Looks like the same whp figure as awesomes old leon.

One thing I did notice is that the delivery seems a bit lumpy and there seems to be a jump around 2.3k/2.4k. Seems more pronounced on the torque curves. Is this down to the (hybrid?) turbo in use?

Chris

All I've got to say is 'great result'

Does look like a "cam" has just kicked in. Think peak torque would be nicer lowering (smoothing) to around 400.

Cracken results.

By the looks of it a stock s3 makes around 170bhp at the wheels at awesome. So 55bhp trans loss. So about a 30% loss.

So is that with the NOS and propane?

I'd like to see a similar run but without the NOS.

I echo previous comments....

The sudden jump in torque is interesting. The torque also shoots up, then drops off quickly. I think I'd want it smoother in arrival and cap it at 380-400 and try for a plateau.

Peak power seems to arrive very early. Other graphs I've seen the power climbs to around 3600-4000 rpm. But they're 1.9 8V units. Given your (I think it was you ) comments about the 2.0 revving more. I'd have expected a longer power curve and certainly, a longer power run.

Maybe they got nervous.

J.

Does look like a "cam" has just kicked in.

NOS by any chance?????

Good Results though, i would take peoples comments with a pinch of salt!!! some people dont quite understand how hard it is to get big power out of a DERV and still keep the power band in a sencible place!!!!!

Fine effort Mike.

I would ask you for a passenger ride in it, but remembering your Beezer - maybe not!!! Only kidding.

I quite agree with you on the wheel horsepower bit, at the end of the day it's the power at the wheels that transmits the power to the road and thus provides the performance, whereas the flywheel power only transmits power to all the other mechanical bits in the drivetrain before it gets to the wheels, so is rather academic.

But there are so many variables (power to weight, torque to weight, grip etc etc) I'm sure we could all sit here typing for ever arguing about what's what whilst mike is actually out driving the beast!

By the way, don't TSR have a 4wd rolling road? I'm sure it was when we were there in March.

NOS by any chance?????

Good Results though, i would take peoples comments with a pinch of salt!!! some people dont quite understand how hard it is to get big power out of a DERV and still keep the power band in a sencible place!!!!!

Just like to post that i apologies Luke with what i posted earlier about your car i should have worded it a lot better and did not mean to offend. I just always remember this video of your car going down Santa pod and as it is the only video of your car i have seen your car did seem to smoke a lot.

Which if you compare that to a video of my car on a dyno.

S1030013.flv - Video - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Can you post a dyno graph of your car please to compare. Here is a graph of my old Seat Ibiza PD Cupra at 246 bhp from back in November 2005.

Picture019.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

I have lost the copy of it at 265bhp but that graph wasn`t very good as car wasn`t mapped right.

By the way, don't TSR have a 4wd rolling road? I'm sure it was when we were there in March.

Your welcome to come for a ride if you want mate. TSR have a MAHA dyno which don`t seem to like cars with Haldrex 4WD. I went to Power station who have a very good rep but my car was rocking back and forth on the RR and coming out with stupid low figures. TSR have only just had it fitted so i doubt they have any experience with it yet plus MAHA give horrible printouts as above with my Cupra printout and it`s not a true power at the wheel figure as they work out flywheel figure then work back wards might be wrong as usual though .

Just like to post that i apologies Luke with what i posted earlier about your car i should have worded it a lot better and did not mean to offend. I just always remember this video of your car going down Santa pod and as it is the only video of your car i have seen your car did seem to smoke a lot.

Which if you compare that to a video of my car on a dyno.

S1030013.flv - Video - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Can you post a dyno graph of your car please to compare. Here is a graph of my old Seat Ibiza PD Cupra at 246 bhp from back in November 2005.

Picture019.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

I have lost the copy of it at 265bhp but that graph wasn`t very good as car wasn`t mapped right.

No problem, just a quick question??? does it smoke without the nos or propane running???

we were going to go the Propane route with mine, to cut smoke levels down but im selling it now lol!!!!

No problem, just a quick question??? does it smoke without the nos or propane running???

we were going to go the Propane route with mine, to cut smoke levels down but im selling it now lol!!!!

Just diesel very little smoke.

Diesel / propane some smoke but no worse then a remapped PD160.

Diesel/propane/nos very little smoke.

Uprated injectors always seem very smokey compared to propane injection of the same power. Diesel/propane is a little smokey because the turbo is pushed to it`s limit so not enough air is supplied to make a complete burn so when NOS is added which is basically just adding more oxygen you burn all the fuel added so no smoke.

I think usuing propane would help but if you didnt have your injectors maxed out so low down in the rev range which gives you a very high torque figure of 430lb from 247 bhp your car would smoke alot less. You have nearly the same torque as me but with 100 bhp less.

Not going to show a dyno graph then.:(

Good luck with your new project car but with the power your aiming for in a little car like that traction will be a nightmare unless you make it 4WD.

have to agree with bengie... its remapped 2.0pd with some nos squirted in for "dyno" vanity.

and tbh driving a 250+fwhp diesel as i do.. i still dont like the peaky delivery that seems inherrant with narrow power band diesels.. will be going back to petrol at the next oppourtunity.

as for 4wd... im intrigued by the earlier ref to haldex... given that its an Audi A4.

then again my thoughts on 4x4 are well known.

