RS3 8V: One step at a time

Start a topic to show off your car or keep us updated on your journey
User avatar
fagin
1st Gear
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by fagin » Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:38 pm

MikeFish wrote:A set of Michelins would definitely help you put that power down. Whilst I know you might not want to do that yet it could help find out what the real potential of the stage 1 mods. I think we have already established that the pirellis are counter acting against a lot of the power here as they have reached their limit of grip (arguably they were already out of their depth with standard power).
It is certainly a possibility that different tyres will help mechanical grip, however, at this stage I'm more inclined to try a better track prep day at Santa Pod initially. This should, I hope, answer a few questions around grip. Dependant upon how that pans out, I can then hopefully make an informed decision moving this forward. :)

User avatar
fagin
1st Gear
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by fagin » Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:24 am

Engine Stage 2 Development
Put simply this is going to be about testing an upgraded intercooler and also a map adjustment to suit.

Upgraded Intercooler
Whilst I didn’t labour this point as part of the Stage 1 write up, it was apparent that increasing charge temps on the dyno were a bit of an issue.

On the stock map the intercooler was “ok” but once we pushed the boost levels up, charge temps were increasing. This was even more evident when back to back runs were completed, which when you’re mapping can be fairly unavoidable.

A dyno cell is a very harsh environment…. Even the ones that have very good airflow. Whilst I’m adamant that you’ll see better airflow on the road, the results measured on a dyno are fairly indicative as to what happens to charge temps on repeated road pulls, or even single pulls when ambient temps are high. This issue is further amplified when you start to increase power.

Whilst there are a number of intercoolers available for the RS3 8V I decided to plumb for the one from Forge. Most of us know of Forge and their products always appear to get decent reviews and their prices are reasonable in my opinion.

To better gauge before and after results directly without any changes to the setup, it was decided to remove the front bumper and replace as much as possible (in readiness for the Forge intercooler), but whilst still retaining the stock cooler. Then run on the dyno and swap out the intercooler in situ and run again.

First off the bumper was removed to show the stock intercooler setup:

Image

The large alloy frame above the stock intercooler is the standard crash bar. The stock intercooler is below and to the left and right of this are the oil, and I’m pretty sure a transmission cooler. Plenty of coolers on these cars!

Next up was to remove the OEM crash bar and replace it with the new revised Forge version. For clarity this is actually an OEM crash bar that’s been modified. Modified? Well it needs to be to enable the larger Forge intercooler to be fitted. You’ll see this further on.

Image

The space between the stock intercooler and the new crash bar gives you an immediate indication how much taller the new Forge intercooler will be.

Some other intercoolers available are getting on for double height. Whether or not this actually makes any discernible difference to cooling ability I don’t know. Personally I think it’s predominantly about the quality of the core (which you can’t see). Surface size isn’t everything in my opinion.

At the end of the day manufacturers quote all kinds of figures about dimensions, airflow, pressure drop. All I want to know is “Does this intercooler work better and how much better?”.

So with the stock intercooler in place the car was strapped down on the dyno for some stock intercooler baseline runs:

Image

Once these were completed we fitted the new Forge unit:

Image

You can see how it nicely fills that void, up against the modified crash bar. Looks great as well all in black.

The new Forge intercooler is bigger than the stock item and here is a further image to show this in comparison:

Image

Car was then run on the dyno again…..

So let’s look at the differences in charge temps between stock and the Forge intercooler.

Stock Intercooler
Image

Run Number: 1st cool run (i.e. no significant heat soak - the best it can be I suspect for the ambients once the engine was up to temp)
Ambient Temp: 16.8degs
Charge Temp at Start of Run: 28degs
Charge Temp at End of Run: 44degs

Forge Intercooler
Image

Run Number: 3rd back to back run on the Forge unit
Ambient Temp: 17.5degs
Charge Temp at Start of Run: 27degs
Charge Temp at End of Run: 26degs

Pictures (with a few important stats) can speak a thousands words!

