# 3.2 v6 upgrades help



## brijon (Apr 21, 2010)

Hi i have a 54 plate 3.2 V6 TT , apart from mad racing paddles which i have just done are there any recommended upgrades or bits and pieces that any of you guys/girls would suggest doing , is it really worth getting a re-map etc as there doesnt seem to be a significant power increase from what i have read . I have an alpine head unit in but only the basic speaker set up is it possible to upgrade to the bose speakers if not can anyone recommend any suitable replacements . Thank you for any advice or help in advance


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

Best upgrade I can recommend is to dump that big heavy underpowered lump and get yaself a 1.8 turbo with a remap :wink:


----------



## robokn (Feb 21, 2006)

Cams, Induction, remap and exhaust will see some gains

Oh and just ignore Les he really is uneducated when it comes to these majestic engines


----------



## wallstreet (Oct 19, 2009)

robokn said:


> Cams, Induction, remap and exhaust will see some gains
> 
> Oh and just ignore Les he really is uneducated when it comes to these majestic engines


Ditto and add yourself to the 3.2 list. A special topic dedicated to 3.2s


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

robokn said:


> Cams, Induction, remap and exhaust will see some gains
> 
> Oh and just ignore Les he really is uneducated when it comes to these majestic engines


I think its lethargic not majestic which is the word you are really looking for :wink:


----------



## wallstreet (Oct 19, 2009)

Whenn you go to the 3.2 list you will find SteveCollier, he has one of the most well tuned TTs.

If you then look at some of his posts you will find what he has done. I think he has 310hp or more.

I would ask him if he felt it was worthwhile, perhaps you can look at turbo or SC options. He plans to go to the most reliable & famous R32 tuners in Holland.


----------



## Marco34 (Apr 5, 2009)

Why does every 3.2 question end with up with this needle or 1.8s and v 3.2s. I've said my piece before as to why folks choose 1.8 and those who choose the 3.2. Horses for courses, race cars for tracks whatever you say. You can get more from the 1.8 for less expenditure I'd agree but for me I like continuous smooth delivery of power from an engine that is far less stressed.

I'm booking mine in for a remap, I'm going to see about 20bhp gains at worst 15bhp. There is an article in the R32 forums which shows the torque and BHP curve in 500 rpm intervals. Interestingly the torque is much improved mid range and the throttle response and power delivery improved. Overy power increased was up 18bhp. A remap is worth it to smooth the V6 out even further.


----------



## cowboybebop (May 20, 2009)

Well said Marco :roll:


----------



## brijon (Apr 21, 2010)

thanks for all the help and advice so far


----------



## V6RUL (May 28, 2009)

Think about where you want to be in 2 years time incl cost implications. The V6 needs induction, engine map, DSG map, lowering and coilies. No more.
2k and you are sorted, however some of us want to shove it right up them 4 potters and all i can tell ya is on the Italia Trip i did not disgrace myself, i think. And i came back alive after 2,250 miles of full on diving.
steve


----------



## RobLE (Mar 20, 2005)

Exactly! As someone who has owned both a 225 Coupe and a 3.2 Coupe, both are great cars but the 4-cylinder drives and sounds like a hot hatch, the 3.2 sounds more like a sportscar...a sports exhuast on a 4-cylinder will never give the same effect/sound as a 6-cylinder engine...

A high percentage of the 1.8 cars seem to agree the 3.2 is the better looking one by the fact they try to emulate it by putting the larger spoiler/rear and front valance on their cars too!

Makes me laugh when people say the 3.2 is slow! 155mph and 0-60 in less than 7 seconds is hardly slow! I don't deny it doesn't go round corners as well as the 225 with that big lump at the front (I mean the engine, not the driver!) but does have other advantages and the handling can always be impoved.

Good luck with whatever you decide to do to your 3.2, will be interested to hear. In the meantime, how do you find the MAD racing paddles (any photos?) quite fancy them myself but they're pretty pricey for a couple of slitheres of aluminum! :?


