quick enough and using the speedo you need to add about 5% to time for speedo error. Complete nonsense  really, the proper kit for this is very expensive 

Edited 18 October, 20187 yr by teescom09

Proper kit is not expensive.

Proper calibrated tuming kit is. But like everything theres cheap alternatives. Back to accuracy again

Racelogic Vbox Sport if you are interested, and compare with more professional timing  if you distrust like Santa Pod timing.

Under £400 but if that is too expensive then that is what others pay and use if really interested in getting timings before posting up in public what they say their car does.

Or pay £25 and get 60 feet times, 1/4 mile, terminal speed etc.  'Simply clever'..

Run what you brungs around the UK with timing.

 

I have Garmin Computers on my Bikes and worn on my wrist that are as accurate as Professional timing, and that logs and uses Wifi / Bluetooth.

Not cheap but cheaper than it used to be.

 

 

 

Edited 20 October, 20187 yr by Offski

Typical mechanically inept Journalist. Starts a car and pulls away at full blast immediately, oil hasn't even reached the head or turbo and lucky if it has pressurised the shells properly. The damage being done those first few seconds is cringe worthy.  Still a 4wd drive Golf R and cannot beat some of the  "claimed" VRS Octavia's times on here with 70hp less, bigger and 2wd????

 

On the Santa pod point. I am sure their timing kit is extremely accurate. But how do they maintain consistent grip on the starting point? Surely the surface gets crucified, covered in oil, rubber fuel etc. One will give more grip the other less.  Can it be used to accurately compare unless it is done at the same time within minutes on the same side.

The journalist / car reviewer is doing just what many drivers do, mash it.

 

Santa Pod is nothing like real world with a rubbered up start.

 

A Crail Thrash is nearer real world with a surface like on a road.

If it matters then look at what people do week in and week out, or just maybe do not bother.

 

 

 

 

Edited 20 October, 20187 yr by Offski

On 19/10/2018 at 06:51, teescom09 said:

Complete nonsense  really, the proper kit for this is very expensive 

Not any more... https://www.amazon.com/dragy-10Hz-Based-Performance-Meter/dp/B077KKPMTB

Proper Kit!

 

 

Oh god ..this thread....

 

Golf R & MQB platform AWD..are front wheel drive ..& AWD when the fronts lose traction....NOT proper 4x4...

 

so that's why they can be slow on standing starts ..especially when people think they should be faster as its AWD.....

 

The car is in FWD mode (some have a small amount of rear bias also due to new gen Haldex being more "pro active")…..& all power goes to the front..then when the fronts lose traction it shunts to the rear..then the car grips...

 

DSG & launch mode helps.....& so does a Haldex control with Bluetooth/remote lock features eg as per HPA

 

https://www.hpamotorsports.com/gen-4-switchable-haldex-controller

 

The main thing as always is power to weight ratio.....& tyres.....& lightweight wheels/less unsprung weight...

On 18/10/2018 at 09:18, JamiePvrs said:

Mine is a dsg hatch, tdi and the only mod is the Audi throttle mod. 

6.5 seconds to 60 in a dsg tdi? I didn’t realise they were that fast! I’ll have to have a look for the timer on mine.

29 minutes ago, Shorty76 said:

6.5 seconds to 60 in a dsg tdi? I didn’t realise they were that fast! I’ll have to have a look for the timer on mine.

Neither did I but I'll take it!! 

On 18/10/2018 at 18:53, 181ce said:

See my post above,proud of that given official figure is 9.9,and I still recon even that's deeply impressive for the weeny engine especially considering it returns serious economy as well

Best I've had is 10 seconds dead!

7 minutes ago, jst_at_home said:

Best I've had is 10 seconds dead!

25000 up on mine now perhaps degree of use ?

5 hours ago, fabdavrav said:

Oh god ..this thread....

 

Golf R & MQB platform AWD..are front wheel drive ..& AWD when the fronts lose traction....NOT proper 4x4...

 

so that's why they can be slow on standing starts ..especially when people think they should be faster as its AWD.....

 

The car is in FWD mode (some have a small amount of rear bias also due to new gen Haldex being more "pro active")…..& all power goes to the front..then when the fronts lose traction it shunts to the rear..then the car grips...

 

DSG & launch mode helps.....& so does a Haldex control with Bluetooth/remote lock features eg as per HPA

 

https://www.hpamotorsports.com/gen-4-switchable-haldex-controller

 

The main thing as always is power to weight ratio.....& tyres.....& lightweight wheels/less unsprung weight...

 

For the record, the mk7 Golf R and the Cupra 4drive (as also the VRS TDi 4x4) have a Gen 5 Haldex system that is widely acknowledged as a big improvement over the Gen 4 you are quoting.

It can send up to 50% of power to the rear wheels and does so seamlessly and almost instantly.

Putting that down as "not a real AWD" and hinting that a FWD would do better is a bit... far fetched.

Have you driven any of these Haldex Gen 5 cars?