The Forge intercooler is so much more efficient over and above the stock item. Not only does it sustain the drop through 3-5k rpm, but it also maintains much lower temps at the top end of the run by a tangible amount (18degs lower). Couple this with the fact that the above Forge charge temp plot was taken from the THIRD back to back run, and the Stock charge temp plot was the first run on the stock cooler, it really does provide context to how much better the Forge item is.

If you look at the data further you can see that whilst the Forge drops the charge temp through the mid range, this was only 3.5degs over ambient! That’s bloody good by anyones standards.

It would appear that this Forge intercooler works well. Very well.

Power Increases?
Sorry to disappoint….. There were none (both runs compared above achieved 430bhp). Being honest I wasn’t expecting any increases just by putting the new intercooler on.

In my opinion unless your OEM cooler is so inefficient, just putting a new intercooler on won’t magically make more power over and above what you had before “just because”. What it will do is ensure that what you should have, you have more chance of maintaining on repeated high load runs (on a dyno, but more importantly on the road) and / or due to increasing outside ambient temps. It can also give you ability to run more boost / ignition, where otherwise you may have been limited due to high charge temps.

You may see “instant” increases in power if the dyno you have used does not have really good airflow in my opinion, or you have an amount of heatsoak (which is what the Forge tests on their website allude to). A dyno is a harsh environment and I do feel at times this harsh environment (with inadequate cooling / airflow) can show some increases with a new cooler as being smoke and mirrors, without any other changes being made. Sure, I have known other types of cars to benefit instantly from a change in cooler, but that has been due to how severely ineffective the stock item was.

A more efficient intercooler will enable you to maintain power for longer, but you can’t just take your previous power figure and just assume you can add power on to that just because of an upgraded intercooler.

Make no mistake this new Forge intercooler is much more efficient over and above the stock intercooler……. By a country mile.

Fitment
Every other intercooler upgrade I’ve had done you’ve had to cut this, shave that and alter this.

Thankfully the Forge unit is straightforward to fit with no cutting and shutting.

It was definitely straightforward for me because I stood there and watched someone else do it, but I suspect you get what I mean.

One of the things that needs to be done is all of the plastic and cowling / foam needs to be removed from the back of the front bumper. There are full instructions to tell you how, and this either pulls off and or unscrews. Easy!

Image

The only consideration is the number plate……

Whilst it’s not a major deal, if you wish to retain the OEM plate surround then that will have to be fixed to the grill from the rear of the grill by other means. Or you just fix the plate directly to the grill, but then you’ll have to screw it in rather than stick it.

One other option is to do this…….

Image

I think this looks so aggressive….. I stuck with this option.

Something else fitted was a set of lower boost silicon hoses from Forge. I have the upper hose set as well, but this will be fitted at a later date.

Image

Image

Image

Revised ECU Remap
This was one other area (apart from helping to sustain any power achieved) I was hoping that the new intercooler would pay dividends…..

One of the key elements that we couldn’t increase any more at Stage 1 was ignition (without the ECU retarding). Whether or not this was in part down to charge temps, we’d soon find out.

Litchfields wanted to try quite a few different things with this remap, so it was decided to leave the car with them.

This is where they ended up:

Image

Summary of Spec
MY16 RS3
Litchfield Stage 2 ECU calibration
Forge Intercooler
Miltek Secondary Decat Pipes
Fuel - VPower Nitro (99 oct)

Stage 2 TEST 1 figure achieved was 453.4bhp & 444.2lbft @ flywheel
Comparing this against Stage 1 TEST 3 figure we saw the following:
+19.8 bhp + 6.9lbft (peak) over Stage 1 TEST 3
+4.5% bhp +1.5% lbft (peak) over Stage 1 TEST 3

Overall Stage 2 TEST 1 comparison against stock
+65.4 bhp +94.2 lbft (peak)
+16.8% bhp +26.9% lbft (peak)

Stage 2 TEST 1 - Comments
It should never be about the peak figures, but it’s always nice to increase the top end again by around +20bhp!

The car actually made 457bhp on a few runs, but consistently made 453bhp. Just thought I’d mention that for bragging rights! lol

Whilst the peak boost levels were only adjusted slightly (running 1.5bar flat through the mid-range, tailing off to around 1.2bar at peak power), the results attained were very positive with work put into the ignition map and overall boost control benefiting from the new Forge intercooler now in place.

