GOLFMK8
GOLFMK7
GOLFMK6
GOLFMKV
VW GTI MKVI Forum / VW Golf R Forum / VW Golf MKVI Forum / VW GTI Forum - Golfmk6.com



Go Back   VW GTI MKVI Forum / VW Golf R Forum / VW Golf MKVI Forum / VW GTI Forum - Golfmk6.com > Volkswagen GTI / Golf Topics > Mk6 vs......


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-06-2010, 02:48 PM   #43
kthor703
FIA GT Champion
 
kthor703's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 2Dr GTI CSG Manual
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southeast Michigan
Posts: 1,122
EPIC
kthor703 is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 02:57 PM   #44
Requiem4aGreen
Formula 5000 Champion
 
Requiem4aGreen's Avatar
 
Drives: too fast..
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,417
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON IN HERE
__________________
Requiem4aGreen is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 02:58 PM   #45
Requiem4aGreen
Formula 5000 Champion
 
Requiem4aGreen's Avatar
 
Drives: too fast..
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,417
I can't fap to this shit
__________________
Requiem4aGreen is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 03:02 PM   #46
DvS21
Rally Car Champion
 
DvS21's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 GTI, 2004 XB12s, 2000 Focus
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diego View Post
I can't fap to this shit
DvS21 is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 03:11 PM   #47
Requiem4aGreen
Formula 5000 Champion
 
Requiem4aGreen's Avatar
 
Drives: too fast..
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,417
oh wait, are we still comparing boosted rwd inline sixxes to boosted fwd fours?

carry on my dear chaps, carry on

__________________
Requiem4aGreen is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 05:16 PM   #48
msm00b
FIA World Rally Car Newbie
 
msm00b's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 GTI
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 477
Let's examine your links/graphs.



Dyno results are interesting aren't they. Interestingly enough, the 335i puts down less than 300hp and 300torque at the wheels.



Whup ... this one hashed out more torque (318) but slightly less hp at the wheels.



Shit, now this one is a bit confusing. The red line shows 276hp and 298lbs torque at the wheel. The blue line shows 323hp and 341lbs torque at the wheel. Now ... this could be a couple of things.

a) One of them was measured at the wheel (what matters) and the other measured at the crank (what doesn't matter).
b) One of them was stock and the other was modified
c) Their dyno machine is hopelessly broken.

Here's a a couple more:




Here's a link to some dyno results from your precious e90forums!

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=343619

Post 8:

Quote:
Results
Dynojet
SAE 5
Stock: 273.58 hp / 282.24 lb-ft
aFe: 267.84 hp / 275.27 lb-ft
Summary: 6hp / 7tq LOSS with aFe intake versus the stock air box

All Dyno Runs (missing the 6th run file)
Runs 1-2 are with the aFe intake.
Runs 3-5 are with the stock air box.


Alright then ... so where are the dyno sheets of a clearly un-modified 335i putting down 350hp/torque at the wheel?



Let's examine the "at the wheel" dyno results for a 2010 GTI stage 2:

Without intake:

With intake/downpipe:


Quote:
but I'll also take the time to address the other ones I labelled as false.
Until we see eye to eye on the points I addressed, there's no point talking about the points I did not address. If we cannot even agree how much power is being put down on the wheels, there's no point really discussing the other shit.

Quote:
It's "DUAL" as in two, not "DUEL" as in a fight. Why are you bringing up this point?
Oh f*ck, thanks for pointing out my one word used inappropriately. Kudos!

