B8 S4 - more than 333 stock hp

[SoCalS4Avant]

Autoblog Article. Thanks to the guys at APR!

Discuss.

[adbender]

Here is an E92 M3 stock dyno without and with an aftermarket exhaust.

an impressive comparison...you do the math!



"The numbers achieved were very impressive indeed: the M3, equipped with the factory exhaust system, achieved 351 wheel horsepower, a very realistic number when considering the car’s 400 crank horsepower rating, and the repeated runs that corroborated this number. This M3, when tested with the Eisenmann system only an hour and a half later, produced 364hp at peak- a 13hp gain! Even more interestingly, 100rpm earlier, at 7900 RPM, the Eisenmann system produced 363hp, while the factory system only allowed the car to produce 348hp- a 15hp gain!"

[NWS4Guy]

Ugh, then the mud slinging and trash talk starts in the comments:

"what kind of dyno was used, that matters!!"

"Quote someone trustworthy not a tuner"

Makes me wish we could keep these things in the community who actually cares about it. Not to mention the headaches this will likely cause Keith, Arin and company. No on bothers to think what would APR gain from saying the car is stronger than Audi reports in stock form?

[SoCalS4Avant]

^ You've got that right. I cross posted this on the B6/B7 S4 chatterbox, and someone was complaining that APR probably fixed the numbers.

Geesh. How about being happy that our cars can perform out of the box pretty damn well, and be excited about what it can do with a little modification.

[NWS4Guy]

Sadly, I doubt that will happen very often, due to human nature

** edit - after reading your post over there, I had to comment on it :)

[SoCalS4Avant]

I'm glad you did. You made an excellent point.

+1 rep for you.

[Saracen]

The trolls can trash AB's %20 drivetrain loss estimation, but that's about it.

Either way, the S4 clearly puts down quite a bit more than the claimed 333hp. Even giving it a broad range of 360-400bhp means it is seriously good bang for the buck.

[Keith@APR]

^ You've got that right. I cross posted this on the B6/B7 S4 chatterbox, and someone was complaining that APR probably fixed the numbers.

Geesh. How about being happy that our cars can perform out of the box pretty damn well, and be excited about what it can do with a little modification.

Yup! We fixed the numbers because we are positive noone else in the world will ever dyno a stock S4.

[04Ultrasprt]

Yup! We fixed the numbers because we are positive noone else in the world will ever dyno a stock S4.

haha, anyone who thought this out would realize that it would only hurt you to inflate the numbers as your company profits by increasing those number through performance parts, and the lower it starts the more room you have to profit.

[SoCalS4Avant]

Yup! We fixed the numbers because we are positive noone else in the world will ever dyno a stock S4.

Seriously! I love you guys, and no one can call me a homer for your products. I think you're doing great work - and I'd say that of a lot of your competitors as well. Keep it up.

What's the deal with the second thread on this topic! I guess it's that important to discuss twice!

[Keith@APR]

Seriously! I love you guys, and no one can call me a homer for your products. I think you're doing great work - and I'd say that of a lot of your competitors as well. Keep it up.

What's the deal with the second thread on this topic! I guess it's that important to discuss twice!

Thanks man!

Maybe Ant will merge them for us?

[L0U]

The sportec kit claims 430hp as well, but the acceleration times for 1/4 mile and 0 to 60 did not improve by much at all....nothing like mtms claims. There were actually questions raised as to why the sportec, putting out 430hp was so slow as compared to the mtm. This is more evidence of the stocker putting out 380ish hp and the 50 extra did less to improve the times. 13.2 is pretty consistant for the stock machine, which is fast for 3950lbs. A 100hp extra would be low 12's which we have not seen yet. I have yet to see sub 13 so far online.

[Arin@APR]

Why would we fix the stock numbers HIGH?

LOL!

[riegeraudi]

Because you guys are great guys and with only a 50hp boost the tune will go for $250.

[Keith@APR]

Because you guys are great guys and with only a 50hp boost the tune will go for $250.

Thank you! That made me laugh. I needed that.