Iain (Litchfield) did say to me that he was very impressed with how the intercooler worked on the dyno. This car had a lot of runs…. Many of which were back to back, yet the intercooler provided stability to charge temps not seen before. You can see on the above run even at this level after a number of back to back runs, the charge temps are well in check. As a comparison during Stage 1 after 3-4 back to back runs the charge temps were over 60degs (virtually the same ambient temps as during Stage 2 as well!). That’s how well this Forge cooler is working.

One other key element that has now been delivered under Stage 2 is how much quicker the torque builds and lasts compared to Stage 1.

We’ll have to have a look at an overlay for that to become clearer:

Image

Whilst this graph is quite “busy” it shows Stage 2 vs Stage 1 vs Stock, if you look at the lowdown torque you’ll see that this is much better with Stage 2. Stage 2 gains around 200rpm earlier torque and around 200rpm extension to torque from over 5k. This ultimately makes the torque curve wider.

Lowdown you’re talking +40lbft between 1600 - 2500rpm.

Clearly there are BHP increases between Stage 1 & 2, but this is predominantly from 4k+, with the more significant gains from 5k+.

Because boost hasn’t really been increased through the mid-range, peak torque hasn’t really altered much from Stage 1, but it was felt that 1.5bar was ample through the mid range and the engine was happy with this.

As the torque is ramping up much quicker now early on, it’s quite difficult to control boost as it hits initial peak boost. That is why you see a very slight dip in the initial part of the torque curve, as this is to prevent any overboost. With a bit more time this could be further ironed out, but it’s a minor point in reality. I’m being overly anal.

Overall the curves are very smooth.

Just as a giggle I decided to overlay the dyno plot from my Litchfield Stage 2 A45 vs where the RS3 is currently:

Image

The blue lines are the A45. The red lines are the RS3.

This is a good example of peak figures not telling the whole story, as between the two cars the peak figures are nigh on identical….. But see how much better the RS3 power/torque is. So much smoother curves and like +100lbft of torque more lowdown. That’s pretty immense and my A45 wasn’t a slow car!

Stage 2 TEST 1 - Road
The car feels better now at the top end as it certainly pulls harder, more than the dyno figure differences appear to suggest in my opinion.

The torque comes in hard and fast down low…. It feels quite brutal. I never felt I was lacking for torque lowdown with Stage 1, but this just feels like it’s turned it up to No.11 now in comparison.

Regardless of these changes the car is smooth, responsive and very driveable….. Feels really nice on the road.

Whilst the Forge intercooler has helped increase power safely I also suspect that the added benefit of better managing charge temps on the road is also having an impact to how the car feels. Every time you floor it, it feels ballistic….... On each repeated full load run.

For me that’s Stage 2 done and dusted.

I intend to get back down the quarter mile again this coming weekend, to see if Stage 2 improves my times. My concern more than ever now is launch grip. We’ll see how that goes.

I’m not assuming I will better my last time….. The dragstrip is never that straight forward. It will be interesting and fun to try though!

In principle the context of Stage 3 has been agreed. If it pans out as expected, this will be exciting using a different approach to the tried and tested. ;)

Stage 3 will begin during November all being well…. So expect more news on this very soon!

asifg
3rd Gear
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 1:15 pm
Location: Milton Keynes

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by asifg » Sun Oct 16, 2016 12:22 pm

I love this thread!

Thanks again for taking the time out to document everything! Very interesting reading

User avatar
fagin
1st Gear
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by fagin » Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:36 pm

Engine Stage 2 Performance Testing
I managed to get back yesterday to Shakespeare Raceway and whilst the day didn’t entirely pan out as I had envisaged, I picked up some very positive performance data.

With poor track conditions, queues, bikes throwing their guts down the track and rain…. I effectively gave up after a couple of runs.

I’ll get this out of the way first….. I didn’t better my previous 11.80s ET. You’ll see further on it’s not always just about the ET for performance data comparisons.