If you had actually taken the time to read my original statement in it's quoted context you would have noticed that the other poster was attempting to quote the faster automatic tranny times while quoting the lighter weight of the manual transmission. My quote, whose point you completely and utterly missed, was pointing out that if he wanted to discount the extra weight between the automatic and the manual, he also had to discount the extra speed of the automatic. You can't quote automatic tramission times with manaul transmission weight. You compare automatic trasmisison speeds/weights vs other automatics. You compare manual transmission speeds/weights against other manuals. If the 3500lb automatic transmission runs a 5.0 second 0-60 and the 3300lb manual transmisison version runs a 5.5 0-60, you can't do what he did ... which was incorrectly attempt to correct me on the weight (by quoting the less heavy manual transmission) while still attempting to use the faster speeds of the automatic. Hence ... why I said that if you wanted to quote the car as being a lighter weight, you also had to accept that with that lighter weight you also had slower times.

You'd have caught that implied point the first time around if you'd bothered with reading comprehension.

Please show me the dynos of the 350hp/350torque at the wheel. While you're at it, please also explain in great detail the overwhelming presence of conflicting dyno information from otherwise fairly reputable sources (which, I might add, Jive just f*ckin peachy with the numbers BMW quotes).
__________________
ATI Crew
Member No 4
2010 MKVI; <United Grey> - Autobahn
APR Stage I, Evo Intake

The "I love my GTI and DON'T CARE if it's not faster than a Camaro SS Club" Club

Last edited by msm00b; 07-06-2010 at 05:47 PM.
msm00b is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 05:45 PM   #49
DvS21
Rally Car Champion
 
DvS21's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 GTI, 2004 XB12s, 2000 Focus
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 382
The APR dyno has to be at the crank... our cars don't put out 212hp 224tq to the wheels stock.
DvS21 is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 05:52 PM   #50
msm00b
FIA World Rally Car Newbie
 
msm00b's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 GTI
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by DvS21 View Post
The APR dyno has to be at the crank... our cars don't put out 212hp 224tq to the wheels stock.
Volkswagen quotes 200hp ... but I thought that car manufacturers routinely undersold their lower-end versions of their high-end cars (Hi there Mr Audi who shares the exact same engine)!?! Unfortunately, volkswagen went one step further and neutered the power output of the engine electronically to keep it from competing with it's more expensive cousins from its sister company.

In all actuality, I actually agree with your point there. APR's is too clean to be a pure dyno at the wheel (that and this particular graph is far to "clean" to be real). The one above it is at the wheel as far as I can tell. It still managed to put down 283/268 compared to 280s/280s ... in a car that's a couple hundred pounds lighter.

Hence ... my statement that once you take the launch and traction (RWD > FWD) out of the equation, the Stage2GTI vs BMW (manual transmission) will ultimately be a driver's race in 99% of encountered driving from a pwr/weight standpoint. If both of them were automatic transmisisons from a 20mph rolling start, it'd probably more matter which company has a more efficient, streamlined, and fast automatic transmission.

Unless, of course, you only like to 0-60 drag race from stop light to stop light or track your car exclusively on the quarter mile ... at which point given similar pwr/wt ratios:

AWD > RWD > FWD
__________________
ATI Crew
Member No 4
2010 MKVI; <United Grey> - Autobahn
APR Stage I, Evo Intake

The "I love my GTI and DON'T CARE if it's not faster than a Camaro SS Club" Club

Last edited by msm00b; 07-06-2010 at 06:02 PM.
msm00b is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 03:06 PM   #51
Kg810
Drag Race Newbie
 
Drives: .:R32
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Calgary, Ab
Posts: 54
Sorry for the delayed reply, been out of town.

Quote:
Originally Posted by msm00b View Post
Let's examine your links/graphs.



Dyno results are interesting aren't they. Interestingly enough, the 335i puts down less than 300hp and 300torque at the wheels.

lol.. you do realize that these dynos are whp/rwhp in which you'd need to do conversions and add in 12.8% (manual) or 16% (auto) on top to accomodate for drivetrain loss right? You also need to take into account the type of dyno, the dyno prep, temp, humidity, the altitude and everything else that is attributing to these dyno reads. No two cars of the same car will dyno exactly the same. Anyways, your dynos you are posting from APR are already converted to HP. So take that into consideration and don't directly compare 284.94 to APR Stg 2 HP numbers without doing proper calculations.