[NWS4Guy]

The sportec kit claims 430hp as well, but the acceleration times for 1/4 mile and 0 to 60 did not improve by much at all....nothing like mtms claims. There were actually questions raised as to why the sportec, putting out 430hp was so slow as compared to the mtm. This is more evidence of the stocker putting out 380ish hp and the 50 extra did less to improve the times. 13.2 is pretty consistant for the stock machine, which is fast for 3950lbs. A 100hp extra would be low 12's which we have not seen yet. I have yet to see sub 13 so far online.

Very good and valid point that lends further weight to the fact that the stock numbers are very underrated. If someone actually put in another 100HP (close to 25% HP increase) why the HELL would the 0-60 and 1/4 mile not increase a lot more?

[leviathan18]

i see no reason, why apr should lie about the stock power, when they tune the car and it makes the 430 MTM is making they still can market it as 100hp gain from the audi numbers.

Or they can show stock wheel HP as they did now and show the gain the reflash did which i guess its going to be near what MTM got from the S4.

thats why i love when companies show the before reflash and after reflash and you can see for yourself.

wish you luck guys this year at the koni challenge with the S4 and with the GTIs

hope to see soon some stage III B8 2.0tsi and some 1.8tsi love

[Arin@APR]

Here's another tid bit of info. The B8 A4 2.0T FSI quattro tiptronic put down very close to what Audi advertises at the crank, AT ALL 4 WHEELS. It only took us about a 10% drivetrain loss to get back to what audi rated. So when you look at our gains, they look small compared to what the european tuners are reporting. Funny thing is, many european tuners are simply quoting what they measured + their drivetrain loss guesses and laying it over top of audi's advertised numbers. Because if this, it makes it looks like they are making almost double what we and other US tuners are making.


Basically some tuners are over estimating crank gains on top of audi's underrated crank figures. Because of this, the power difference is falsely increased!

[Keith@APR]

stock weight is 3830 with half a tank of gas.

[sakimano]

13.2 is pretty consistant for the stock machine, which is fast for 3950lbs. A 100hp extra would be low 12's which we have not seen yet. I have yet to see sub 13 so far online.

ehh...not necessarily. 1/4 mile is a tough test for these AWD 3850 lb cars.

A B6/7 S4 is 340hp stock...and when supercharged produces about 500hp and 380-400whp. It will murder a Modena on the road, or any RS4/M3 etc...but in the 1/4 mile they struggle to get into the 12s (vs. 13.8 ish stock). Fighting an AWD launch bog and the inertia of 3850 lbs is difficult to say the least.

You can't hang your hat on the success or failure of a product/tune for these cars based on 1/4 mile times, as it's kind of a stacked deck against Audi. Nor can you assume big instant 1320 gains based on expected XX hp pickup. It's just not as simple.

[samtimtom]

This is making the new 3.0 TFSI A6 Avant look VERRRRY appealing.

[sakimano]

Yup! We fixed the numbers because we are positive noone else in the world will ever dyno a stock S4.

I think your B8 A4 numbers dynoing way higher than factory claimed might contribute to that...i.e. has anyone else dyno'd the B8 A4 2.0T way over factory when counting a 20-22% drivetrain loss? Or was it just APR? And where is this magic dyno!

[Keith@APR]

I think your B8 A4 numbers dynoing way higher than factory claimed might contribute to that...i.e. has anyone else dyno'd the B8 A4 2.0T way over factory when counting a 20-22% drivetrain loss? Or was it just APR? And where is this magic dyno!

I'm sorry, I don't follow.

[NWS4Guy]

I'm sorry, I don't follow.

I think he is trying to say:

Since you also dyno'd an A4 which showed higher than what is expected for what Audi claims, coupled with the higher than expected run of the S4 - proves your Dyno is broken.

I don't agree with that statement, just trying to translate.

[Keith@APR]

I think he is trying to say:



I don't agree with that statement, just trying to translate.

What B8 A4 dyno of our's shows higher than Audi's claims?

[Arin@APR]

This is making the new 3.0 TFSI A6 Avant look VERRRRY appealing.