I always knew I was going to struggle with grip off the start. I was struggling at Stage 1 and with Stage 2 we’re now producing more torque and faster. This was further amplified by the start line prep….. It was bad. Many other runners (including a few of my friends that turned up) on street tyres were struggling.

To make the situation even worse the organisers then decided to keep gluing the track up throughout the day. We saw them redress the surface 4 times. I suppose with the oil being thrown down by some bikes and cars, they had to do it after cleaning up.

Every time this happens for street tyres it adds drag which makes us slower (my speeds were dropping as were others, as the day progressed). I suspect this was due to all the bikes running yesterday, especially with the track surface temps being quite low as well.

There is nowt you can do though…. It is what it is.

Image

This was the best time achieved yesterday:

Image

Anyone that knows what they’re looking at may now think “Mmmm… that looks interesting!!”.

60ft
This is one of the key indicators of launch grip.

At Stage 1 when we achieved the 11.80s pass the 60ft was being seen in 1.80s. This run was showing a very poor 1.97s. That’s how bad the launch grip was.

From my past experience any reduction in the 60ft time will see at least the same reduction at the ET.

To get the ET achieved here, with that kind of 60ft is bloody good and alludes to how much more potential the car has in it’s ET times.

Some form of logic dictates that if grip had been sufficient to achieve a 1.80s 60ft, the ET’s could have been 11.7’s and maybe even a very high (11.69) 11.6’s.

1/8m MPH
At Stage 1 we were seeing 92.74mph at this part of the fastest run. On this run at Stage 2 we’re seeing 95.33mph. This is the first indication that Stage 2 (dyno figures to one side) is clearly producing more power. More BHP will see higher trap speeds on a like for like car (as in weight).

1/4m MPH
At Stage 1 we were seeing 116.10mph at this part of the fastest run. On this run at Stage 2 we’re seeing 119.36mph. This again shows that Stage 2 is producing more top end grunt, which is what was shown on the dyno graphs.

To have trap speeds at this level for this stage of tuning on the RS3 8V is extremely good.

So what!?
Apart from the logical theory of the 60ft times and impact this could/should have on the ETs, what does all this MPH increase really mean?

It should mean that the car, after launching, is quicker than Stage 1 in and through the gears. Let’s see if that is the reality…..

All this data is from the same run as above. I’m not picking and choosing! ;)

There is no point me comparing 0-60 against Stage 1, as this is where traction was bad at Stage 2 yesterday. Stage 2 was slower than Stage 1 by 0.23s because of these launch traction issues.

60-100mph in 4.74s
Image

This is 0.34s quicker than Stage 1.

Seeing as this had dropped a fair whack, it would be interesting to see if the 0-100mph was better, even though we knew 0-60mph was worse because of traction issues.

Not bad for a shopping car with some bolt ons and a remap. lol

0-100mph in 8.38s
Image

This is 0.11s quicker than Stage 1 even with worse traction at the start (that lost it 0.2s)!!! That starts to tell you how much quicker this car is now.

With better launch traction I would imagine this time could be reduced further by a couple of 10ths.

When VBOX “Verified” graphs do not always tell the TRUE picture
I’ve previously said that comparing figures between a drag strip and road run are, in my opinion, not always comparative. So you need to be wary of this. On road tyres, runs on the strip tend to be slower (especially through and in-gear) than on the public road due to the increased tyre drag on a prepped drag strip surface.

One thing I’ve touched on before is the impact that “slope” (uphill or downhill) can have on acceleration figures. It goes without saying that with all things being equal if you accelerate uphill you’ll be slower, and if you accelerate downhill you’ll be quicker.

Whilst VBOX Verify (as in the charts you’ve seen in my posts), check that the datalog has basic integrity, it also checks for slope %. If the slope is outside of its specified tolerance, it will state the run is “Invalid”. You’ll see that all of my runs are marked up as “Results Valid”.

You would assume that because VBOX Verify has deemed your run as valid that’s all cool and we can compare apples with apples. In a word….. No.

