1/4 mile times

[doublespeeded]

Apparently what ive been told is that the GEN III incl Skodas and Golfs etc... has a ''Direct investion, instead of port'.. and they have a 'closed-deck Manifold)

So..........


, if this is the case...

then APR & REVO have added the IS38ETR to the 2.0 TSI; intercooler+pipes, HIflow cat & exhaust.... With stock internals) achieving 510ps (375KW)... (not sure what fuel)

but regardless... a performance of 0-60mph in 3.2 sec (opposed to stock 4.9 sec) Golfs R, Superbs, Octavias... that's almost unbelievable for a 4cyl and mind blowing.

Can't help and deny the fact; it leaves us EA888 Gen II 2.0T TFSI folk thinking 'What the f£$%?!' and short changed....


https://www.onlyrevo.com/product-det...5-/244/stage-3

As I said, apparently this Skoda Superb cracked the 10sec quarter mile with this particular REVO set up

[Spawne32]

We have "direct investion" as well, even the earlier FSI engines in the B7's do. I am fairly certain the reason the Gen 3's make more power is because VVT was carried over to the exhaust side and the cam profile was changed. It may have a more modern turbo as well.

[f_399]

Direct injection in vw/audi started with the first gen 2.0t’s back around 2005 with the b6 passat and Mk5 GTI


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

[A4x]

We have "direct investion" as well, even the earlier FSI engines in the B7's do. I am fairly certain the reason the Gen 3's make more power is because VVT was carried over to the exhaust side and the cam profile was changed. It may have a more modern turbo as well.

This. Plus the exhaust manifold pointed out by earhythmic in the last page, plus the upgraded/bigger turbo.

The gen 3 engine is a completely different beast than what we have in North America on our B8/B8.5 A4s.

[Brandon K.]

I as at my APR dealer yesterday having my steering repaired. The shop has a friend/custom that ran 11.40 in a mk7 4 motion 1.8T wagon...

Apparently it is some sort of record, especially for the mk 7 1.8T. They went back last weekend to duplicate it but ran lean for a brief moment and melted one of the piston. They already had sourced a new block and about had the motor back together. That motor is smaller than ours and the 1.8s don’t even have the variable exhaust timing.

I know our cars are heavy pigs, but WTF one a few of our B8s have been able to brake into the 12s. You can pick up a low mileage version of our cars all day long for less than 17k. These things are prime for moding but the aftermarket has left them to languish.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

[JLAllroad]

The 1.8T has a 5 valve head (overkill for stock) but breathes at higher rpms...most BT tuners run these over 7k rpms making for big HP #s but very little action below 4k rpms and not great on the street outside of the powerband.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

[doublespeeded]

We have "direct investion" as well, even the earlier FSI engines in the B7's do. I am fairly certain the reason the Gen 3's make more power is because VVT was carried over to the exhaust side and the cam profile was changed. It may have a more modern turbo as well.

Easy bro... typo and wasn't caught by the spell check for some reason.

This. Plus the exhaust manifold pointed out by earhythmic in the last page, plus the upgraded/bigger turbo.

The gen 3 engine is a completely different beast than what we have in North America on our B8/B8.5 A4s.

Ok, so exhaust manifold, cam profile, VVT differences & better turbo... is enough or justifies the fact that the Gen 3 (with an even LARGER turbo) Stage 3 - can be pushed to 372KW / 500hp @ Crank/flywheel?!... when a (slightly) bigger turbo on a Gen 2 - Stage 3 - (the KO4) can only be pushed to 264KW / 354hp @ Crank???? really?

I mean look at the differences there; (108KW / 144hp)
Not that im really Turbo-literate ... I assume the IS38 is larger than the K04... but why hasn't anyone (including Custom tuners) tried that?

I really wish a REVO, APR, GIAC and someone that's a custom tuner/workshop can comment on this, because I don't recall any of them freely wanting to comment on it.

[A4x]

With E85 the gen 2 engine is at like 380 HP crank.

Yes, improved fueling, bigger turbo, better intake and exhaust variable timing systems, improved overall engine air flow among other improvements will get you to 500 hp. There is like 8-10 years of development work in between these 2 engine classes.

