Found the time to do a "clean" and strong 1/4 mile run on my local drag strip and as i suspected, time dropped a bit further. 



Pretty mental to think this time is achievable by a Skoda which is not even a full out performance variant, with just a remap and an intake while on fully stock exhaust...

Nice 0-103+mph in 10.16 suggests a sub 10 to 100mph (160kph).

8 minutes ago, shyVRS245 said:

Nice 0-103+mph in 10.16 suggests a sub 10 to 100mph (160kph).

Since we're operating in km/h I'm not familiar with that metric tbh, if you ask me i don't know of any other car's time on 0-100mph run but i guess it should should be a popular reference among UK owners that quickly classifies how fast a car is.

For what it's worth, It did it in 9.51"

As our speed limit (NSL) in the UK is 70mph (113kph) your 0-120kph time is 0-75mph in a scant 5.55 seconds and I would guess my own car's 0-70mph to be about 5.5 seconds judging by how fast my bottom clock informs me regarding these things. Good stuff thanks for sharing as always. Just for reference my 1994 BMW 325i Coupe with 199bhp did a quarter mile at Santa Pod Raceway in 15.4 seconds at 91mph and it took 19.2 seconds to reach 100mph (maximum speed 145mph).

Edited 20 July, 20205 yr by shyVRS245
More info added.

26 minutes ago, shyVRS245 said:

As our speed limit (NSL) in the UK is 70mph (113kph) your 0-120kph time is 0-75mph in a scant 5.55 seconds and I would guess my own car's 0-70mph to be about 5.5 seconds judging by how fast my bottom clock informs me regarding these things. Good stuff thanks for sharing as always. Just for reference my 1994 BMW 325i Coupe with 199bhp did a quarter mile at Santa Pod Raceway in 15.4 seconds at 91mph and it took 19.2 seconds to reach 100mph (maximum speed 145mph).

Just get a Dragy Shy! Otherwise it's pointless to try and guess such precise times, you'd be surprised by the amount of variation that can exist between similar cars, even on the same car due to different conditions sometimes. A bit different map, a bit different weight, a bit different DSG shifting and it accumulates.  I mean sure there can't/shouldn't be more than, i'd say, 1-2 seconds of difference between any two Stage 1 cars on a 100-200 run but already half a second at 200km/h is around 6 car units difference between them.

Besides, I know for a fact you love posting figures (albeit of a different nature) so it's essentially perfect for you!  

Edited 20 July, 20205 yr by newbie69

6 hours ago, newbie69 said:

A bit different map, a bit different weight, a bit different DSG shifting and it accumulates.  I mean sure there can't/shouldn't be more than, i'd say, 1-2 seconds of difference between any two Stage 1 cars on a 100-200 run but already half a second at 200km/h is around 6 car units difference between them.

 

So true! look at this comparison:

 

7 hours ago, newbie69 said:

 

Stage3:

 

Obviously with mine there is some problem to solve, but it is also true that with your car you have found an optimal setting...It will be difficult to do better than this without other hardware improvements, I think! Very impressed! 

Roscio perhaps you should show your tuner newbie69's dragy above and ask for a refund.

54 minutes ago, shyVRS245 said:

Roscio perhaps you should show your tuner newbie69's dragy above and ask for a refund.

Nah!

Poor driver  😛🙂

7 hours ago, Roscio said:

So true! look at this comparison:
 

Stage3:

 

Obviously with mine there is some problem to solve, but it is also true that with your car you have found an optimal setting...It will be difficult to do better than this without other hardware improvements, I think! Very impressed! 

Yes it's obvious something needs further optimization in your stage 3 map. It's not possible for any stage 1 to be quicker than your stage 3 in the quarter mile! even with a worse 0-100.

Also, for its weight and power, the 100-200 time should be at least mid 8's, not 9.26" (correction based on the slope of that run) so yeah, I'd be asking some questions to my tuner.