I thought you'd understand this, and maybe it is the reason why you completely disregarded the articles I presented you with. You'd think if you took a few minutes to read them, you'd understand that their dynos show the same results as the ones you and I have posted, but then go on to say that the 335 is in fact closer to the 350hp ballpark.




Whup ... this one hashed out more torque (318) but slightly less hp at the wheels.

Sigh.

100% - 12.8% (assuming manual) = 87.2% (Percent of engine power to the wheels and 87.2%= 0.872 rwph/1hpcrank)

279.9rwhp / (0.872 rwhp/1hpcrank) = 321 hpcrank

100% - 16% (assuming auto/step) = 84% (0.84 rwhp/1hpcrank)

279.9rwhp / (0.84 rwhp/1hpcrank) = 333 hpcrank

Even if this owner's 335 stock numbers aren't -that- close to 350 hp, it is significantly higher than BMW's numbers that you keep preaching like it is 300hp and no more. So I've proved my point here in that you are wrong and will continue to be wrong when arguing something you have no clue about. If you want to continue trying to preach what you think is a fact, then go find me a stock 335s dyno numbers that are -exactly- what BMW claims. Seriously. I'd like to see it.




Shit, now this one is a bit confusing. The red line shows 276hp and 298lbs torque at the wheel. The blue line shows 323hp and 341lbs torque at the wheel. Now ... this could be a couple of things.

a) One of them was measured at the wheel (what matters) and the other measured at the crank (what doesn't matter).
b) One of them was stock and the other was modified
c) Their dyno machine is hopelessly broken.

lol I would have thought you were a little smarter and understand to only look at the BASELINE dyno when I kept saying BASELINE and referring to STOCK numbers. /facepalm.

Did I really just need to explain that?

I don't think I need to do the calculations for you this time, you should be able to do that on your own now.



Here's a a couple more:




Here's a link to some dyno results from your precious e90forums!

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=343619

Post 8:



Alright then ... so where are the dyno sheets of a clearly un-modified 335i putting down 350hp/torque at the wheel?


LMAO... When did I ever say it was 350whp????? Show me where. I specifically said "closer to 350hp" hahaha. Man, you sure are getting desperate.

Either way, thanks for proving yourself wrong posting all those stock dynos for me. All of which are close to 330hp lols and none of which are 300hp which you have been claiming the 335 has.




Let's examine the "at the wheel" dyno results for a 2010 GTI stage 2:

Without intake:



Uh... yeah why are you posting a 2007 GTI dyno claiming it as 2010 and on top of that you are taking it from a European site and we all know the EU GTI has more hp/tq than the NA GTI.

Anyways, since we are aren't talking about the MKVI specifically even though you keep talking about Stg II GTI on this MKVI board, here's a MKV TSI Stg II video dyno - http://vodpod.com/watch/2959206-2009...i-dyno-results

So 250whp for a Stg II 2.0 TSI with APR Stg II ECU, APR 3" DP, Carbonio Intake will have approx:

Manual (assuming 12.8% drive train loss) = 250whp / .872 = 287hpcrank
DSG (assuming 15% drive train loss *prob less with DSG but w.e*)= 250whp / .85 = 294hpcrank.

Feel free to tell me otherwise. Or at least try to tell me how a APR Stg II with 3" DP and Carbonio Intake > stock 335?

Let me quote you here from your first post
Quote:
Stage 2 GTI with intake/downpipe 0-60? It's difficult to say as there are no published numbers, but the extra 15-20hp, torque, and wider power band put some estimates I've researched handily btw 5-5.4 with a decent set of tires.
So let's see here, you researched and found that Stg II will be around 5-5.4 from 0-60. I've shown you published articles all the way back from 2006 that the 335 does it in 4.7-4.9 and that has been tested and proven countless times.


With intake/downpipe:




Until we see eye to eye on the points I addressed, there's no point talking about the points I did not address. If we cannot even agree how much power is being put down on the wheels, there's no point really discussing the other shit.

