# NW Rolling Road Day (RESULTS)



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

*North West Rolling Road RESULTS !!*










A few Pics
_______________________________________________________________________








TT 240

(NOTE: Problems Discovered, booked in for investigation)
_______________________________________________________________________








TT225

_______________________________________________________________________








TT225

_______________________________________________________________________








TT180

_______________________________________________________________________








*TT 225: *
APR Remap (High Octain) 
K&N pannel filter with WAK box
Forge DV 007p (yellow)
Samco TIP Pipe


----------



## starski4578 (Aug 24, 2007)

First of all cheers Jon for organising the RR. I Think i might of gone round everyone asking if they were jon before realising u left an hour before i arrived!

Good meeting Tony, Stevie, Nem, John-h, Hark, Tesiboo and everyone else sorry i didnt get everyones names.

BHP 254.84
Torque 281.44

Just under the 262bhp quoted on the website but i was above the 270 torque so i gotta be happy with that.

Cheers

Stu


----------



## bigsyd (Jul 9, 2008)

WHAT a bloody good day that was, was well worth it for me as the RR has shown a problem with the car :roll: :roll: :roll: that i did not know about, power dropping off over 4000rpm (not maf..was changed..thanks tony  ) thing is i thought it was quick, so i did not see any problem
it is booked in on tuesday to have a full diagnostic check @ awesome (they could not do enough for me today to try and fix is the short amount of time we had 8) )

i had a good plan for a video...but it all went a bit tits up with chatting to peeps  :roll: so if i got your car all well and done..if i missed your car....sorry 

if you would like a dvd just pm me...thanks

quite a befitting tune on my video.."even if it is going wrong"....i still love it


----------



## DAVECOV (Apr 23, 2009)

Hi Just like to thank the guys at Awesome for squeezin me in at the end of the day.... 

I think it was well worth the wait with Torque readings 300+ (Not bad for just a remap) :roll:

Hi to all the guys I met Sorry don't know the names as still a noobie at all this this 



Hope to see you all again soon!


----------



## stundies (Nov 23, 2008)

tony_rigby_uk said:


> North West Rolling Road.
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 
> ...












Cheers Jon for an "Awesome" day. I thought i might post my graph up for all to see. Was I the only one happy with their figures?? especially the torque figure of 322.52 ft-lbs

Sorry to here about Shells car  
Nem, your's looks mint bud, lovin the stance and wheels
Syd, best colour for the QS, got to be the shiniest car there, hope you get it sorted.

Nice to meet up with you guys once more, and again, NW meet a big success.


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

stundies said:


> Syd, best colour for the QS, got to be the shiniest car there, hope you get it sorted.
> 
> Nice to meet up with you guys once more, and again, NW meet a big success.


I know his is the shiniest :? But i keep trying to beat him one of these days... guess i'm gonna have to hope he drives through a mud puddle before he arrives at any meet if thats gonna happen [smiley=bigcry.gif] :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

tony_rigby_uk said:


> stundies said:
> 
> 
> > Syd, best colour for the QS, got to be the shiniest car there, hope you get it sorted.
> ...


Tony,
I will lend you my G220 and you can spend a week buffing your car!


----------



## seasurfer (Apr 10, 2009)

Hi, this is my graph- when someone has time, could you please explain whats means what on it 

Seasurfer


----------



## DAVECOV (Apr 23, 2009)

Same here if poss .....What's the important bits to look at ?

Thanks.


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

Good figures Stundies. Someone told me that they your running 2bar boost through the hybrid. Is that peak? I so what does it hold at?

What other mods have you got along side it?

Top of the graph looks odd as well, very 'peaky' i thats a word.


----------



## stundies (Nov 23, 2008)

Hark said:


> Good figures Stundies. Someone told me that they your running 2bar boost through the hybrid. Is that peak? I so what does it hold at?
> 
> What other mods have you got along side it?
> 
> Top of the graph looks odd as well, very 'peaky' i thats a word.


Yeah, that's 2 bar peak (on the gauge at least, which could be inaccurate), holding at approx 1.4 bar. The guys said that that was probably too much on a standard bottom end and that I should think about having it strengthened ( :? :? )

Mods are:-

Not a Forge FMIC, some universal thing I think (on car when I bought it)
Forge 077p DV running the standard spring
K04 turbo which contains standard compressor rotor but which Vauxhall Astra Coupe / Zafira shaft and exhaust rotor (slightly bigger) - http://www.turbocentreuk.co.uk - ask for Craig and mention mine, he'll explain all.
Milltek cat-back
BMC panel filter in Wak-Box mod
Custom re-map - http://www.more-bhp.co.uk - Ask for Jason

I need Jason to have a look at the mapping regarding the 'peakyness' (if that's a word too :? ), I think the overboost is cutting in at approx 3300rpm according to the graph, hopefully he will be able to turn it down slightly so I don't get that big 'trough' at the highest 'peak'

What did you achieve Hark??


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

My peak bhp was constantly around 240bhp.  Bit odd.

My torque was high 290s and one 302lbs/ft. Might post up my graph to see if people can explain for me.


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

Tesiboo said:


> Hi Just like to thank the guys at Awesome for squeezin me in at the end of the day....
> 
> I think it was well worth the wait with Torque readings 300+ (Not bad for just a remap) :roll:
> 
> ...


who's map and which car was you? very consistant graph there


----------



## DAVECOV (Apr 23, 2009)

I went on at the death after the TVR

The Map is a Revo done by Justin at the TT shop near Milton Keynes
set up with Tesco 99 octane fuel 

no other significant mods to speak of really :roll: 
so i'm really pleased with those figures


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

Tesiboo said:


> I went on at the death after the TVR
> 
> The Map is a Revo done by Justin at the TT shop near Milton Keynes
> set up with Tesco 99 octane fuel
> ...