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

RobLE said:


> Exactly! Makes me laugh when people say the 3.2 is slow! 155mph and 0-60 in less than 7 seconds is hardly slow! I


It is in my book when the 1.8 turbo does it in 6.4secs :wink: Lets be honest most people expect more from a sports car with a 3.2 V6 engine so its hardly fast when compared to the opposition with similar engines and put against the 1.8 225. :roll: remap both cars and there is little in it apart from the fact the 1.8 is a tad faster with more power. Few people will do more than remap their car and few will even bother to remap the V6. But you pays your money and all that.


----------



## Marco34 (Apr 5, 2009)

The 3.2 test figures, with DSG have been 6.2 in most documents. Either way standard I think it's 0.2 or 0.3 quicker than the standard 225.

Once I put new springs on mine it improved it no end. I think the 3.2 is more aimed at a GT style. My thought anyway.


----------



## Marco34 (Apr 5, 2009)

les said:


> RobLE said:
> 
> 
> > Exactly! Makes me laugh when people say the 3.2 is slow! 155mph and 0-60 in less than 7 seconds is hardly slow! I
> ...


The whole 3.2 choice is not purely about 0-60 times Les. Like Rob pointed out he's driven both and they ar different. I test drove a 225 and it was great but I've always wanted a V6. I'd agree that it would have been nice if Audi really made it the flagship TT with say 300bhp. It wasn't relly designed with the 3.2 in mind. I think it attracts different people from what they want out of a car. Also it's a car that doesn't require much modding. It has the body kit, the S4 adapted brakes and looks the business out of the box. I may speak for others in that it's a car that doesn't really need money throwing at it... lowering is probably key and a remap, either engine /DSG or both.

As a point of interest.
The merc SLK has a 3.2 with 215bhp... now that is low! But sprints to 60 in 6.5. A friends wife has one and it's not a patch on a TT.


----------



## Hallyfella (Mar 5, 2007)

Mark your going to have to stop taking the bait from Les , he only does it to wind us up but some more than others . 
Now you know he would rather be seen in a V6 than an imitation so let him have his fun and soon he will realise that he is wrong .


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

the stig said:


> Mark your going to have to stop taking the bait from Les , he only does it to wind us up but some more than others .


 no more than you are the real stig :wink:



the stig said:


> Now you know he would rather be seen in a V6 than an imitation so let him have his fun and soon he will realise that he is wrong .


Na drove one and although there are some advantages the 1.8 turbo is the way to go and has other advantages over the V6 which are more in my priority and my liking.


----------



## Marco34 (Apr 5, 2009)

les said:


> Na drove one and although there are some advantages the 1.8 turbo is the way to go and has other advantages over the V6 which are more in my priority and my liking.


Now that's more like it Les.


----------



## MrHooky (Oct 27, 2009)

I agree with Marco. I personally would have liked it if the V6 standard was closer to 300bhp than it currently is. Perhaps from Audi's point of view they know the car is only based on a MKIV Golf except it has a fancy body and Audi interior. I think they were just playing it safe and thought 250bhp was fine, after all, in 2003 when the V6 was first released, there weren't many hot hatches around with similar power. From memory I would say perhaps only the Leon Cupra R at 225, and the most that VW was putting through that same chasis at the time was 180bhp with the Golf GTI anniversary. Now you have Focus RS, new Leon Cupra R and new Megane 250 pumping out at least as much as the MKI V6. Crazy really as they're front drivers too.

And to keep on topic about mods - I'm personally going for springs and an engine remap with either a changed air filter or induction kit. All this should be comfortably under £1k which should hopefully give a car with 270bhp, which admittedly is only the same as most remapped 225s although a completely different driving experience. I've owned a fair few hot hatches, and for me it was all about the V6 in the TT. I didn't even bother test driving the 1.8T as I wanted more than 4 cylinders.

If you want to do a few more aesthetic ones, how about the quattro etched mirrors and paint those nice big S4 front stoppers in a classy colour&#8230;?

Would like to see pics of those paddles too!


----------



## Marco34 (Apr 5, 2009)

the stig said:


> Mark your going to have to stop taking the bait from Les , he only does it to wind us up but some more than others .
> Now you know he would rather be seen in a V6 than an imitation so let him have his fun and soon he will realise that he is wrong .