 

---edit--

Adding a link to a video that illustrates the point - the power shift to the rear is nearly instant:

 

 

Edited 20 October, 20187 yr by Jaco2k

These are the specs for the Civic type R: 0-63 in 5.7s

https://www.caradvice.com.au/557204/2018-honda-civic-type-r-0-100-and-european-specs-revealed/

 

And the Cupra R FWD: 0-62 in 5.8s

https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/seat/seat-leon-cupra-r-2018-review/

 

And the Golf R: 0-62 in 4.6s

https://www.evo.co.uk/volkswagen/golf/r/page/0/1

 

And the Cupra 4drive: 0-62 in 4.9s

https://www.evo.co.uk/seat/leon/cupra/page/0/1

 

And a APR Stage 1 Golf R (370bhp/520nm) : 0-60 in 3.8s

https://www.goapr.com/products/ecu_upgrade_20tsi_gen3_mqb_r.html

 

This is all factual information, do with it as you please, but for a forum of car enthusiasts, trying to defend a FWD car launches faster than a AWD car or saying that a Gen 5 Haldex is not real AWD car is a bit disappointing... I am sure you guys know better

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Jaco2k said:

 

For the record, the mk7 Golf R and the Cupra 4drive (as also the VRS TDi 4x4) have a Gen 5 Haldex system that is widely acknowledged as a big improvement over the Gen 4 you are quoting.

It can send up to 50% of power to the rear wheels and does so seamlessly and almost instantly.

Putting that down as "not a real AWD" and hinting that a FWD would do better is a bit... far fetched.

Have you driven any of these Haldex Gen 5 cars?

 

---edit--

Adding a link to a video that illustrates the point - the power shift to the rear is nearly instant:

 

 

 

 

Firstly I stated in my post & you quoted, but obviously forgot to read:-

"The car is in FWD mode (some have a small amount of rear bias also due to new gen Haldex being more "pro active")".

 

I also stated "NOT proper 4x4... "...NOT what you accuse me of stating of "not a real AWD"....

 

Also I stated :-

"so that's why they can be slow on standing starts ..especially when people think they should be faster as its AWD.."...

 

so fecking well read & DO NOT MIS-QUOTE ME for your own blinkered agenda..

 

 

AWD & 4x4 actually mean different things mechanically....MQB platform cars are NOT "4x4"...…

 

Secondly go look at that video on nice big 24" screen in 720Hd & slow it down further..as I did

 

....the rear wheels start spinning with the initial amount of "pro-active" rear bias...& its not until 13secs (video mark) in that they start spinning at almost the same speed as the fronts...then the rears briefly slow down..then speed up again.then slow down....etc...that's because the Haldex can't make its mind which axle to put the power to...

 

I have driven & serviced Halex & know the difference between the versions..I also know how these systems work..mechanically & electrically....

 

Many people on the R sections on MK7 forums (masses in USA track their cars) have problems getting the power down quickly from a standing start as even this better Haldex generation has problems getting the power shift right...even in manual "R" & not just DSG..& that's the nature of the beast..it continually juggles the power front & rear & tries to predict which axle will need it most....

 

& simple full on quattro systems which is proper 4x4 will split 50/50 & dump the power instantly....all four wheels will spin at the same rate instantly even under slo-mo filming....not like in that video...

 

& here's a link for the specific Gen5 Haldex tuning software that helps dump more torque to the rear for standing starts...as thats what you are showing in the videos & what a good 0-60 time is about...

 

http://www.unitedmotorsport.net/products/haldex-software/?vehicleId=1377&productId=1491

 

 

Edited 21 October, 20187 yr by fabdavrav

That escalated quickly

 

I guess no one likes to be proven wrong...

Just now, Jaco2k said:

That escalated quickly

 

I guess no one likes to be proven wrong...

 

You haven't proven what I stated wrong..

 

 

.just mis-quoted me....

 

 

slight difference...

9 minutes ago, fabdavrav said:

AWD & 4x4 actually mean different things 

God I do wish people could process this.

 

Real world can be pi55ing down or cold, grease roads and carrying passengers quite often, and not everyone is a driving god.

 

 

 

 

Edited 21 October, 20187 yr by Offski

16 minutes ago, fabdavrav said:

 

You haven't proven what I stated wrong..

 

 

.just mis-quoted me....

 

 

slight difference...

 

So wait... You STILL defend that a Gen5 Haldex car is "slow" and "hard to launch"??

if so, then I am out, since I just posted actual performance figures that you refuse to accept, based on "your experience servicing haldex cars"

... everyone is a specialist in something these days, it seems...

3 minutes ago, Jaco2k said:

 

So wait... You STILL defend that a Gen5 Haldex car is "slow" and "hard to launch"??

if so, then I am out, since I just posted actual performance figures that you refuse to accept, based on "your experience servicing haldex cars"

... everyone is a specialist in something these days, it seems...

 

I suggest you re-read what I have stated...& most importantly you understand it...

 

as you keep mis-quoting....yet again...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On 17/10/2018 at 20:14, JamiePvrs said:

As you know the My Skoda app has a 0-60 timer built into it. So today whilst coming along the A50 I had to pull over to send a email so I thought I would give it a try. First time just booted it in manual mode and recorded 7s. Second and third time I used the launch control. Wow!!!!! 6.52s!!!!! 

 

Not bad I don't think!!!! 

 

As you also know VAG never lie about anything.

 

60 mph is taken from the speedo which might be 55mph.