Maybe start a dedicated thread to compare the engine technology in detail, instead of clouding up this one?

[Perry01]

Ok, so exhaust manifold, cam profile, VVT differences & better turbo... is enough or justifies the fact that the Gen 3 (with an even LARGER turbo) Stage 3 - can be pushed to 372KW / 500hp @ Crank/flywheel?!... when a (slightly) bigger turbo on a Gen 2 - Stage 3 - (the KO4) can only be pushed to 264KW / 354hp @ Crank???? really?

Regardless of the generation of motor, upgraded internals are needed to reach 500 HP. Anyway, there are bolt on big turbo kits out there that can produce over 500 HP on a Gen 2 motor.

https://www.performancebyie.com/inte...for-mk6-golf-r

[Spawne32]

I have no doubt that there is probably an easy turbo option to put these cars at 350-400 to the wheels with needing major modifications. the reason we dont see it is what i think is a number of factors, one being this is a dead platform, and has been dead from the get go, its prone to failure for many other reasons unrelated to performance, once they break nobody keeps them so the retention rate is low, and the tuning issues as well as other issues with electronics make it a waste of money for companies to invest in real R&D to produce a cheap turbo option bigger then the K04. Reason the K04 is still around as a cheap upgrade for us is because its based on an OEM setup, its ridiculously cheap to assemble a hybrid K04 (from a business end) and it still has a pretty large profit margin for most companies. Especially since we know that alot of them are sourcing parts from china and that the turbo fully assembled probably only costs most of these companies 4-600 bucks and then sold for 1000 dollars higher.

[hyperunion]

The 1.8T has a 5 valve head (overkill for stock) but breathes at higher rpms...most BT tuners run these over 7k rpms making for big HP #s but very little action below 4k rpms and not great on the street outside of the powerband.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

Not the 1.8t he was talking about in that mk7 golf sport wagon that hit 11.4.. that's a 16 valve ea888 gen 3 1.8t.. pretty much the same design, but smaller and using the is12 turbo!.. the is38 bolts right on..

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[Brandon K.]

Not the 1.8t he was talking about in that mk7 golf sport wagon that hit 11.4.. that's a 16 valve ea888 gen 3 1.8t.. pretty much the same design, but smaller and using the is12 turbo!.. the is38 bolts right on..

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

His car had the turbo replaced with the IS38.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

[hyperunion]

His car had the turbo replaced with the IS38.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

Yep.. I Know.. why he hit that 11.4.. but then again he did melt a piston..

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[doublespeeded]

With E85 the gen 2 engine is at like 380 HP crank.

Yes, improved fueling, bigger turbo, better intake and exhaust variable timing systems, improved overall engine air flow among other improvements will get you to 500 hp. There is like 8-10 years of development work in between these 2 engine classes.

Maybe start a dedicated thread to compare the engine technology in detail, instead of clouding up this one?

apologies for clouding this thread.
I may start one; one day... after/if I ever write and hear back from the tuners.
in a way, quarter mile times is relevant to the motors we have and the restrictions it poses.

I have no doubt that there is probably an easy turbo option to put these cars at 350-400 to the wheels with needing major modifications. the reason we dont see it is what i think is a number of factors, one being this is a dead platform, and has been dead from the get go, its prone to failure for many other reasons unrelated to performance, once they break nobody keeps them so the retention rate is low, and the tuning issues as well as other issues with electronics make it a waste of money for companies to invest in real R&D to produce a cheap turbo option bigger then the K04. Reason the K04 is still around as a cheap upgrade for us is because its based on an OEM setup, its ridiculously cheap to assemble a hybrid K04 (from a business end) and it still has a pretty large profit margin for most companies. Especially since we know that alot of them are sourcing parts from china and that the turbo fully assembled probably only costs most of these companies 4-600 bucks and then sold for 1000 dollars higher.