Torque is very good then matey.... for someone without a exhaust / downpipe... very good indeed 

I'm pretty pleased with mine also,the graph is pretty close together on all runs...and running pretty well for what i've had done to it.. happy with the results and happy that my car isn't showing any massive problems...

but........ 262BHP from a re-map alone....... :roll: ALL BOLLOCKS!!!! :lol: isn't that right les?


----------



## DAVECOV (Apr 23, 2009)

......Who's been tellin porkies then???


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

Tesiboo said:


> LMAO ......Who's been tellin porkies then???


Think everyone who claims a BHP figure from a remap is... I mean what does your re-map "claim" compared to what you've got? know the APR "Claims" 262BHP (although seen a few 265's floating about) and to be honest the torque increase over standard is there the bhp is well only 25BHP on mine...(rounded up .6) but know there was a 238BHP from the same map :? Think i must have got a good cookie and a lovely engine... makes me want to service it more often to keep it in tip top condition now....


----------



## Nem (Feb 14, 2005)

Excellent day indeed.

I've got video of my car along with Hark and Les's runs, uploading to youtube right now. Will add links later.

I've got a LOAD of pics which I'll try and ge some up tonight if I can. I'm away from tomorrow for a week so it will be after then otherwise, sorry.

Have attached my run for comparision.


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

Hark said:


> My peak bhp was constantly around 240bhp.  Bit odd.
> 
> My torque was high 290s and one 302lbs/ft. Might post up my graph to see if people can explain for me.


What's your peak boost on the Stage 3 Matt? Also your holding boost?

Cheers

Rich


----------



## p7 TTj (Feb 14, 2008)

Just wanted to say im glad everyone enjoyed the day so much and a special thanks to everyone at Awesome for putting on the event for us.

Slightly disappointed with my own bhp 205 (had hoped my 180 remapped might have got to 220) but was happy with the torque.

Just checked it to standard, and its up over 60 at around 237. And my graph was showing nice accerelation curves until it got to 5800 rpms and then it hits a flat spot and drops drastically.

Can anyone explain to me why this is? Is the remap wrong on the car or could it have some other problem.

Cheers 
Jon


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

p7 TTj said:


> And my graph was showing nice accerelation curves until it got to 5800 rpms and then it hits a flat spot and drops drastically.
> 
> Can anyone explain to me why this is? Is the remap wrong on the car or could it have some other problem.
> 
> ...


Maybe the smaller K03 can't hold the boost higher up the rev range.

In answer to Richs question. Usually 1.7/1.8 bar peak then holds 1.5 dropping off. Can't remember what it holds to redline.


----------



## p7 TTj (Feb 14, 2008)

Thanks Matt, I was wondering possibly that as well.

I think I might email my graph to the company I got the remap from to be its not a problem with the remap, just to be sure as well.

Anyone else any other ideas?


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

I wonder i mine wasn't performing right as had problems today. Think I have a boost leak :?


----------



## SpenTT (May 31, 2009)

Hi All

I just wanted to say what a great morning i had at the Awesome-gti North west RR day.

As a Newbie i didnt know what to expect so i was pleasantly surprised to find on my arrival nothing but friendly welcoming people. Everyone i met were relaxed and approachable.

Special mention goes to Big syd and his wife and their awesome QS TT plus Brandon who were very welcoming (thanks also to everyone who i met, sorry i dont know your names) and full of useful advice and good genuine people! Thanks.

Ive only had my TT for two weeks and i wish i could have put it on the test, it would be interesting to see what it is putting out! Maybe next time.

Thanks again.


----------



## bigsyd (Jul 9, 2008)

spencerkoa said:


> Hi All
> 
> I just wanted to say what a great morning i had at the Awesome-gti North west RR day.
> 
> ...


It was a pleasure to meet you and your lad on Saturday m8, glad you had a good day and Linda says hi and thanks for the nice comments on the QS....have you seen this m8 viewtopic.php?f=3&t=142263 the next NW meet...will be a good ride out 8) hope to see you there.....syd


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

seasurfer said:


> Hi, this is my graph- when someone has time, could you please explain whats means what on it
> 
> Seasurfer


Firstly, Torque is measured in ft.lb (foot pounds) which is a 1 lb force acting on the end of a 1 foot lever to provide a turning effort of 1 ft.lb. The longer the lever the more turning effort and the greater the force the more turning effort. So, 2 lb at 6" is the same thing as 1 lb at one foot or 1/2 lb at 2 foot (less force longer lever). Your engine provides torque, measured in ft.lb, that gives you acceleration.

Power is simply the rate at which work is done, or rate at which energy is consumed. Power and torque are inter related as explained in a bit.

The main graph at the top of your plot shows the torque and power curves with the three runs (red green and blue) superimposed on top of each other. Engine rpm is given by the horizontal scale. The torque is the curve that shoots up at 2,500 rpm (corresponding to the left hand vertical scale) to 170/180 ft.lb and then slowly tails off as it goes to higher rpm. The power curve is the one that rises to a lesser extent at first and then slowly rises, as the rpm increases but tends to drop back again at the highest rpm - yours produces peak of around 168 bhp power at ~6,000 rpm. This graph represents power and torque measured at the wheels by the rolling road.

The lower graph is a correction of the first graph, which takes into account the losses in your transmission, in order to arrive at an estimation of the power at your flywheel i.e. engine power - because some power is lost in the gearbox etc. This is cleverly achieved on this rolling road by measuring how long the rollers take to slow down, when the engine/gearbox is disengaged at the end of the power run. The longer it takes to slow down, the less the frictional losses in your transmission. This loss is then added to the measured power at the wheels to end up with a figure for the engine itself. Older rolling roads simply estimated this loss as a fudge factor - so this at least is more accurate.

http://www.********.co.uk/forum/download/file.php?id=2550

Torque is what gives you acceleration being basically force (xxx lb) on the end of a lever (1 ft long). If you produced the same torque through the rev band you'd have constant acceleration in any one gear.