As you say though, I think currently mine is really as good as it can ever be for a stage 1 car, especially low down, the efficiency with which it hooks and accelerates compares to much stronger cars. It's probably 50% the REVO + TVS combo and another 50% the fact that historically, my modded cars were slightly slower than everybody else's with similar mods so maybe the tuning gods pitied me after all these years . 

To be any faster I would need to start spending BIG compared to what I've done so far and I'm really at a dilemma currently: In reality it's all the "fast" that I can really use (and even that rarely) but I somehow have got used to it and was already having thoughts of jumping to a bigger turbo.

A few months back I was certain I would stop at this and maybe get a "dad's" sports coupe that can see 500bhp with just a remap and also start going back to my local track regularly, but it's too early for that car yet in my life for several reasons.

Also, the car after the performance and wheel/suspension mods is such a better thing to drive and look at than stock it's almost impossible to fault it and replace it with something else that could offer a similar package and does not cost an extra 20K eur (yes it needs better brakes but I'm on it) so where does that leave me.... 

3 minutes ago, Bigeater said:

Nah!

Poor driver  😛🙂

That was me watching Dr Who as a kid.

1 hour ago, Bigeater said:

Nah!

Poor driver  😛🙂

Yeah because keeping your hands straight on the steering wheel and your right foot down for around 10 seconds is a fine art mastered only through years and years of experience  

 

Edited 21 July, 20205 yr by newbie69

3 minutes ago, newbie69 said:

Yeah because keeping your hands straight on the steering wheel and your right foot down for around 10 seconds is a fine art mastered only through years and years of experience  

 

Only 10 seconds?

6 minutes ago, shyVRS245 said:

Only 10 seconds?

Well for a stage 3 making a 100-200 run it's even less than 10 but I added some pre-launch time for contingency 

32 minutes ago, newbie69 said:

Well for a stage 3 making a 100-200 run it's even less than 10 but I added some pre-launch time for contingency 

Get it driver hesitation, sweaty hands and licking of lips time built in.

3 hours ago, shyVRS245 said:

Roscio perhaps you should show your tuner newbie69's dragy above and ask for a refund.

 

2 hours ago, newbie69 said:

Also, for its weight and power, the 100-200 time should be at least mid 8's, not 9.26" (correction based on the slope of that run) so yeah, I'd be asking some questions to my tuner.

 

I showed him my stage 1 dragy times when i got these bad times, asking for explanations. He said: to have good times you need the right conditions, let me use your car and I'll show you some interesting results.
Now, I'm not a professional driver and surely others would do better, but no way that I could leave my car to someone to squeeze it as if it were in a videogame!!
There is some problem with the gearbox, and we will have to fix it. But the engine map is well done, I can't say anything about it, the power delivery is smooth and constant.
And the power is also there, when I had the opportunity to try it well, at 286 km / h it was still pushing. but I was afraid of damaging the engine so I slowed down.

 

2 hours ago, newbie69 said:

As you say though, I think currently mine is really as good as it can ever be for a stage 1 car, especially low down, the efficiency with which it hooks and accelerates compares to much stronger cars. It's probably 50% the REVO + TVS combo and another 50% the fact that historically, my modded cars were slightly slower than everybody else's with similar mods so maybe the tuning gods pitied me after all these years . 

To be any faster I would need to start spending BIG compared to what I've done so far and I'm really at a dilemma currently: In reality it's all the "fast" that I can really use (and even that rarely) but I somehow have got used to it and was already having thoughts of jumping to a bigger turbo.

A few months back I was certain I would stop at this and maybe get a "dad's" sports coupe that can see 500bhp with just a remap and also start going back to my local track regularly, but it's too early for that car yet in my life for several reasons.

Also, the car after the performance and wheel/suspension mods is such a better thing to drive and look at than stock it's almost impossible to fault it and replace it with something else that could offer a similar package and does not cost an extra 20K eur (yes it needs better brakes but I'm on it) so where does that leave me.... 