Very. It's fast right from the factory with loads of torque right off the line. :)

[edit] I just noticed you said A6 and not S4... that being said, I've been behind the wheel of the new A6 3.0 TFSI and I have to say, for as big of a car as it is, it felt pretty good. :)

[L0U]

I think your B8 A4 numbers dynoing way higher than factory claimed might contribute to that...i.e. has anyone else dyno'd the B8 A4 2.0T way over factory when counting a 20-22% drivetrain loss? Or was it just APR? And where is this magic dyno!

well 100km is all I could take, it is broken in!....borrowed some test gear from the motor heads at opg.

g-tech pro is calling mine 317hp at 5500rpm at the wheel, so 130hp better than my A3 and the i-pod version is 313hp at 5500rpm. My car is tight, broken-in it will push 325, I didn't want to rev the new beast past 5500 with so little kms on it. My first tank is showing a stellar 12.8 mpg, but it is trending up! I'd put money on a mustang dyno pushing 305 on a car with 5000km on it. They are as conservative as it gets. My stiff o meter was showing 315hp on the sun dial. So it is settled.

the dynojet shows more hp than aprs numbers on the 2.0 litre.

[NWS4Guy]

What B8 A4 dyno of our's shows higher than Audi's claims?

This quote from Arin farther up this thread stating that you guys got roughly the same numbers are the wheels that Audi claimed from the crank on a B8 A4

Here's another tid bit of info. The B8 A4 2.0T FSI quattro tiptronic put down very close to what Audi advertises at the crank, AT ALL 4 WHEELS. It only took us about a 10% drivetrain loss to get back to what audi rated. So when you look at our gains, they look small compared to what the european tuners are reporting. Funny thing is, many european tuners are simply quoting what they measured + their drivetrain loss guesses and laying it over top of audi's advertised numbers. Because if this, it makes it looks like they are making almost double what we and other US tuners are making.


Basically some tuners are over estimating crank gains on top of audi's underrated crank figures. Because of this, the power difference is falsely increased!

[Arin@APR]

This quote from Arin farther up this thread stating that you guys got roughly the same numbers are the wheels that Audi claimed from the crank on a B8 A4

We did not get the same as what Audi rates at the crank with the A4. It was still over 20 hp less IIRC, but it didn't take 20-25% DTL to get back to their advertised numbers! That was the point of my post. From what we have seen, it appears these two engines have come from the factory with power claims undererated. Some tuners are taking these unerrated figures as fact when comparing their over estimated tuned crank figures. Doing so widens the gap for their supposed 'Gain'.

I hope by showing you SAE correced figures, Uncorrected figures and 6 run averages of each we can better paint a good and accurate picture of what you can really expect in terms of gains from this engine once it's safely tuned.

Also, for what it's worth, I'm sure Audi has to base their numbers on 91 octane in the US and our figures were met using 93 octane. I believe our A4 stock figures were also recorded in the winter months when the B8 A4's first started hitting the states. :)

[NWS4Guy]

I totally understand what you are saying Arin, I was just trying to reference why sakimano is saying he thinks your Dyno is off.

[Keith@APR]

I totally understand what you are saying Arin, I was just trying to reference why sakimano is saying he thinks your Dyno is off.

Arin should have quoted Sak. Thanks for helping us understand what he meant.

Arin was on a "wtf b8 a4 dyno graph internet assassination" mission for the last while since Sak posted that.

[Arin@APR]

Arin was on a "wtf b8 a4 dyno graph internet assassination" mission for the last while since Sak posted that.

I'll refrain from posting what I found... the universe may explode.

[NWS4Guy]

I'll refrain from posting what I found... the universe may explode.

LOL nice :) I get what you guys are saying and agree.

I think Sak saw "well you have 2 cars lately which are showing a lot more power at the wheels stock than what OEM claims, so it must be a bad Dyno."

I'm more of the persuasion of "let me see someone prove otherwise with a dyno of thier B8 S4. L0U up a few posts here in this thread (which might have been lost in all the chatter) said he took his and Dyno'd it in Canada somewhere and only brought it up to 5500RPM and it's showing 317 at the wheels before getting to peak HP range, not to mention it's not really loose yet :)

[Nvius]

LOL nice :) I get what you guys are saying and agree.

I think Sak saw "well you have 2 cars lately which are showing a lot more power at the wheels stock than what OEM claims, so it must be a bad Dyno."