Power is related to torque simply by the equation:

*Horsepower = Torque x rpm / 5252.*

So, if you did have constant torque at all rpm, then you can see that your power would simply rise with rpm, but engine torque tends to drop off at higher rpm in reality (due to turbos running out of puff etc.), so the power curve tends to have a peak in it - usually a little less than maximum rpm.

It's possible to have an engine that produces a very high power figure at near full rpm but that has a very low torque figure at lower rpm. Such an engine would seem good from the "power figure" but be poor on the road at lower rpm - if you put your foot down nothing happens as there's little torque at low rpm and you need to change to a lower gear to get the revs high. Often big turbos only start to work at 4,000 rpm for example. The 225 TTs tend to spool up their turbos at around 3,000 rpm and 180's about 2,500 rpm due to the smaller turbo, so you benefit in a 180 from first having torque low down in the rev band - just not as much of it at higher rpm.

Hope that helps.


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

By the way, you will all have the following fault codes stored:

Address 03 -------------------------------------------------------
Controller: 8N0 907 379 E 
Component: ESP 20 CAN V005 
Coding: 18446
Shop #: WSC 06435
3 Faults Found:
00290 - ABS Wheel Speed Sensor: Rear Left (G46)
04-10 - Mechanical Malfunction - Intermittent
00287 - ABS Wheel Speed Sensor: Rear Right (G44)
04-10 - Mechanical Malfunction - Intermittent
01324 - Control Module for All Wheel Drive (J492)
49-10 - No Communications - Intermittent

This is due the the rolling road operating with the Haldex fuse disconnected. It's nothing to worry about and can simply be cleared with Vag-Com or dealer diagnostics. It won't cause a problem having the fault logged there in the mean time. Just remember it's there in case your dealer does a scan and suggests you may have a problem when you next have a service :wink: Just ask them to clear it.


----------



## Nem (Feb 14, 2005)




----------



## swfblade (Apr 24, 2007)

Those of you unhappy with your BHP but pleased with your torque, just be Happy! BHP is pub talk, its all about the Torque and the area underneath it!

Some good figures there, but I'm interested in why the figures on the graphs are so "wobbly", for want of a better word! :lol:


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

John-H said:


> By the way, you will all have the following fault codes stored:
> 
> Address 03 -------------------------------------------------------
> Controller: 8N0 907 379 E
> ...


 Just get Awesome to service it and cut the hassel. :wink:


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

Here's 2 pic's taken by Nick on the day.
My car on the RR. ( seen one ya seen em all on the RR:? ) 









The second is much more interesting. That's me presenting Sarah with a TTOC complimentry tin of beans ( note only the best Heinz ) Unfortunately Sarah was to shy to put her gas maks on and she had forgot the talcum powder help get her into her laytex suit, another time maybe. We did have an old tin bath but one tin of beans was hardly enough for Sarah to give us a demo on her cold beans in a bath tub fetish.  Still i'm sure she enjoyed them when she got home though. :wink: ( BTW i'm posting this in this thread in an atempt to out fox her and that she won't see it :roll: ) 
Thanks to all the guys at Awesome for the day and Sarah in particular for arranging with Jon. Also to all who attended for helping to make it a good un. I would just like to finish by saying if Sarah does get to read this ....Her secrets safe with me :wink:


----------



## dbv8nos (Jun 6, 2009)

Remember guys.....
BHP sells cars, torque wins races.

Thanks for having me there, it was good to show i had an extra 7 bhp @ wheels after some recent work.
The nitrous run only showed about +50 bhp but later discovered the bottle was nearly empty of liquid.
A fresh bottle at the drag strip Sunday had me running 116 terminals but struggling for traction!

Thanks again,
Derek


----------



## seasurfer (Apr 10, 2009)

Hi John

Thanks very much for taking the time to explain the graph - its complicated to me to understand it at the moment but I will read it carefully (probably 100 times) and hopfully understand it. It is interesting, and i am wanting to learn more. [smiley=bigcry.gif] [smiley=book2.gif] [smiley=book2.gif] [smiley=book2.gif] [smiley=book2.gif] [smiley=book2.gif] 

Thanks again

Seasurfer


----------



## AwesomeSarah (Mar 6, 2006)

Cheers Les
I had told you about giving my secrests away  but then , the book is all yours now
So let me know how you get on 

I must admit , it was a great day and a pleasure to see you all
There was a couple of upset people , but as Big Syd said , if he had not had his car on the rolling road he would not have known of the fault
We will sort that lovely car out for you Syd
Shell , how did you get on with yours my dear?
Let me know if I can help

Thank you all for making it enjoyable for us too
Sarah


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

AwesomeSarah said:


> Cheers Les
> I had told you about giving my secrests away  but then , the book is all yours now
> So let me know how you get on
> 
> Sarah


 Damn! Who spilt the BEANS and told her you barstewards? :evil:


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

Cheers for the pics Nick.


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

AwesomeSarah said:


> Cheers Les
> I had told you about giving my secrests away  but then , the book is all yours now
> So let me know how you get on
> 
> ...


Pass our thanks on the the technition that ran all the cars also (think his names jeff)... he was brilliant. bet he was sick of the site of tt's after that day  and also thanks to andy for letting me in when i'd shown up early  and being brill through the whole day... and ofcourse john, He always looks after me anyway (think he's on orders to) oh and nearly forgot Al, who was kind enough to make me a brew even on his day off :lol: :lol: :lol: and ofcourse yourself !!!

was a brilliant day... and i'll no doubt be pestering about those samco hoses and coilovers soon enough (forgot what dates you said they were due now :roll: memory like a fish  )

And cheers to all for coming !!!! some really nice cars all day... roll on the next meets.... and maybe in the winter after i've got a few more toys we can sort out another run...

tony


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

tony_rigby_uk said:


> . roll on the next meets....
> tony


So who is organising this one?