 

I think at the moment you have a really optimal configuration, with an excellent money to performance increase ratio. With every penny that you go to spend more you will necessarily go to lower that ratio.
So, in my opinion, you do well to keep it as it is.

And I can assure you that even with a stage3 you will get used to it quickly... 

1 minute ago, Roscio said:

I showed him my stage 1 dragy times when i got these bad times, asking for explanations. He said: to have good times you need the right conditions, let me use your car and I'll show you some interesting results.
Now, I'm not a professional driver and surely others would do better, but no way that I could leave my car to someone to squeeze it as if it were in a videogame!!
There is some problem with the gearbox, and we will have to fix it. But the engine map is well done, I can't say anything about it, the power delivery is smooth and constant.
And the power is also there, when I had the opportunity to try it well, at 286 km / h it was still pushing. but I was afraid of damaging the engine so I slowed down.

As I wrote earlier, I'd go with that excuse on an older RWD, manual car with weird power delivery but these cars really, my mother could match my own times in my car with a few basic instructions, they don't require any driver input apart from doing the run in the right conditions. 

I'll PM you just to try something out though...
 

 

1 minute ago, Roscio said:

And I can assure you that even with a stage3 you will get used to it quickly... 

Lol, it's probably true! The power addiction is one of the dumbest types I have to admit, myself included, it's never enough, just a continuous money pit. Majority of owners I know with BT setups keep them for around 1.5 year more on average and then sell up and look for something else. The more extra bhp you add you are not covering a need any better, just create even worse temptation for more and more...

But you see, since 2015 when I came across the first stage 3 setups of the 2.0 TSI and their incredible results for such a mildly tuned 2.0T, I was tempted by the tune-ability of these engines and i was set for getting a car with that engine and taking it to those levels at least once. I realized it didn't make sense on the FWD GTI Clubsport but this car is crying for more... 

The fact that 600bhp in a Golf R is possible with no internal engine mods required is testament to the inherent strength of the EA888 engine. Much as I would like 400bhp at least I can't justify the expense on hardware of getting there and my car is great to drive and the economy improvement means I'm in the sweet spot for me anyway if not you guys and your need for speed to quote "Days of Thunder".👍

12 hours ago, newbie69 said:

But you see, since 2015 when I came across the first stage 3 setups of the 2.0 TSI and their incredible results for such a mildly tuned 2.0T, I was tempted by the tune-ability of these engines and i was set for getting a car with that engine and taking it to those levels at least once. I realized it didn't make sense on the FWD GTI Clubsport but this car is crying for more...

 

Are you sure that it's the car the one that is crying for more? 

Jokes aside, if I look at my project objectively it is a waste of money. With a good stage1+ setup and a good dsg map too you got a fast and reliable car.

 

But you know what? Thinking in retrospect I would do it again, in the same way. 

I struggle to stay objective about the car, a bit like Cole Trickle from "Days of Thunder" movie that @shyVRS245 mentioned (what an epic movie!)

 

22 hours ago, shyVRS245 said:

The fact that 600bhp in a Golf R is possible with no internal engine mods required is testament to the inherent strength of the EA888 engine. Much as I would like 400bhp at least I can't justify the expense on hardware of getting there and my car is great to drive and the economy improvement means I'm in the sweet spot for me anyway if not you guys and your need for speed to quote "Days of Thunder".👍

600bhp or rather the torque that will be making that bhp is too much even for these engines based on the findings so far. 500bhp are fine with the upper ceiling being closer to 550bhp but I generally wouldn't be too cool going much above 520bhp on a stock engine. Also, same limit applies to the DSG. Above 580Nm  usually stronger clutches are needed.

 

10 hours ago, Roscio said:

 

Are you sure that it's the car the one that is crying for more? 

Jokes aside, if I look at my project objectively it is a waste of money. With a good stage1+ setup and a good dsg map too you got a fast and reliable car.