You can also use a piece of software called “DBScanner”, which actually “corrects” the performance based on the slope that is recorded within the VBOX data. It effectively corrects the figures as if the run was on a flat piece of road.

This is only a calculation and I don’t know what wizardry it uses to do that. Quite a few people all over the world are starting to use this method now, as it is clearly apparent that there are differences and they can be quite considerable….. VBOX Verified or not.

I have a shedload of VBOX logs from all sorts of cars and owners. I’ve seen variances of up to 0.5s in figures between VBOX verified runs and what they have been corrected to using DBScanner. As in VBOX Verify giving a quicker figure than what DBScanner does.

I can’t emphasise this enough….. If you compare my data with anyone elses, make sure it’s like for like. Based on the comparison data I have (other tuned RS3’s which has been verified and corrected)….. This Stage 2 is properly quick.

Of course my data is from a drag strip which is a known entity and UPHILL! ;)

And finally….
Since my terminals were up as part of Stage 2 benefits and because some of the whatsapp crew have been banging on to me about getting some 100-200kmh times (this appears to be a standard measure of through the gears real world performance - 62 to 124mph), I kept my “foot in” at the end of the drag runs yesterday.

100-200km/h (62-124mph) in 9.34s
Image

There is a very very slight downhill slope just after the end of the 1/4m at the strip (-1.5ft lol), so the corrected figure via DBScanner gives a figure of 9.35s (see below highlighted).

Image

Again, based on the corrected data I have from others………. This time is very quick for this level of tune on the RS3 8V.

Just one LAST thing….
Although I didn’t manage to achieve the ET I was hoping for yesterday, hopefully all the other data that has been gained shows that Stage 2 has certainly made the car quicker / faster.

I know I keep banging on about traction issues and perhaps some of you will think I’m over egging this…. So here’s some more data to back that up:

This is the 0-60 VBOX graph of the same 1/4m run being used throughout this update. As you can see it’s a poor 3.63s. Lol

Image

If you look at the parts I have highlighted you can see where the speed has dipped from around 9mph and the G’s fall right off. This was the area I lost the time due to traction issues.

I filmed my runs yesterday in-car and you can actually see what’s going on with the boost and revs during this part of the run.



If you look at the dash when I’m launching you’ll see the TC light come on, then the revs and boost drop and then it picks up. It’s quite obvious that’s going to be impacting my 1/4m times.

I’m not sure whether this is being invoked due to the lack of traction, or whether the car now needs a DSG remap to cope with the extra torque on launch, or whether we need to alter the launch strategy.

We’ll look into this more with Stage 3, but since this is a road car it’s not really an issue to be honest. This does not happen in any other scenario apart from when using Launch Control.

Roll on Stage 3…. We need more sauce!

forge
Neutral
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2003 10:40 am
Contact:

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by forge » Wed Oct 26, 2016 12:28 pm

Great write up and glad you are happy
as a comparison here's what we saw on a stock car and independent dyno.


http://www.forgemotorsport.co.uk/Audi_R ... -1474.html

On the standard car we tested on, it made 362bhp completely stock (so largely in line with what Audi quote) with a peak intake temperature of 58 deg C. With just this intercooler fitted and no other modifications, the same car made 386bhp with a peak inlet temperature of 23 deg C, a gain of 24bhp and a drop of 35 deg C.

User avatar
fagin
1st Gear
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by fagin » Tue Dec 13, 2016 9:33 pm

Dogbone Insert and Exhaust Valve Mods
Whilst this isn’t anything earth shattering, last week I made some further mods to the RS3.

Let’s be honest, it’s probably time for a bit more rice anyway!

034Motorsport Billet Dogbone Mount Insert
Quite a few people have fitted one of these and some say it’s a “must have” mod on the 8V RS3. Like most things available in the tuning world, I was quite sceptical, but for the sake of £45 I thought I’d give it a punt.

The idea behind this insert is that it stiffens the mounting off the bottom of the gearbox (and engine) with the front subframe.

The marketed benefits of this state it will make gear shifting crisper, reduce wheel hop / axle tramp on launches and provide a more connected driving experience. All sounds very good in black and white terms! Let’s see what it really does….