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

one planned for the 1st august.... and with folks away in june probably gonna be the next one...http://www.********.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=142263


----------



## ecutune (Oct 5, 2006)

Stundies .... Nice results 

I suspect that your overboost needs to be fixed at the wastegate, it could possibly be slightly out on adjustment due to the hybrid work the turbo has had, luckily you have a boost gauge on board so you can see what happens as you adjust... try winding it off a just a little at a time.. so the nuts are moving outwards towards the end of the bar...

It can take a little time to get right because you should only make very small adjustments at a time and you need to do it whilst the engine is coolish ... or you BURN your hands..

We could do it at my place but you will be there hours and hours and hours because of waiting for the turbo/engine to cool ...

J


----------



## BAMTT (Feb 22, 2004)

Not wanting to throw the cat amongst the pidgeons but i notice the headline BHP number were low again ...and you ran in fwd :?

The only times i have seen numbers get close to claims was on AmDs (Bicester) rolling road :?


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

BAMTT said:


> Not wanting to throw the cat amongst the pidgeons but i notice the headline BHP number were low again ...and you ran in fwd :?
> 
> The only times i have seen numbers get close to claims was on AmDs (Bicester) rolling road :?


Can't really say owt about the rollers a 180bhp completely standard ran 180bhp on all 3 runs :roll: at first thats what we were thinking when everyones was low..... then the 180 just blew that out....... in truth it's the maps claims that are wrong... the torque figures yeah i can go with but bhp wise think they egg up on their maps. and in reality they just don't deliver...but 262bhp or in reality 249.6 (mine) either way i'm still happy with that result compared to some of the others with exactly the same map running 233, 238, 240, and 254 on all different cars... guess engine wear and transmission/clutch wear all play a factor here.... know my cutch is spot as only got changed in march.... but mine was one of the higher ones.... but be honest how many mappers show you a graph and a video to prove it.... None just hope and guess.... but as one person who was claiming 265BHP found out...... he was getting 240BHP


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

tony_rigby_uk said:


> BAMTT said:
> 
> 
> > Not wanting to throw the cat amongst the pidgeons but i notice the headline BHP number were low again ...and you ran in fwd :?
> ...


I think you will find a lot of those believing they had 263BHP are only getting 240BHP Tony including me  there was at least another 3 besides me with the APR map who got in reality 240. I also have a bluflame zorst and a BMC CDA induction which should take me easily from 263 to 265. What my figures without these would have been is anybodys guess. :?


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

les said:


> I think you will find a lot of those believing they had 263BHP are only getting 240BHP Tony including me  there was at least another 3 besides me with the APR map who got in reality 240. I also have a bluflame zorst and a BMC CDA induction which should take me easily from 263 to 265. What my figures without these would have been is anybodys guess. :?


Wasn't having a pop les matey... :lol: was just proving the point to the above.. the thing that confuses me is that you've got more mods than me but i got 9BHP more than you... (all i got is the TIP that you havent got, and pretty sure it isn't that) mine is on 86'000miles... not sure what yours is... but only thing i can think is that it's the wear on engine/transmission thats letting the results differ... (afterall the standard 180... rand 180 so it can't be the rollers)

I'll be honest was hoping for 250 anything above was a bonus.. so i was there abouts .... but as the results started to come in i realised mine was quite good....the maps increase the torque... the torque is what you feel... and if ya hadn't put it on the rollers you'd still be thinking it's BHP is what the mappers claim... I'm actually glad i did it as it's let me know what i'm running... and if there was any problems...

oh and les your signiture still says 265bhp :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:  :lol: :lol:


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

tony_rigby_uk said:


> les said:
> 
> 
> > I think you will find a lot of those believing they had 263BHP are only getting 240BHP Tony including me  there was at least another 3 besides me with the APR map who got in reality 240. I also have a bluflame zorst and a BMC CDA induction which should take me easily from 263 to 265. What my figures without these would have been is anybodys guess. :?
> ...


Na wasnt offended mate :lol: My cars done 108,000 and gets regular serviving it's on the same engine at least it got there unlike some. :roll: You can't expect it to be like new but I thinks its more to do with the cliams made by mappers than simple engine wear. I would like to see a new engine mapped and then put on the RR to see what it gave out. I bet nothing like 263BHP. i'm still not convince the 180 wasnt in some way tweaked before the present owner bought it and without his knowledge. :-| Now you are havinga pop so perhaps I should change my sig to show torque rather than BHP then :roll: Now there's an idea for us all. Consider it done :lol: 
:wink:


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

les said:


> ...perhaps I should change my sig to show torque rather than BHP then :roll:


Not such a bad idea Les. Torque is more important than BHP anyway as it represents the engine's ability to shift weight. The higher the figure the better.

It's interesting reading these results as they were similar to the figures we got on Ben's rolling road day. Interestingly the only standard car then was also giving the correct, standard BHP figures - so again indicating no incorrect rolling road calibration.

The other thing is BHP is generally 'calculated' using the MAF readings both on VagCom and by default on a remappers quoted figures but then I can't understand why these same figures should still be correct for the standard car and comparable with those given by the rolling road. :roll:

Complete bloody mystery...

Cheers

rich


----------



## swfblade (Apr 24, 2007)

So does anyone know why the graphs are all wobbly then, or am I missing something?

On all the RR's I've had done, with a 2.0 Zetec, 1.8 G60 and 2.9 VR6, the graphs were pretty much smooth curves, not up and down all over. Is it the old Haldex issue again, or something more obvious or what?

Cheers.


----------



## stundies (Nov 23, 2008)

les said:


> Now you are havinga pop so perhaps I should change my sig to show torque rather than BHP then :roll: Now there's an idea for us all. Consider it done :lol:
> :wink:


That'll be *322.52 *ft-lbs then 8) 8) 8) 8)


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

As I've just posted I think the torque figures are accurate as it seemed to reflect the level of tuning.