I know  As Les is doing a good job as North West rep I'll let him off. As long as it's good weather next Wednesday Les, you are soley responsible for that


----------



## V6RUL (May 28, 2009)

No V6 breakdowns on the Italy Trip [ 6 of us ]. At least 3 1.8s had problems and 1 terminal. Quality rises to the top in the end.
Steve


----------



## brijon (Apr 21, 2010)

Thanks for all the advice guys i will probably go the BMC CDA with re-map route then go from there , i plan on keeping the car for a few years so would like to make this an ongoing project without throwing thousands at it . I have posted paddle pics on my garage , tried to do it here but couldnt get it to work , clicked on img button but not sure how to from there . My view on the 3.2 vs 1.8 is i tried both and although the 1.8 is very nippy i loved the sound of the v6 and barring any major hiccups i adore the options that the dsg gearbox provides , some days i drive in fully auto others in manual using the paddles , or manual using gearstick or in sport mode just depends how i feel . Thanks again


----------



## showtime (Mar 29, 2008)

drop the tt and get the 350z only joking i know im a desserter but i still love the tt. longest ive kept a car


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

stevecollier said:


> No V6 breakdowns on the Italy Trip [ 6 of us ]. At least 3 1.8s had problems and 1 terminal. Quality rises to the top in the end.
> Steve


Tell me Steve which was the most powerful car on the italy trip and how many problems it had.


----------



## wallstreet (Oct 19, 2009)

showtime said:


> drop the tt and get the 350z only joking i know im a desserter but i still love the tt. longest ive kept a car


Nearly bought it, until I saw how frail and tattered it looked! Inside. They get tired & used quickly. The TT looks great consistently.


----------



## showtime (Mar 29, 2008)

total agree they need more looking after but they are good fun and very quick


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2010)

I'm with Marco. It's all getting boring. I'm going to start flaming every 3.2 V6 vs 1.8T discussion from now on with bile for both camps. The best car is obviously going to be a forced induction V6 with rear ballast to balance up the weight distribution which would kill us all stone dead on performance and handling! :lol:

Or a QS with a DSG style gearbox... Shame neither exist eh?

Doug


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

stevecollier said:


> No V6 breakdowns on the Italy Trip [ 6 of us ]. At least 3 1.8s had problems and 1 terminal. Quality rises to the top in the end.
> Steve


Odds were hardly in our favour though at 25: 6


----------



## jaqcom (Apr 20, 2009)

Its a no brainer unless you are deaf and cant smile..................... 8)


----------



## V6RUL (May 28, 2009)

Doug Short said:


> I'm with Marco. It's all getting boring. I'm going to start flaming every 3.2 V6 vs 1.8T discussion from now on with bile for both camps. The best car is obviously going to be a forced induction V6 with rear ballast to balance up the weight distribution which would kill us all stone dead on performance and handling! :lol:
> 
> Or a QS with a DSG style gearbox... Shame neither exist eh?
> 
> Doug


You will struggle to fit the DSG to the 1.8 but it may be possible with a bucket of money to throw at it.
As for the forced induction for the V6 and corner weighted it is a possibility and i would urge you to watch this space as a few of us are looking in to it..  
Steve


----------



## V6RUL (May 28, 2009)

Hark said:


> stevecollier said:
> 
> 
> > No V6 breakdowns on the Italy Trip [ 6 of us ]. At least 3 1.8s had problems and 1 terminal. Quality rises to the top in the end.
> ...


I think the ratio was slightly different with 3 RS, 1 2litre and an ST on board. All i was saying is the stats for the trip.
No malice intended and posting on 3.2 discussion boards for the benefit of the V6 crowd. Now wheres Les on this V6 post.. :roll: 
Steve


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

stevecollier said:


> Hark said:
> 
> 
> > stevecollier said:
> ...


Remind me again Steve How many faults did vagcom throw up and what warning lights came on your dash :wink: re no issues for V6s :lol:


----------



## V6RUL (May 28, 2009)

les said:


> stevecollier said:
> 
> 
> > No V6 breakdowns on the Italy Trip [ 6 of us ]. At least 3 1.8s had problems and 1 terminal. Quality rises to the top in the end.
> ...


Well Les the most powerfull was either a 2litre or 2.5litre, obviously it wouldnt be a 1.8.. :lol: 
As for issues, that is not something i would not rather discuss as if you were aware of some of the fixes you would shit yourself..  
pm sent
steve


----------