I think your post makes perfect sense Spawne.
yeah, the Gen 2 probably had a bad reputation due to issues such as oil consumption, Timing chain tensioner etc... it was only a brief period.. 2012 - 2013 (I assume even up to 2014 in North America)... was when the oil consumption was fixed on the gen 2... and then 2013 or 2014... the Gen 3 wast introduced, and still used to this day. I also assume that the A4..somewhat a non-performance Audi range... the market isn't in high demand for more products from tuners. compared to say, S4, S3, VW Golfs etc...

spawne, is yours running a Ko4?

[base14]

2013 allroad APR stage 1 E85, summer tires, all else stock. AMAX fa sho engaged. Not too shabby for just a tune and fuel change!
Estimated via PocketDyno+.
Ambient temp 70 degrees
0-60 - ~4.5 sec
1/4 mile 12.92 sec @ 109.01 mph and 13.14 @ 105.16 mph




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[muffinman92]

According to that you would have by far the fastest Allroad recorded. The best 0-60 I got on Stage 2 E85 APR was 4.54. I think the best 1/4 for a Stage 2 Allroad was 13.1/13.2.

[base14]

No doubt that it’s not 100% accurate because that app uses the iPhone’s g meter to measure, and not gps. But it sure as hell feels fast .


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

[Jake@JHM]

No doubt that it’s not 100% accurate because that app uses the iPhone’s g meter to measure, and not gps. But it sure as hell feels fast .


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

https://jhmotorsports.com/dragy-gps-...-and-more.html

[Perry01]

https://jhmotorsports.com/dragy-gps-...-and-more.html

Any acceleration meter using a mobile phone is rubbish. I bought a Dragy from JHM. It has proven to be very accurate.

[A4x]

Any acceleration meter using a mobile phone is rubbish. I bought a Dragy from JHM. It has proven to be very accurate.

What kind of times are you putting up?

These Allroads are kicking ass with that gear ratio advantage

[earhythmic]

Hot damn that’s fast on a stage 1! My quickest stage 2 was 13.2. That was before I learned to launch tho.

[Spawne32]

apologies for clouding this thread.
I may start one; one day... after/if I ever write and hear back from the tuners.
in a way, quarter mile times is relevant to the motors we have and the restrictions it poses.





I think your post makes perfect sense Spawne.
yeah, the Gen 2 probably had a bad reputation due to issues such as oil consumption, Timing chain tensioner etc... it was only a brief period.. 2012 - 2013 (I assume even up to 2014 in North America)... was when the oil consumption was fixed on the gen 2... and then 2013 or 2014... the Gen 3 wast introduced, and still used to this day. I also assume that the A4..somewhat a non-performance Audi range... the market isn't in high demand for more products from tuners. compared to say, S4, S3, VW Golfs etc...

spawne, is yours running a Ko4?

No K04 yet, running the K03 balls to the wall until it explodes.

[Perry01]

What kind of times are you putting up?

Keep in mind that I have the K04 in a 4200 lb. (SUV) Q5 that rides pretty high and in stock trim 0-60 is ~ 8 seconds.

The Dragy device does not include a one foot rollout like the VBOX does and most magazines use. A one foot rollout shaves around 3 tenths of a second off of an average 0-60 time. With a full tank of 91 octane gas I recorded a 4.8 second 0-60 time using the Dragy device. This is more than 3 seconds faster than stock and if you factor in a one foot rollout it would be less than 4.6 seconds. I’m still working on the launch and with some weight reduction and an ethanol blend, I think I can shave off even more time.

[Perry01]

As a comparison, my 2.0T Q5 is quicker than a stock SQ5 or a twin turbo 3.0 V6 Porsche Macan GTS.

[earhythmic]

^^^Does the 1 foot rollout include 0-60mph time? Every track I’ve been to doesn’t measure that, only 60 FOOT time, which the 1’ rollout benefits. Isn’t 0-60mph is what it is so dragy results would be pretty accurate?

I’m only being half facetious.

[Perry01]

Dragy support says they will include a one foot rollout option for 0-60 speed measurement in a future update. They currently incorporate it in the quarter-mile time (NHRA rules).

Info on one foot rollout.