Stage 1/2 cars were getting around 260/270 lbs/ft

Nicks made 295 lbs/ft I think

And I managed 300lbs/ft on my last run with high 290s on the other 2.

The hybrid made 20lb/ft more still...

Why this doesn't translate to bhp has to be something t do with where that torque peaks in the revs range surely?


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

*Horsepower = Torque x rpm / 5252.*

So it depends where the most torque is produced and at what rpm.

It is interesting why the 265bhp/270bhp claims have not been met. I can see certain possibilities:

1) The re-mappers made exaggerated claims.

2) The cars have faults which don't allow full power to be developed - e.g. weak coil packs causing incomplete combustion and throwing the good cylinders lean. This is more likely to show up at higher boost on remapped cars and can go unnoticed.

3) The rolling road is accurate for standard cars but does not provide the best environment for remapped cars - e.g. the air blowing past the intercoolers is OK to cool standard boost heat but remapped boost gains too much heat (about twice!) and looses air density (by half) - unless the air is kept at a constant temperature. At higher rpm there's more heat to shift due to higher volume flow too. I doubt the fan at the front blows air at 130mph, which is what the cars are effectively doing at peak power. - Then again, how did the re-mappers come up with their figures?

4) The Haldex is sapping power - With the fuse pulled on the Haldex the electric pump is not active but the mechanical pump still is, as it's being driven by the spinning propellor shaft. This loss should be calibrated out by the slow down measurement with the engine disengaged. However I don't know whether it applies an average calibration factor across the whole graph, in which case it may be inaccurate if the losses are non linear - this could perhaps cause excess error at high rpm if it were the case. However you'd expect the standard cars to suffer similarly - but then again the losses could be non linear with torque as well as speed.

The wobbly lines may well be caused by the Haldex due to the mechanical pump being active. How does wobbliness compare between standard and remapped cars?


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

John-H said:


> *Horsepower = Torque x rpm / 5252.*


So, What I don't understand is how people can be happy with their torque increase but unhappy with their BHP increase if that equation is correct. It implies a constant relationship between the two for any given RPM.

According to that equation, if the BHP is below what you expected, then the torque is also below what you should have expected. The only difference is, no one had any expectations regarding torque as the power mods were sold to them on the promise of BHP gains. So, when the power increase doesn't pan out, any increase in torque is seen as 'worth it' (despite the torque increase being less than expected based on the equation and the BHP claims).


----------



## swfblade (Apr 24, 2007)

Not if the Peak Torque is lower down the rev range and there is more area under the curve.

VAGCheck, for example, do quote for torque gains as well, eg. 1.8T 225 - up to 45bhp/80ftlb. That would suggest that a tip top 225 could make an extra 45bhp and 80ftlb. Does that mean 45bhp on the peak, ie 270bhp? maybe, maybe not. It might mean that somewhere on that curve the car is making 45bhp more than it does at stock. Same with torque.

Again, as I've said before, I couldn't give a monkeys what the bhp from a remap is, I'm more interested in Torque, peak torque, area under the torque curve and where that curve starts to die.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

swfblade said:


> Not if the Peak Torque is lower down the rev range and there is more area under the curve.


Understood regarding the position of the peak torque within the rev range but I'd still say, based on that equation, to increase the overall area under the graph, you'd need to increase the area under the BHP graph too. The RPM and '5252' figures are constants so the only variables are torque and power.

Obviously the thing people are worrying about is their peak bhp, rather than the more important response curve across the revs. I'd say the area and shape of the graph are the most important things for both torque and power. This is one of the reasons I personally don't like small-engined, turbocharged cars. Too peaky, at the expense of drivability.


----------



## BAMTT (Feb 22, 2004)

les said:


> tony_rigby_uk said:
> 
> 
> > BAMTT said:
> ...


Was kinda my point, as we all know when you have a car remapped you drive for the first time it feels so much quicker, but as anyone who has driven a modern TDI will tell you its all torque


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

BAMTT said:


> I think you will find a lot of those believing they had 263BHP are only getting 240BHP Tony including me  there was at least another 3 besides me with the APR map who got in reality 240. I also have a bluflame zorst and a BMC CDA induction which should take me easily from 263 to 265. What my figures without these would have been is anybodys guess. :?


Was kinda my point, as we all know when you have a car remapped you drive for the first time it feels so much quicker, but as anyone who has driven a modern TDI will tell you its all torque[/quote]

So its all TORQUE and no show then :wink:


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

I think I've worked it out... :?

Could someone tell me standard torque is on a 225?

My peak torque is 300lbs/ft. Much higher than standard.

BUT

It's produced at 3000rpm. 300x3000/5252= 171 bhp :?

It stays high through the mid range, but drops off higher up. Maybe due to the fans? I don't know.

At 5000 rpm torque is about 246lb/ft 
246 x 5000/5252 = 234 (not far off what I got)

I'm not sure what this tells me but I understand the numbers now.


----------



## Redscouse (Sep 30, 2008)

Its all about the Torque baby!!!

(wonder why im saying this!??)

:lol:


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

Hark said:


> I think I've worked it out... :?
> 
> Could someone tell me standard torque is on a 225?
> 
> ...


Belive a standar 225 is


> 280 N·m (207 ft·lbf)


 meaning my run of 265.24lb/ft is pretty good  and it makes sense as les has 270ish and he's got a exhaust too but the same map.... making a little more sense now... guess the bhp peaks are all to do with where the torque lads on the RPM.