The power from the VT5 is not at all peaky in delivery. 2bar boost is available at around 3250 rpm (with power building nicely from just under 2krpm) and the turbo will sustain near that boost until 5500-6000 rpm. Most un diesel like imo.

Mike's dyno plot shows how the rr operator has lifted off at just over 4krpm which is a shame as it doesnt show how well the power is held.

Was a bit sceptical about Mike's car, but after being taken for a spin i can say power delivery is very smooth, hardly any smoke and its very quick.

This is very impressive, you are a true tdi fanatic ) This is probably what i would if i had a lot of money.

I bet it's pretty good feeling when you smoke s3 in a diesel

OMG - can you stick it in my car, pretty please :thumbup:

The power from the VT5 is not at all peaky in delivery. 2bar boost is available at around 3250 rpm (with power building nicely from just under 2krpm) and the turbo will sustain near that boost until 5500-6000 rpm.

thats not what it shows there, look at the torque curve! its falling quicker than a cheap hookers knickers, in fact its falling so quickly that the power curve is flat which is very unusual in a car.

thats not what it shows there, look at the torque curve! its falling quicker than a cheap hookers knickers, in fact its falling so quickly that the power curve is flat which is very unusual in a car.

Your welcome to your point of views bengie and red baron if thats what you believe but it just goes to show you don`t know squat about dyno graphs and diesel cars mate . A power curve that rises smoothly then levels out and stays flat all the way to the red line is what most mappers try to achieve but fail that is why it is unusual to see it. Would you rather the power rise sharply then fall " quicker than a cheap hookers knickers " from 3.5K :confused: .If your not happy with a car producing over 300 lb torque at the red line either then i think you should buy a petrol as you dont deserve to drive a diesel car with 250 bhp. Why dont you post a copy of your cars dyno printout to show how it should be done then so everyone else can compare maps.

as for 4wd... im intrigued by the earlier ref to haldex... given that its an Audi A4.

then again my thoughts on 4x4 are well known.

I drive an Audi A3 not A4.:P

been lurking - really interesting stuff here tbh. Looked up devonmikeyboy's past posts on turboing....

Final upgrade for me - finally ordered a TD stage 2 hybrid and uprated injectors.

Feel that this should be more than enough for a daily driven car (!).

Cheers

Bas

been lurking - really interesting stuff here tbh. Looked up devonmikeyboy's past posts on turboing....

Final upgrade for me - finally ordered a TD stage 2 hybrid and uprated injectors.

Feel that this should be more than enough for a daily driven car (!).

Cheers

Bas

Hope everything goes well mate . Who is doing the fitting/ mapping and what power/torque are you hoping for?

Thanks for the encouragement mate - will be fitting the turbo and injectors myself, and Rich from Forge will be doing his ECU magic.

Will really need Rich's magic considering the car is out in the Middle East!

As far as hoped for numbers - I've been looking at some of the numbers you've had in the past and hope that level of power will be reliably attained. Hope to have the car smoke like crazy near redline - in fact I'm pretty insistent on it! Not so much for NOS/propane use, more to annoy tailgaters:rofl:

Still waiting for an airflow map to know what kind of boost/airflow the VNT17/20 hybrid will be happy with...

Your welcome to your point of views bengie and red baron if thats what you believe but it just goes to show you don`t know squat about dyno graphs and diesel cars mate . A power curve that rises smoothly then levels out and stays flat all the way to the red line is what most mappers try to achieve but fail that is why it is unusual to see it. Would you rather the power rise sharply then fall " quicker than a cheap hookers knickers " from 3.5K :confused: .If your not happy with a car producing over 300 lb torque at the red line either then i think you should buy a petrol as you dont deserve to drive a diesel car with 250 bhp. Why dont you post a copy of your cars dyno printout to show how it should be done then so everyone else can compare maps.

put your handbag away

put your handbag away

Mikey, you ask for opinions good or bad and i wasn't slating your car infact i said it would be a gigle and bet it pulls like mad at peak torque but that i prefer a more consistent torque curve than that so calm down mate!

i do have a copy of my power curve round here somewhere so i i'll see if i can find it and scan it.

Mikey, you ask for opinions good or bad and i wasn't slating your car infact i said it would be a gigle and bet it pulls like mad at peak torque but that i prefer a more consistent torque curve than that so calm down mate!

i do have a copy of my power curve round here somewhere so i i'll see if i can find it and scan it.

not yours, but i'd prefer a graph to be this kinda shape:

not yours, but i'd prefer a graph to be this kinda shape:

Yes so in this graph as peak torgue starts to fall off, this is where max bhp is produced and then continues to hold near to max bhp near to the red line. This is what most tuners would want to achieve in an ideal situation. I.e the smaller the "V" shape in the middle of the graph the better.

Mikes graph is no different to this: As peak torque is reached and starts to tail off, max bhp is produced and this remains very level and would start to tail off gradually as it gets towards 6krpm. This is the real key here, the sustaining of bhp into the upper rev ranges. You get a very useable power band of 4000rpm, from 2krpm to nearly 6krpm. Most un diesel like as I said. If you look at maps of standard turbo remapped TDis (see http://www.jabbasport.com/vehicle_preview.asp?variantid=58# ) you will see that power drops off after 4krpm and after 4.5krpm it really starts to drop.

Its only beacuse of the scale on the Awesome graph of the torque measurement that the two graphs look different, but in reality they are not too disimilar.

Cheers.