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...nce-of-rollout

https://racelogic.support/02VBOX_Mot...e_Foot_Rollout

[earhythmic]

I understand rollout in a 1/4 mile setting. Just 0-60 mph I’d think roll out has zero bearing. But if you what you say is true, my best dragy 0-60 mph is 3.8s, so that would meeeeaaannn 😏

[Perry01]

I understand rollout in a 1/4 mile setting. Just 0-60 mph I’d think roll out has zero bearing. But if you what you say is true, my best dragy 0-60 mph is 3.8s, so that would meeeeaaannn 😏

Well either way, it’s what Car and Driver, Motor Trend, Road & Track etc. use for their 0-60 measurement. So if you are going to compare your vehicle’s 0-60 time, it’s good to compare apples to apples.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cul...-2-28-seconds/

[AllroadCorbin]

Screw this b8 stuff. Revo stuffed an IS38 in the new b9 and ran an 11.9 on beta software. Anybody wanna buy my Allroad?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Perry01]

Screw this b8 stuff. Revo stuffed an IS38 in the new b9 and ran an 11.9 on beta software. Anybody wanna buy my Allroad?

The EA888 Gen 3 motor is very mod friendly and performs great.

[earhythmic]

A run from last week. POV shot of P3 gauge and instrument cluster during launch. Slow day though, DA was around 2000', strong headwind, and full tank of 91 because I wasn't planning on going to track.

[Spawne32]

12.6 @ 106 not bad on 91 octane, you have a 8spd allroad though? That would make a 6spd sedan probably in the low 13's.

[earhythmic]

12.6 @ 106 not bad on 91 octane, you have a 8spd allroad though? That would make a 6spd sedan probably in the low 13's.

Indeed. Best run of the night was 12.50 as it started getting cooler. Problem is my dial in time was 12.55 so I broke out

[hyperunion]

Screw this b8 stuff. Revo stuffed an IS38 in the new b9 and ran an 11.9 on beta software. Anybody wanna buy my Allroad?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the dsg and fwd based Quattro ultra on the allroad can handle the torque...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[hyperunion]

Screw this b8 stuff. Revo stuffed an IS38 in the new b9 and ran an 11.9 on beta software. Anybody wanna buy my Allroad?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But yeah it's about time.. such easy power on the gen3 motor!!!. Especially with the s3/r turbo!!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[AllroadCorbin]

If the dsg and fwd based Quattro ultra on the allroad can handle the torque...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

The dq381 is the same one in the RS3 that’s holding like 500 wheel torque with software. There’s nothing the 2.0 can toss at it that it won’t handle luckily


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hyperunion]

The dq381 is the same one in the RS3 that’s holding like 500 wheel torque with software. There’s nothing the 2.0 can toss at it that it won’t handle luckily


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is it really the same dsg as the b9 a4???. Ultra Quattro drivetrain on the allroad had a 380tq maximum!..

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[AllroadCorbin]

Is it really the same dsg as the b9 a4???. Ultra Quattro drivetrain on the allroad had a 380tq maximum!..

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Yep. Stage 1 b9 Allroads are doing 380 ft/lbs at the wheels on 91 octane on the dumbed down APR plus files. That’s well over 400 ft/lb further up the drivetrain. There could be different clutch packs involved but dsgs hold significantly more torque safely with simple software updates to adjust clamping force. Idk where you read the drivetrain has a max limit of 380 ft/lbs but if that’s the case it’s probably just the known/ set max limit of the ecu that gets adjusted during the process of any software. People have been shoving crazy amounts of twist through the crappier and weaker dq250 found in the mk7 and 2015-2017 S3.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[muffinman92]

Indeed. Best run of the night was 12.50 as it started getting cooler. Problem is my dial in time was 12.55 so I broke out

Jesus! My best 0-60 according to the P3 has been 4.15s. We have almost exactly the same engine set up beside the harmonic balancer. Maybe my RS5 wheels are weighing me down too much?

[Perry01]

Jesus! My best 0-60 according to the P3 has been 4.15s. We have almost exactly the same engine set up beside the harmonic balancer. Maybe my RS5 wheels are weighing me down too much?

Don’t put too much faith in 0-60 readings from Torque, P3 and other gauges that measure velocity data out of the car's computer. They are not very accurate.