----------



## bigsyd (Jul 9, 2008)

just got back from awesome with what i can only describe as a new car    all i can say is Jeff (the technician )you are a Jedi master and i would give you a big hug in the most manly non gay way possible 

i have said it before and will deffo say it again....AWESOME you are AWESOME 8) 8) 8) 8) i was treated like i had taken somebody to A&E, they could not reassure me enough that they would get to the bottom of the problem and sort it out. The car was on the RR with all manner of wires and probes and strange looking devices probing places where any self respecting car should not be probed  and me in the waiting room looking out at my car like a farther with a new born at a hospital... stand up sit down up down ....toilet  then the power runs started  1 then another and another and another    jeff with laptops in the car, monitors outside the car ...i was getting stressed [smiley=bigcry.gif] [smiley=bigcry.gif] [smiley=bigcry.gif] must have been at least 6 power runs then silence 

after a few mins somebody came to me with a piece of paper (sorry i am murder for names )    ..." see i said it would be something and nothing ".... the stress drained away from me.. go on then what was it :? :? :?

A BLOODY BOOST LEAK on one of the pipes that connects to the inter cooler :lol: :lol: :lol: the clip had come loose, a new clip later and all other clips checked we now have this










BLUE line = when the car came in
BLACK line = stock (factory)
RED line = mapped

all BHP results are at the wheels and awesome told me that if i added between 10/15 BHP it would give me my flywheel figure (looking at my original graph i had a loss of 10/11 BHP )

so when the car came in = 205.80 BHP @ wheels = 215 BHP @ flywheel and max torque of 246.60 (original run on Saturday gave a best result of 213.66BHP @ wheels = 222.78 BHP @ flywheel and max torque of 269.54 temp on saturday was 25.49 oC and today 27.29 oC

after the jedi master

243.02BHP @ wheels = 253BHP (estimated) @ flywheel and max torque of 260.26

so the BHP @ the wheels is up 38 BHP , the torque is just the same ish (did not have a problem with the torque figure as the max torque was reached before i had boost loss)...BUT how the torque is delivered is a massive difference
at around 56mph i was getting around 206 lbs of torque...now fixed at the same speed i am getting 260 lbs of torque and higher all through the rev range and that is what is making the car feel alive

you still with me (do not bombard me with questions as i am on my limit of what i understand ) so all in all

WIN WIN WIN


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

bigsyd said:


> all BHP results are at the wheels and awesome told me that if i added between 10/15 BHP it would give me my flywheel figure (looking at my original graph i had a loss of 10/11 BHP )


Excellent new Syd mate... you swine you got more than me [smiley=bigcry.gif] and i just did a calc and got 17.35bhp conversion back to the wheels.... i assume this means the transmission is good/bad... be interesting to know other people calcs from wheels to fly...

But i got 265.24lb/ft torque.... i'm confussed now :?

but really pleased for you syd.... good news matey


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

Would a boost leak cause figures to drop off higher up or across the rev range?

I have found I have a boost leak and want to know how much this might have killed my figures.


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

Wooo Syd mate result AMAZING just what a little defective clip can cause. Little and nothing but what a difference. Made up for you mate now lets go drag racing


----------



## starski4578 (Aug 24, 2007)

Good news Syd! Think i just missed you again as i dropped in to awesome this afternoon. (Tony i blame you, bought a bloody APR badge can't believe i paid £23!)

Heres mine










Anyone got any ideas on why my rev limiter kicked in so early? I was told by the gent doing the runs it could be a possible faulty maff?


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

tony_rigby_uk said:


> one planned for the 1st august.... and with folks away in june probably gonna be the next one...http://www.********.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=142263


Is no one going to the national event then?? I would have thought everyone would be up for that


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

Just as an experiment I used my LiquidTT on the way home.

I recently had a VagCheck Stage 3 but it's by no means running to full potential as I have my exhaust issues (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=143523) and a possibly tired turbo...

However, without really trying I saw 303 lbs/ft torque and 278bhp on the LTT. My turbo is currently boosting at about 1.5bar but holding it well - fades off about 5000rpm. Morgan reckons it takes a while to spool too...

I'm well chuffed with the way it feels on the road though - and surely that's what counts? 

Cheers

Rich


----------



## seasurfer (Apr 10, 2009)

Tony - dont forget my 1.50bhp - my little car did 181.50 - every little helps and its running like a dream - 

It hasn't been tweaked in any way, and only had normal fuel in, but will put higher grade in in the future and of course its never thrashed which i suppose will help 

Seasurfer


----------



## bigsyd (Jul 9, 2008)

pendle7 said:


> syd, how much did they charge at awesome to get it sorted for you?????????????????


well lets just say for the time i was there (3hrs+ on the rolling road ) i was very very VERY pleased with the bill


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

bigsyd said:


> pendle7 said:
> 
> 
> > syd, how much did they charge at awesome to get it sorted for you?????????????????
> ...


 Yeah but dont forget the large tin of beans as well Syd :wink:


----------



## bigsyd (Jul 9, 2008)

Matt B said:


> tony_rigby_uk said:
> 
> 
> > one planned for the 1st august.... and with folks away in june probably gonna be the next one...http://www.********.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=142263
> ...


the GTI event m8, we will be there


----------



## AwesomeSarah (Mar 6, 2006)

Hey Syd
As always it was good to see you again
Glad we managed to get it sorted for you 
Sarah


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

starski4578 said:


> Good news Syd! Think i just missed you again as i dropped in to awesome this afternoon. (Tony i blame you, bought a bloody APR badge can't believe i paid £23!)
> 
> Anyone got any ideas on why my rev limiter kicked in so early? I was told by the gent doing the runs it could be a possible faulty maff?


Question is where you putting the badge you going for Above like me,,,,










or below like les, and the other guy with the black TT (sorry didn't catch your ID or name  )

oh and it could be possible faulty maf  if thats what they say..... although it wasn't with syd's... why don't you book it in for a diagnostic at awsome... take your graph with you so they know you ran on the rollers... sure they'll do a similar "syd" price for you... customer relations and all that.


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

Mine as per my avitar but I swear its on straight and level its just look that way on the pic :?