These do look a really nice quality item, and for something so simple to look at, you’d be forgiven for thinking how can this actually do anything worthwhile.

Image

Image

It states in the fitting instructions sheet that it takes between 30-45 mins to fit. More like 10 mins! It really is easy and quick.

This is the mount that we need to put this new insert into.

Image

All you do is unscrew the bolt, push the insert in and screw the bolt back in. It’s really just that!

We put some grease around it, copper slipped the bolt and marked the bolt against the insert (just so we can see if the bolt moves due to vibration). You don’t need to do any of this though.

Image

Simple!

Exhaust Valve Mod
The next mod that I’ve been threatening to do for ages is to remove the valves on the exhaust backbox so they stay open all the time.

Since the valves on the RS3 open and close dependant upon gear and revs, maybe even throttle position with revs (as well as the obvious drive mode select) and certainly with cold start, I wanted to see what it was like with the valves effectively jammed open…. All the time! :D

The easiest way to do this is to start the car up and ensure the valves are open, then pull the plug on each of the valves. This way they will remain open regardless of what the ECU thinks it’s doing to control them. This will throw a code with VCDS but it doesn’t cause any issue.

I did try pulling the valves off whilst on my back without the car being up in the air….. It was more or less impossible for me to get my arms and hands around that space. Your mileage may vary though.

Much easier to do it on a ramp to be honest…… it takes seconds to unplug.

The valves are literally on top of each exit pipe from the backbox.

Image

Image

Instead of just leaving the plugs dangling and to protect them, you really need to tie them out of the way and ensure the loom ends are covered. We just zipped tied them up and covered the ends with a finger from a latex glove.

Image

So…. what’s the difference?
I’m not entirely convinced this isn’t the full “placebo”, but the front end of the RS3 does feel a bit more solid. Not like earth shatteringly different, but certainly different.

I haven’t felt any compliance issues yet, but….. I have a resonance issue when in Sports gearbox mode at idle. I’ve always had a slight rattle in headlining where the pano roof controls are. Only ever evident with music on and shedload of bass. In Sports gearbox mode now on idle, I now hear a vibration in this same area. Never had that before and if I drop it to Dynamic gearbox mode at idle (revs drop) and the noise goes. I doubt if the exhaust valve mod has caused this, as it shouldn’t make any difference at idle.

I haven’t done a launch yet so I’m not sure if it’s helped with my wheel hop issues.

Can’t say I feel any difference with gear shifting if I’m being honest. My car always felt tight on shifts.

The exhaust…….

Mmmmm….. It’s pretty anti social now! lol

You’ll either love it or hate it with the valves open all the time….. For the time being I’m loving it.

One downside is a drone on cruise, which it didn’t have before as the valves would normally close at this point.

Just see these mods a stocking filler for xmas!!!

User avatar
MikeFish
Cruising
Posts: 15588
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:23 pm
Location: The Middle of Somewhere

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by MikeFish » Tue Dec 13, 2016 9:44 pm

Shaun, if you like the valves always open you can get rid of the error on VCDS by pluggingsome Milltek vavle delete modules in. This stops any errors which is useful when taking in for service and they run a scan; also Doug at MRC said it caused a little funny behaviour on the dyno when he was cancelling the errors which came back straight away; just a thought for when you are on the dyno again, might be worth plugging the valves back in or getting delete modules. Also keeps the ends of the cables free of crap (like your latex glove solution). I paid about £45 for a pair.
I looked at the dogone insert for my car, so thanks for the feedback as I was a little dubious too.

User avatar
fagin
1st Gear
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by fagin » Sat Dec 17, 2016 4:59 pm

Do you know what problem it caused?

User avatar
MikeFish
Cruising
Posts: 15588
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:23 pm
Location: The Middle of Somewhere

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by MikeFish » Sat Dec 17, 2016 8:59 pm

fagin wrote:Do you know what problem it caused?
Not a problem, just spurious readings. Come to think of it, it was the torque that was giving big differences in the readings; this may have been the overboost torque that was creating the differences and the clearing of faults was coincidental.

