This is what a stage 2 1.4TSI truthfully makes

[vRSy]

Most of you have probably realised that i dont really buy all this 220Hp stage 1 cars etc and stage 2 230hp cars that some guys have had dynod. I believed they were inflated figures. Anyway heres a load of graphs from Rolling road day at JKM today for myself and JCBoc.

Also when we met the other night we had a run together in the cars are neigh on identical in performance, with maybe the slightest performance gain in my midrange, but in all fairness pretty equal.

My graphs
Car/engine: Fabia vRS 1.4TSI
Tuner/stage settings: ***** Performance stage 1+/2
Engine Modifications: Modified stock exhaust, Forge Intake.
Type of dyno: Dynodynamics
Misc details: standard exhaust butchered to reduce exhaust gas temps and increase flow, probably not as free flowing as a full 3" TBE.

Jasons graphs
Car/engine: Ibiza Bocanegra 1.4TSI
Tuner/stage settings: REVO stage 2
Engine Modifications: Miltek 2.75" full exhaust system
Type of dyno: Dynodynamics
Misc details: Setting B

For comparison this is what an Ibiza Fr makes @ stage 1 REVO on JKMs rollers. We all kow that the Fr150 makes the same figures at stage 1 as a cupra with 180ps will.
Car/engine: Ibiza Fr 1.4TSI
Tuner/stage settings: REVO stage 1
Engine Modifications: Nil
Type of dyno: Dynodynamics
Misc details: Setting B

This to me makes the 1.4TSI in the cupra/Fabia vRS even more impressive as its managing to make awesome 1/4 mile times with only 200-215hp

As you can see mine and jasons are practically identical

 

[jc_boc]

Nice one mate. Good to see a relative comparison between stock, stage 1 and stage 2 now. I am still reeling at the fact that the claimed figures from REVO are so high. Still an awesome day and some nice blokes I met there too.

 

[vRSy]

revo did it with stage 1 on the 2.0 K03 TFSI. they used to claim 255hp which well and truly stage 2 territory. But since no one ever managed that they have since dropped their claims. Maybe its marketing? Figures sell maps at the end of the day

 

[VRSLOZ]

Nice to see the graphs finally guys, a bit shocked it didn't make more

 

[NetworkMan]

Engines being equal I'd expect the Cupra to be a tad quicker with less weight, slightly lower Cd and being lower, slightly smaller frontal area with width about the same I believe. But then not all engines are exactly equal.....

Is the gearing the same on the 1.4 tsi? For the 1.2 tsi it is and VW group quote slightly better 0-60 times for the Ibiza. 9.8 versus 10.1 seconds so almost the same.

 

[jc_boc]

Agreed and since vRSy does NOT have REVO and he is making roughly the same figures as me there is no way we would be fabricating this either so there is definately something not adding up here at all.

 

[shuggy boy]

revo did it with stage 1 on the 2.0 K03 TFSI. they used to claim 255hp which well and truly stage 2 territory. But since no one ever managed that they have since dropped their claims. Maybe its marketing? Figures sell maps at the end of the day

wow!a fair bit down on what they were claiming

 

[vRSy]

thinmk they claim 218-230hjp in fairness, but thats still 10hp off. Its all dependant on what dynos they have used to get the figures. Dyno lottery and all that.

Its alright for Jason he went on after a 196hp mk4 Ibiza ran. I had to follow on from a 34hp Octavia vRS with K04 turbo. thats just plain embarassing.

 

[vroomtshh]

This seems like a strange thread. How do you know, that it's revos claims being high, and not jkms dyno reading low.

Only way to really tell is get them on an engine dyno. And can't see anyone doing that

 

[vRSy]

Engines being equal I'd expect the Cupra to be a tad quicker with less weight, slightly lower Cd and being lower, slightly smaller frontal area with width about the same I believe. But then not all engines are exactly equal.....
.

I have more torque though and that was notable on the midrange runs we did, not hugely noticable but enough for jason to comment straight after. At the end of the day what im trying to get at is there's two seperate stage 2 software packages with neigh on identical figures which when compared to stage 1 figures on the same dyno still show the gains.

This to me just shows revo to be claiming incorrect figures, or if there have been cars making those figures how aggressive must it have been?

When i spoke to my tuner about the REVO claimed 230hp he refused to accept that it was feasible at stage 2 without turning your turbo into a consumable item.

Theres obviously more power to be had by fitting an intercooler and advancing timing i guess then we might start approaching 225-230 i think.

 

[vRSy]

This seems like a strange thread. How do you know, that it's revos claims being high, and not jkms dyno reading low.

Only way to really tell is get them on an engine dyno. And can't see anyone doing that

no the easiest way to tell is with before and after runs to see the actual gains

this is my car

this is also my car

So you can see my car makes comparable figures when stock on different dynos and you can see the gains.

the rollers that give these 230hp figures all seem to dyno stock 1.4TSis at around 200hp which is obviously 20hp up on what mine made on DD rollers. Maybe i should go and try AMDs or Superchips rollers and get myself some free Hp lol

 

[jc_boc]

Sneaky vid of mine...........

 

[Ad Lav]

I have to say that JKM's dyno dynamics rollers are the most accurate I have ever been on. They don't over-read or under-read. Always handy to have a stock car to get figures from then the mapped cars believe the figures.

Still, its all a lottery as some cars run more power anyway!

I guess Revo claim this 230bhp for sales/marketing,have they proved it?

 

[jc_boc]

Not that I am aware of tbh mate.

 

[m0rk]

Yes, it was proven on the dyno they use for all their stuff. I've got the plots somewhere. What you're seeing is what Bill calls dyno lottery. Nothing exciting, but the DD does show the lower of the numbers you'll expect

That said, my 172 made 169 (bang on) when all the tuned turbo cars ran v low there two years back

 

[skeat12]

Were you on C setting Jason, and would that have made any difference?

 

[vRSy]

Yes, it was proven on the dyno they use for all their stuff. I've got the plots somewhere. What you're seeing is what Bill calls dyno lottery. Nothing exciting, but the DD does show the lower of the numbers you'll expect

That said, my 172 made 169 (bang on) when all the tuned turbo cars ran v low there two years back

Same happened with a 172 on there today. 169hp. All the other cars were making bang on the money with their figures as well.

Ive got the plots for the revo graphs but it looks to me like they have edited them together in a excel graph plotter, as these are not proper dyno graphs.

@ AndyF- Jason had his on Setting B, which IMO make sense. thats what he has it on all the time so why turn it up for a dyno run then turn it back down whenyour finished. makes more sense to run it on B and know what your running everyday. would be interesting to see the difference though. Cant imagine it being a huge difference though

th

 

[jc_boc]

Yeah I was running setting B as tbh I don't think there is much in it between a,b or c as the switch only changes things nominally so would not make a huge difference. I think the point Sy and I are getting at here is that DD rollers from what we can see on stock cars is very accurate, therefore I fail to understand a difference of nearly 25HP on REVO claims. That said, I am still very happy with the performance of the car and honestly can not falter the map.

 

[BeezerDiesel]

Interesting stuff.
Just as an aside, what other VAG forced induction motors ran on the rollers on the same day and what sort of outputs did they produce?

Edit to the above: Now realised it was the mk5 Golf forum meet up and now off to read the thread properly.

 

[jc_boc]

LOL, there was a guy with a mk4 FR, stage 1 and I believe he ran about 196HP or there abouts.