I'm more of the persuasion of "let me see someone prove otherwise with a dyno of thier B8 S4. L0U up a few posts here in this thread (which might have been lost in all the chatter) said he took his and Dyno'd it in Canada somewhere and only brought it up to 5500RPM and it's showing 317 at the wheels before getting to peak HP range, not to mention it's not really loose yet :)

Nor did he list the octane. I'm hoping he used 91, which would make Lou's data seem consistent with APR's results. What's the highest octane you guys got up there anyway?

[L0U]

I borrowed one of these. They are actually a pretty nice unit if set up right. acceleration is measured via an accelerometer, and knowing the mass, I used 4000lbs, it can calculate hp/torque. It knows the rpm via the cigareet lighter voltage. Ipod has an application that uses its internal accelerometer to do pretty much the same thing.
I was on 91 shell premium gas. It is the business for hp gas in Canada.
http://www.gtechpro.com/ss.html#

[Nickyracer]

The maximum power of S4 B8 is 333 hp on 95 octane (sorry, US and European octane numbers are measured differently). But in Russia and Germany there's 98 octane available, "Premium SuperPlus". Guess, it's US's 91 and 93 respectively.
As I've known, filling a tank of 98 instead of 95 can provide a 5% gain. 333+5%=350 hp. MTM claims 430 hp ONLY for 98 octane. It means just 80 hp gain over stock power figures, which is also impressive, but not as much as nearly 100 hp.

By the way, everyone here have probably seen the famous video of MTM-chipped S4 S-tronic which beaten M3 E92 from 30 mph up to 160 mph.
One fellow in Russia raced his stock S4 S-tronic against M3 E92 with DKT transmission. When they started from 30 mph, M3 beaten him at 60 mph. When they started from complete stop, M3 beaten S4 at 110 mph - got away from S4 very fast (much faster at that speed he said).
It looks nothing like those video, where S4 dominates over M3 up to 160 mph (and they were racing roll-on from 30-40 mph, from a complete stop S4 would beat M3 even more).
What I mean - it merely looks that MTM's chip gives more than 50 hp - it's about 80-100 hp can make such an advantage before M3, not just lsmall amount 50 hp.

One more thing, is new A6's V6T, which is 290 hp, also underrated? I believe it's got the same engine as S4 B8, with slightly electronically decreased output in order not to compete with Audi's 4,2 V8.

[BLACKa4QUAT]

One more thing, is new A6's V6T, which is 290 hp, also underrated? I believe it's got the same engine as S4 B8, with slightly electronically decreased output in order not to compete with Audi's 4,2 V8.

i do believe the only difference between the b8 s4's supercharged v6 and the a6's is all in the software. so with a chip they'd have the same output

[vjma]

Very. It's fast right from the factory with loads of torque right off the line. :)

[edit] I just noticed you said A6 and not S4... that being said, I've been behind the wheel of the new A6 3.0 TFSI and I have to say, for as big of a car as it is, it felt pretty good. :)

This was what I thought when I ordered my S4. They didn't have any test car so I asked for the A6 just to get a feel for the engine (I know it's tuned down). It's much better than what I expected and therefore I went ahead and ordered the S4

[Infra]

I think Sak saw "well you have 2 cars lately which are showing a lot more power at the wheels stock than what OEM claims, so it must be a bad Dyno."

This is a logical fallacy, namely affirming the consequent. P implies Q therefore Q implies P.

If your dyno is broken then your HP readings are high. Your horsepower readings are high, therefore your dyno is broken.

What is reasonable is to have doubt about it being 100% accurate, but if all the pre and post tuning is done on the same dyno, it doesn't matter if it was reading 100 HP stock. It would still be the same % gain - which, if I understand correctly, is APR's point of view.

[L0U]

This is a logical fallacy, namely affirming the consequent. P implies Q therefore Q implies P.

If your dyno is broken then your HP readings are high. Your horsepower readings are high, therefore your dyno is broken.

What is reasonable is to have doubt about it being 100% accurate, but if all the pre and post tuning is done on the same dyno, it doesn't matter if it was reading 100 HP stock. It would still be the same % gain - which, if I understand correctly, is APR's point of view.

And the same dyno showing a B7 s4 with 270 doesn't appear to be "reading high"