BTW Tony on first looking your reg appears to spell TOSSER :lol:


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

les said:


> Mine as per my avitar but I swear its on straight and level its just look that way on the pic :?
> 
> BTW Tony on first looking your reg appears to spell TOSSER :lol:


Quite an acurate description then :lol: :lol: :lol:

but no it's T70 ASR so the best you can get is TT0ASR :lol:


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

tony_rigby_uk said:


> les said:
> 
> 
> > Mine as per my avitar but I swear its on straight and level its just look that way on the pic :?
> ...


That will do its near enough and an acurate description as you say :wink:


----------



## shell (Feb 1, 2008)

hey everyone its Shell here

had an aweosme day and so nice to meet all of you 

Sorry i made a swift departure i was miffed with the car  i wouldnt ven drive her home 

the CVboot is fixed now lol (thank you Lee) one thing fixed

i just need to figure the other problem out which is either :-
1. boost leak
2. maf sensor

My results really did upset me, i think what upset me the most was i spent a few bob on her in the last few months, been in debt over her and not treated my self and then she goes and does this and really disappoints me 

BHP - 10 down 
Torque - 30/40 lbs down 

so hopefully it is eather a boost leak or i need a new maf sensor which i dont think will be a hard job for Lee and done soon enough............... prob after my hol to Eygpt :lol:

Using VAG.com on her at weekend to try and figure her out

My car is a mardy bum ........................ bit like me really 

but all in all had a great day :mrgreen:


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

shell said:


> the CVboot is fixed now lol (thank you Lee) one thing fixed


I still have oil on my jeans. [smiley=bigcry.gif]


----------



## shell (Feb 1, 2008)

Sowwi


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

found the problem yet shell? or you leaving it till after your hols now?


----------



## jay (Mar 17, 2009)

Does anyone have any figures from the liquid TT to compare against the dyno RR? Trying to establish here just how inaccurate on measuring the BHP/Torque liquid is...


----------



## shell (Feb 1, 2008)

leaving it till after the holiday

tried VAG.comon sunday but it wouldnt read my car, fine on Lee's bora though


----------



## p7 TTj (Feb 14, 2008)

Hi Everyone

Just wanted to report a coilpack went yesterday only a week after this event!

On the understanding they are normally faulty prior to going, does anyone know if this would have affected my results and graph?

I got a decent 205bhp and 237 lb-ft of torque from my remapped 180, but like everyone else id hoped for me. My graph had showed a huge drop in power at 5800 rpm which many people but down to the smaller turbo.

Could it simply have been a faulty coilpack?, wish it could go back on now.......but without the cost!!! :lol:

Thanks
Jon


----------



## les (Jul 24, 2006)

p7 TTj said:


> Hi Everyone
> 
> Just wanted to report a coilpack went yesterday only a week after this event!
> 
> ...


Sounds like your clutching at straws now Jon :roll: but at least you posted better results than most of us all things considered. :?


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

p7 TTj said:


> Hi Everyone
> 
> Just wanted to report a coilpack went yesterday only a week after this event!
> 
> ...


A weak spark will give you less power and the higher the air density, with the higher charge/boost, is more difficult for the spark to strike - so it's certainly possible.


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

Mines getting worse as the weak goes on. Had to really floor it to go passed a renault 205 today. 

Really need to get it sorted. MPG is crap as well.


----------



## shell (Feb 1, 2008)

Hark said:


> Mines getting worse as the weak goes on. Had to really floor it to go passed a renault 205 today.
> 
> Really need to get it sorted. MPG is crap as well.


Really.....would love to have seen that....especially as Renault never made a 205.....perhaps its not just your spelling thats WEAK eh mate!!!


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

shell said:


> Hark said:
> 
> 
> > Mines getting worse as the weak goes on. Had to really floor it to go passed a renault 205 today.
> ...


Peugeot ?  It was a piece of crap...does that help?


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

Hark said:


> shell said:
> 
> 
> > Hark said:
> ...


 :lol: :lol: :lol: No a peice of crap just throws up shitreon to me mate... oh wait there the same company anyway... ignore me... peice of crap is accurate description. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

shell said:


> Hark said:
> 
> 
> > Mines getting worse as the weak goes on. Had to really floor it to go passed a renault 205 today.
> ...


Quality pisstake [smiley=cheers.gif]


----------



## awesomeade (Jun 22, 2004)

Pictures/vids/graphs now online:
http://www.awesome-gti.co.uk/page.php?x ... 30609.html


----------



## swfblade (Apr 24, 2007)

HI Awesomeade, can you explain why the graphs for the TT's are so "Jaggy"? I want a better word, but I'm sure you know what I mean. :wink:


----------



## awesomeade (Jun 22, 2004)

We get the option to smooth them out but prefer them not smoothed to pick up on problems etc


----------



## swfblade (Apr 24, 2007)

ok, that explains why some are smooth, but I was more wondering why they are jagged in the first place? Just curious, as whenever I had RR's done in the past, the curves were always a lot smoother.


----------



## awesomeade (Jun 22, 2004)

its purely a software setting, all dynos will be reading similar results and the software just either automatically smooths the results out or has a manual option like ours and we choose not to auto smooth


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

awesomeade said:


> Pictures/vids/graphs now online:
> http://www.awesome-gti.co.uk/page.php?x ... 30609.html


EXCELLENT !!!! thanks very much ade, much appreciated


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

Ok guys... Quick fire here... (updated front page also)










here's everyones results in a table next to each other... they are in order of Fly BHP... but i think were going to have some serious talking points..... sould the conversion back to the wheels be effected by transmission wear... and does this mean mine is in good nick?? i'm finding it difficult to work out how a few people lower have more bhp at wheels but less at fly... although mine has got a brand new clutch in (well 2months old)

whats everyone think? i'm sure this will be a [smiley=gossip.gif] point

Tony

EDIT: P.S can anyone who's details i've got wrong drop me a pm or reply on here and i'll ammend it... cheers...