User avatar
fagin
1st Gear
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by fagin » Sun Mar 12, 2017 4:17 pm

Image

Stage 3 development has now commenced.... finally!

User avatar
fagin
1st Gear
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by fagin » Sun Mar 26, 2017 9:15 am

Hopefully this will be the last substantial update for Stage 2, prior to me getting stuck into the Stage 3 development.

As you probably appreciate I like to “tell a story” when key events have taken place…. This update will certainly be no different. lol

So, since Stage 2 has been in place I have put the car under the microscope on several occasions with drag runs, dyno runs and vbox data. Whilst the the car has certainly achieved some impressive performance measures, I was always looking to gain much improved drag strip data.

Last year I had issues with launch traction but the car showed a lot of promise with the trap speeds it achieved. The additional 0-60, 0-100, 100-200 vbox data also backed up the “promise”. However…. Like most things, logic, theory and data mashing is one thing. Doing it on the quarter is something else, and something that isn’t easy to do in my opinion….. Especially when you’re hunting down those last few 10ths!

If we fast forward to this year I had already visited Santa Pod twice during February. I only ran the car once as the first event (early Feb) would have been a complete waste of time from the off. The track prep was the worst I have ever seen it, with the track being very “green”. All cars were struggling with grip so I gave it a miss.

February 2017
Desperate for a formal drag strip slip (it doesn’t matter how many times I’m able to run on a local airfield for vbox data, a proper formal drag run is the MUST HAVE leveller) I went back down to Santa Pod in very late February.

Not only was the track still “green” (they even had flame throwers on the start line to get heat into the tarmac!!), but on this specific occasion there was a 25+mph headwind!! Headwinds usually play havoc with times, especially speeds. It was stupid of me to even bother running (I had seen the weather forecast), but I was proper desperate.

I did one run and it was ALL so wrong. No grip and a massive headwind.

The result on the one and only run I did was an awful and laughable 12.28s @ 113.76mph!!

Image

So…. in short make sure the track grip levels are good and that you don’t have a headwind. If you don’t, you could be looking at stock car times! Lol

Fast forward to this weekend…..

March 2017
The sun is shining, it’s a bit warmer and there’s no headwind. What could go wrong!!! If previous outings are anything to go by….. All of it!!! lol

I set off to Santa Pod as nervous as hell (I’d been up since 5am and the pod is like only 30mins away!!). Every time I do anything performance related on my cars I always get very anxious…. It’s the pressure and expectation I put on myself every time. I think I must have a problem!

I rocked up at the Pod and it looked like the cars were just about to start running. I thought I best just get straight on the end of the queue and quickly get signed on.

As I literally sat back in the car the cars started to run down the strip, so I very quickly connected my VBOX up and started sweating!!!

Quickly got to the front and did all the normal stuff to set the car up for the launch.

Bang off I went. Car felt very good on launch with no real traction issues and just pulled like an Ox up the strip. I kept my eye on the speedo to get an indication of what I was going to trap at. I was very close to 120mph so I knew it was a good run, so I kept my foot in to ensure I could get a 100-200kmh (124mph) data log as well.

I quickly looked over to my VBOX and saw this:

Image

I instantly (swore) thought “Holy Moly” and started to flip through the rest of the screens, assuming that at worst it would be an 11.7x on the official timing slip.

Image
0-60mph in 3.3s
0-100mph in 7.9s

Image
60-100mph in 4.7s
100-200kmh (62-124mph) in 9.0s

Whilst these were only rounded (and uncorrected) VBOX figures, they all alluded to the fact this was a very good run.

I nailed it down to the timing office to pick the slip up.

Image

BOOM!!!!

11.55s @ 118.57mph

The trap speeds I had seen before, so that wasn’t a shock….. But the ET. That really did surprise me.

If you look at the 60ft time it was a good launch, and to be honest I was hoping for an 11.7 quarter. Thinking if I was lucky I’d get an 11.6….. But no way did I even think for one minute I’d get an 11.5 (and a good solid one at that).

I’ve never just rocked up and “banged one in” on my first attempt.