 

But you know what? Thinking in retrospect I would do it again, in the same way. 

I struggle to stay objective about the car, a bit like Cole Trickle from "Days of Thunder" movie that @shyVRS245 mentioned (what an epic movie!)

 

Well I don't know if it's the car or myself, but someone cries for more from time to time  

From an economics point of view nothing can come close to a stage 1. The gain/buck ratio is impossible to reach with any other mod/stage after that. So yeah anything after stage 1 is hard to justify in any other way other than "cos I feel like it". The problem is usually it's too late to prevent the addiction.


I had to google that movie as I'm a young guy, unlike you old folks       I generally enjoy a car movie even an average one as long as it's not about stupid car explosions, do you think I shall schedule it for tonight?

You've not lived unless you've watched Days of Thunder (Tom Cruise doesn't make bad films and does most of his own stunts) with a cold beer. I even forced SWMBO to watch it once but then she likes Tom as most ladies do despite his lack of vertical meterage.

9 minutes ago, newbie69 said:

I had to google that movie as I'm a young guy, unlike you old folks       I generally enjoy a car movie even an average one as long as it's not about stupid car explosions, do you think I shall schedule it for tonight?

 

What!?!? Obviously you have to look at it. Now.  
I've seen this movie maybe 15 times ... and every time I watch it I enjoy it!

7 minutes ago, shyVRS245 said:

You've not lived unless you've watched Days of Thunder (Tom Cruise doesn't make bad films and does most of his own stunts) with a cold beer. I even forced SWMBO to watch it once but then she likes Tom as most ladies do despite his lack of vertical meterage.

 

2 minutes ago, Roscio said:

 

What!?!? Obviously you have to look at it. Now.  
I've seen this movie maybe 15 times ... and every time I watch it I enjoy it!

All right all right! You both sound very serious about... I just checked with my... video club and it has it so i'm sorted for tonight 

Edited 22 July, 20205 yr by newbie69

21 minutes ago, newbie69 said:

 

All right all right! You both sound very serious about... I just checked with my... video club and it has it so i'm sorted for tonight 

Might watch it myself with the wife tonight as I've got 3 days off now to chill and watch the forecasted rain tomorrow.

Quote

You said nobody goes to the outside on turn four

 

Aye.. some good old tension fun... They do sound better than the current gen too  Although I suspect they used a very good microphone and some effects, having never been to a real nascar race.

 

I'd prefer to watch Ronin; crikey 1998! Mainly as my old man had a top de la top XM and I'm pretty sure it couldn't do a tenth of what they did with it. When I used to have my old stereo/sub setup, there is one scene that threatened any loose crockery on that side of the room. Just watch the film, not the trailer, it's full of good old spoilers.

Thankfully I don't have a car that sounds like that; nascar 51, when I start it up.  I think that definitely passes with age. I would not mind a little more of a signature, or something, if only to give my aging brain a clue about what's going on.

Nothing is a waste @Roscio if it's making you happy. We're here for precious little time, you never know what is around the corner.  I've lost indestructible friends, one I missed his call and when I called him back he was already gone. Live your life, there is no dress rehearsal. But yes, it's all a total waste, a 10year old car for a grand is probably the most economic.... but you can't drop the hammer ( too many times )

Edited 22 July, 20205 yr by ColinD

Ok just watched it!  I think you guys are being more nostalgic of your younger carefree times than objective about the film's actual qualities    (has happened to me too with films and music as well)

At some points I laughed as it was being completely comical!  Also, too much (North) American pride and social mentality in there 

I did love Duvall's acting though (as always) and that Russ Wheeler's face my god, made you want to throw a punch on his face, great casting!


 

2 hours ago, ColinD said:

Nothing is a waste @Roscio if it's making you happy. We're here for precious little time, you never know what is around the corner

Probably true, but words like these are never good news for one's savings we have to agree on that!