----------



## seasurfer (Apr 10, 2009)

Hi Tony, ooooooooooh what is all that ?  Will be interested to hear you all decifer the table   I am still re-reading John-H post on the explanation of the graph 

Seasurfer


----------



## jammyd (Oct 11, 2008)

shell said:


> Hark said:
> 
> 
> > Mines getting worse as the weak goes on. Had to really floor it to go passed a renault 205 today.
> ...


WOuld this not be the 205?????????


----------



## swfblade (Apr 24, 2007)

awesomeade said:


> its purely a software setting, all dynos will be reading similar results and the software just either automatically smooths the results out or has a manual option like ours and we choose not to auto smooth


OK cool, I'm just wondering why the power is output in such a way, not questioning if your equipment is right!


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

swfblade said:


> OK cool, I'm just wondering why the power is output in such a way, not questioning if your equipment is right!


Think a few of us where hoping that it wasn't until the standard 180 got 181... that kinda upset a few peeps :lol: Regardless i'm happy with mine... just gotta run a vagcom and see what the difference is... i'd imagine doing cals from maf can't be accurate compared to the rollers...


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Pity nobody could do a Liquid whilst on the rolling road :?


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

i'm a noob and probably just this second blown my car up so just remove me from the list [smiley=bigcry.gif]


----------



## jay (Mar 17, 2009)

John-H said:


> Pity nobody could do a Liquid whilst on the rolling road :?


Agree here! It is possible though aint it?? Can you guys who attend the next meet try and make this happen?? Would be great to see how accurate it is..


----------



## seasurfer (Apr 10, 2009)

tony_rigby_uk said:


> i'm a noob and probably just this second blown my car up so just remove me from the list [smiley=bigcry.gif][/quote
> 
> Oh No, whats happened?
> 
> Seasurfer


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

http://www.********.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=145388

seems like i've sorted it... fingers crossed but it aint done the gearbox much good


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

http://www.********.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=145410

for all those who are toying with the remap... awsome now are running a great deal...


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

We'll be featuring the Awesome rolling road day in the coming issue of absoluTTe magazine which should provide some very interesting reading regarding explaining the results and on rolling roads in general. I'm just filling in a few gaps and wonder if some kind person could help?

Could someone please give the forum ID for the two missing people? Oh and if anybody spots a mistake please let me know. Thanks.

Surname.......Forum ID...........Model.....Spec........Colour
Underhill.......Stundies...........Coupe......225........Lake Silver
Hartford.......starski4578........Coupe......225........Lake Silver
Leung..........__________.......Coupe.......225.......Phantom Black
Rigby..........tony_rigby_uk.....Coupe.......225........Denim Blue
Goodall........Nem................Coupe.......225........Kingfisher Blue
Carey..........Tesiboo............Coupe.......225........Phantom Black
Handford......John-H.............Coupe.......225........Brilliant Black
Mason..........Hark...............Coupe.......225........Lake Silver
Wright........._________.........Coupe.......225........Lake Silver
Mellling.........Les................Coupe.......225........Raven Black
Hogan.........mark_hogan.......Coupe.......225........Amulet Red
Brayford........Shell..............Roadster.....225.......Murlin Purple
Davies......Mark Davies..........Coupe.......225........Misaro Red
Hitchen........Bigsyd............Coupe QS.....240........Misaro Red
Pendlebury....pendle7............Coupe........225........Lake Silver
Pitt.............P7JTT..............Coupe.......180........Lake Silver
McCartney.....IWEM............Roadster.......180........Olive Green
Powell.........Seasurfer...........Coupe........180........Lake Silver


----------



## shell (Feb 1, 2008)

John-H said:


> Brayford........Shell..............Roadster.....225.......M*u*rlin Purple


Without wanting to sound pedantic....its M*e*rlin Purple....well you did ask for mistakes!!

:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Lee


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

> 1. Richard (CLK and my brother in law) - confirmed 13th June 9.00am
> 2. tony_rigby_uk - confirmed for 13th June 9.20am
> 3. Mark_Hogan - confirmed for 13th June 9.40am
> 4. p7 TTj - confirmed for 13th June 10.00am
> ...


That was the original list john, perhaps with abit of work we can work out who the missing forum id's are...


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

sure sickboy's car is silver.. :?

and judging by this post



st3vieuk said:


> Hi Tony
> 
> It was nice talking to you - good to be able to share someone's knowledge like yours. I hope you managed to sort out that silver TT with VAG COM check....
> 
> ...


st3vieuk is the black TT... job sorted for ya john


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Marvelous Tony - thanks you're a star!


----------



## DAVECOV (Apr 23, 2009)

Mine was the last one of the day which you have forgot :?

As seen on this link

http://www.awesome-gti.co.uk/page.php?x ... 30609.html


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Tesiboo said:


> Mine was the last one of the day which you have forgot :?
> 
> As seen on this link
> 
> http://www.awesome-gti.co.uk/page.php?x ... 30609.html


I think I got you didn't I?

Carey..........Tesiboo............Coupe.......225........Phantom Black


----------



## DAVECOV (Apr 23, 2009)

No Worries ...I was refering to the list Tony put up


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

Tesiboo said:


> No Worries ...I was refering to the list Tony put up


LOL the list was for how it was booked for the day (although the times were way out).... which obviously means you were a late addition on the day :lol: :lol: no offence intended matey


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

And there is now a new 2010 ROlling road day...

6th Novemeber... http://www.********.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=181098


----------



## Nem (Feb 14, 2005)

Nice one Tony!

Was trying to find my results from last time to compare when I run again next week


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

Nem said:


> Nice one Tony!
> 
> Was trying to find my results from last time to compare when I run again next week


I aim to please must admit it took a couple of searches to find it LOL


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

I would have thought you'd have remembered this :roll: 

Rolling_road_A20


----------



## tony_rigby_uk (Nov 27, 2008)

I do Remember the Feature John, and it's also still in awesomes waiting area. !! :lol:


----------