I then pulled the card on the VBOX and analysed the corrected data. Santa Pod, like most proper drag strips, is slightly uphill so it would be interesting to see the corrected figures for slope.

0-60mph: 3.26s
Image

0-100mph: 7.91s
Image

60-100mph: 4.63s
Image

100-200kmh (62-124mph): 8.97s
Image

Apart from the 60-100mph measure, these have been the best the car has achieved with Stage 2. To be fair though I haven’t really been able to test the car properly since the blown boost hose was found and replaced in December. It would be logically to suggest that even when I ran the car in October last year down the strip, I already had a boost leak.

The only other change has been the dogbone mount. It’s hard for me to objectively state whether this has helped with the launches, as the track conditions yesterday were good. When I ran in February (dogbone was fitted late last year) the car was all over the place on the launching, but the conditions were poor.

I actually think the car could have gone ever so slightly quicker as I had a higher fuel payload than I normally have when running down the strip. The fuel gauge just ticked down to half full as I turned up for the first run.

Image

I normally run on two bars of fuel.

Sounds pathetic I’m sure….. But when you may have been able to reduce your time by 6/100ths (to get in the 11.4’s), every little can help.

Stage 2 - The End
I think I can safely say I’ve tested the backside out of Stage 2 and I’m extremely pleased with the results.

As far as I’m currently aware, this car is the quickest down the quarter in the UK for a comparatively tuned 8V RS3 (Stage 2) running on normal pump fuel (Tesco finest!) and full weight (no stripping!).

Image

To highlight as well, this car (apart from the replaced boost hose and dogbone mount) has had NO further performance tuning or remapping since I picked the car up after the Stage 2 work last October.

My Stage 2 is pretty basic in reality, but in my opinion works extremely well.

I have had a number of people ask me offline if I have anything else done to the car that I haven’t disclosed. The answer has/is no.

I’m on stock suspension. Stock (original) tyres. Straight 99 pump fuel. Full weight car (in fact it’s optioned up with pano roof etc, so pretty much as heavy as these things get). Stock launch control map. Stock DSG map. Stock induction. Stock HPFP.

So that’s it for my Stage 2 testing and if these results are anything to go by I really can’t wait to get the Syvecs on alongside a bigger turbo!

Happy days!

User avatar
MikeFish
Cruising
Posts: 15588
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:23 pm
Location: The Middle of Somewhere

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by MikeFish » Sun Mar 26, 2017 10:11 am

Some impressive numbers there Shaun. Just to clarify, what have you had done to get to this stage so far? Remap, secondary decat, dog bone insert and an aftermarket intercooler?

User avatar
fagin
1st Gear
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:34 pm

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by fagin » Sun Mar 26, 2017 1:49 pm

MikeFish wrote:
Sun Mar 26, 2017 10:11 am
Some impressive numbers there Shaun. Just to clarify, what have you had done to get to this stage so far? Remap, secondary decat, dog bone insert and an aftermarket intercooler?
Thanks Mike. :thumb:

Yes... that is the sum of all the mods for my Stage 2.

Litchfield Stage 2 remap;
Miltek secondary decat replacement;
Forge intercooler;
034 dogbone insert.

doodlebug
Cruising
Posts: 5831
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:56 am
Location: Somewhere. Maybe.

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by doodlebug » Sun Mar 26, 2017 3:10 pm

What's the cost? Not cheaper to have just bought something faster to start with?!

User avatar
MikeFish
Cruising
Posts: 15588
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:23 pm
Location: The Middle of Somewhere

Re: RS3 8V: One step at a time

Post by MikeFish » Sun Mar 26, 2017 3:30 pm

The decat is about £170, the intercooler is about £1000.
Dog bone doesn't cost a lot. So not very expensive at all. And what can you buy faster? An RS6 is very big if you only need an rs3 sized car and would cost a he'll of a lot more than these upgrades. Plus I don't think it's all about the speed, it's about the journey to get there. Some people just want to buy a car and do nothing with it others like to buy a car and see what can be done to it.

Post Reply

Return to “Readers' Rides”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 68 guests