Buddy, until you open your eyes, there's no point in even talking to you. Everything that I bring up that has been a valid point, you disregard and go straight for something that you could maybe try and argue. You completely ignore the articles and the other false claims I pointed out. You have no idea what you're talking about and you are too stubborn to see that. Keep preaching that the 335 only makes 300hp/300tq and does 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. Until you realize that you're wrong on a lot of things you've addressed, you won't see eye to eye even if you wanted to.

Oh f*ck, thanks for pointing out my one word used inappropriately. Kudos!

If you had actually taken the time to read my original statement in it's quoted context you would have noticed that the other poster was attempting to quote the faster automatic tranny times while quoting the lighter weight of the manual transmission. My quote, whose point you completely and utterly missed, was pointing out that if he wanted to discount the extra weight between the automatic and the manual, he also had to discount the extra speed of the automatic. You can't quote automatic tramission times with manaul transmission weight. You compare automatic trasmisison speeds/weights vs other automatics. You compare manual transmission speeds/weights against other manuals. If the 3500lb automatic transmission runs a 5.0 second 0-60 and the 3300lb manual transmisison version runs a 5.5 0-60, you can't do what he did ... which was incorrectly attempt to correct me on the weight (by quoting the less heavy manual transmission) while still attempting to use the faster speeds of the automatic. Hence ... why I said that if you wanted to quote the car as being a lighter weight, you also had to accept that with that lighter weight you also had slower times.

You'd have caught that implied point the first time around if you'd bothered with reading comprehension.

Please show me the dynos of the 350hp/350torque at the wheel. While you're at it, please also explain in great detail the overwhelming presence of conflicting dyno information from otherwise fairly reputable sources (which, I might add, Jive just f*ckin peachy with the numbers BMW quotes).

Read above. Thanks.
Kg810 is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 04:05 PM   #52
Requiem4aGreen
Formula 5000 Champion
 
Requiem4aGreen's Avatar
 
Drives: too fast..
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,417
jesus fucking christ
__________________
Requiem4aGreen is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 04:05 PM   #53
Requiem4aGreen
Formula 5000 Champion
 
Requiem4aGreen's Avatar
 
Drives: too fast..
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,417
wait let me get a bigger stick so you can beat this dead horse a little harder
__________________
Requiem4aGreen is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 04:40 PM   #54
grambles423
Limited Activity
 
grambles423's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008.5 BMP GTI
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Balls Deep
Posts: 18,424
Wanna keep talking about shit that doesnt matter? Email me at teamfreak44@yahoo.com
__________________
UnNaturally Aspirated
APR Stage 1- ECS Dogbone
Driver Gear Springs-Tyrol Rigid Collar Subframe Kit
Centric Blank Rotors-Stoptech SP Pads


Last edited by grambles423; 07-09-2010 at 04:51 PM.
grambles423 is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 04:52 PM   #55
DvS21
Rally Car Champion
 
DvS21's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 GTI, 2004 XB12s, 2000 Focus
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diego View Post
wait let me get a bigger stick so you can beat this dead horse a little harder


this entire fucking thread.
DvS21 is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 05:21 PM   #56
msm00b
FIA World Rally Car Newbie
 
msm00b's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 GTI
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 477
It's all so clear now. I'm wrong. BMW is wrong about their own vehicle. APR is apparently wrong in it's dynos. The people publishing their own BMW dynos aren't showing off their information correctly. Everyone is wrong except you.

Gotcha, we're super duper clear now. Mind telling me where you got your PhD for intrawebs awesomesauce? I'd love to be in the know.

/thread
__________________
ATI Crew
Member No 4
2010 MKVI; <United Grey> - Autobahn
APR Stage I, Evo Intake

The "I love my GTI and DON'T CARE if it's not faster than a Camaro SS Club" Club
msm00b is offline  
 
Closed Thread

Tags
128i, bmw, golf, gti

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.