414bhp or ???bhp

[Contigo]

Fair play for going through with this but does it really matter that it's not 414bhp?

It's a quick car and a bloody nice one to drive after having owned one and loved it. I really don't see the point in going through with it!

[Contigo]

Oh by the way, the RS6 doesn't put 571PS to the wheels so are you going to order that and then dyno it and send it back within the first 28 days?

[APM]

will be having mine dyno'd at the end of the month,will be interesting to see what 84k miles does to these engines,

[murgelloMatt]

Get this!my motor, it had covered 24000 miles and when i took it to AMD 8 weeks ago they RR it as standard and it produced 387. They fitted non res milltek and re-mapped, it RR at 411 but the inlet temp was around 33'cSo they said it was to hot and the ignition was retarding to allow for the temp.It went to audi for service and suspesion ( they had car for ages) they did the fuel recall and when i got the car back it was running really bad and so slow( i posted on here about it).it got a little better,  I took it to APS to have the mid boxes put in to cut some of the noise and still was not happy.So took it to AMD and they RR it. its producing 348 horse ?????Checked the map and they told me someone had tried to remove the map and have a look at it but only taken half of it ???? ( i think it was a milton keynes based tuner begining with R ) so i had half original map and half AMD map??? The guy who does AMD maps said it should not be running at all ????anyway they eventually sorted the mapping on the car and then RR it againthe car had now covered 28000 miles and was only producing 388 horse. so 4000 mile and the mid res boxes has cost me 25 ish horse power if the RR is to be belived.
I HOPE THAT MAKES SENSE !

[ARSEY4]

Sounds like a good reason not to mess with a a 50k car and leave it stock.

[S4INT]

When we went to DMS for the "group buy" re-map, there was a guy there with an RS4 saloon with the full milltek including 100cpi cats etc. It made the least power of the group as it wasn't running right. DMS didn't want to re-map it until the running issues were sorted. IIRC, the owner then put the car back to standard and it ran fine....

[murgelloMatt]

50k 6 months ago maybe.The car was running absolutly fine until it went to audi and they fu&*ed around with it.Richter tuning use a superchips map and its not anywhere near as good as APS + AMD etcthey tried to pull it off and failed which left it in a right 2&8

[Dom81]

Matt - isn't the colour Mugello? I may well be wrong...

[murgelloMatt]

not to sure have seen it spelt a number of different ways in my world its spelt my way

[PetrolDave]

in my world its spelt my way

If we all had that attitude then eventually we would all talk our "own" language and none of us would be able to communicate with each other.

The correct spelling is what Audi have decided it is ... and AFAIK that is "Mugello" and is named after the Italian racing circuit http://www.mugellocircuit.it/english/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mugello

But if you're happy in you own little world, then please stay there...

[Golich]

Wow been off the site for some time and missed this post and others like it.

Just to share Brooner and my experiences. Brooner and I had our cars RR tested last August. Brooner felt his car was down on power from when he first got it. (circa 2K miles to 8Kmiles) My car's first result was 379bhp and 299ftlb (if memory serves me right) the 2nd run produced 390bhp and 303ftlbs. (mileage was approx 18K) I am not sure what the tuner did between the two runs to effect the difference? It certainly wasn't repositioned or anything obvious as we were both stood there. So on reflection this makes me even more wary of RR results when there was a 10bhp increase litterally 2mins later! I guess we have to consider this as a percentage i.e. <3% which is nothing really!

Brooner's car produced something like 400bhp and 325ftlbs. (ambient temp was 20DegC)

Now this is a RR we've both used with our previous B5 RS4s and my previous mapped B5 S4 as a means of a supposed relative health check. In all cases they ahve always produced more than manufacturer's claimed figures. With respect to the B5 RS4s they both produced approx 405bhp where claimed stock is 380. Brooners torque was 325ftlbs (i.e. as claimed) mine was 365ftlbs - nice!

Interestingly, the Tuner said none of the RS4's he's tested have made the claimed. The best he'd seen was Brooners! In all his years, as a rule, generally Audis make more than the manufacturers claimed. It even made the Tuner doubt the calibration of the RR!

Now I totally agree that RR results are only relative and we have no REAL way of knowing what the true crank bhp is as there is some magic worked on losses. But right or wrong, I can't help feel Audi have cheated me. Of course the other way of looking at it is, with our previous cars we may have got more than we shouldn't have!

The question is, what do you do about it? It is still a great car and bloody quick. I talked to the service dept about it when it went for its first service they said they would check it over. With one thing or another I never did get a chance to discuss the results. Given it was RR'd before its first service I meant to have a re-run as plugs and filters were 18K old.

So while this doesn't pre-occupy me too much I am not finshed with it. I like the idea of coming to a discount with a new model

One of the important things I have to remind myself from time to time is this - while it might not be making the claimed, its not slow and seems to be pretty much as fast as my old B5 RS4 which was apparently more powerfull- in fact it is a far better handling car, AND there is nothing on the market that gives me the all round package the Avant does to make me want to replace it.

Happy motoring chaps

[A20LEE]

I was talking to the engineer at well lane a few years ago about E46 M3's and he said they used to lose 25bhp of you changed the exhaust. A free flowing exhaust may not be a good idea on a N/A engine which needs back pressure?

[almoRS]

I was talking to the engineer at well lane a few years ago about E46 M3's and he said they used to lose 25bhp of you changed the exhaust. A free flowing exhaust may not be a good idea on a N/A engine which needs back pressure?

Interesting point A20LEE. I had a Tubi exhaust fitted at the weekend which does just that and releases the back pressure. It is supposed to give some more BHP also. Haven't pushed it hard enough yet to see the difference but it does seem to kick more above 5000rpm.

[rAudiguy]

Haven't pushed it hard enough yet to see the difference but it does seem to kick more above 5000rpm.

You may find that this is very much down to the sound!? If you get me? it sounds faster so cons your brain into thinking you are going faster!!

[Stoffle32]

Just saw this post thought Id add my 2 cents from south Africa JHB, I know a guy in the Audi Club SA who has 2 Rs4's one for his wife and one for him, both cars where dyno'd, but the one produced, a significant power loss, 175kw at the wheels (at altitude), which converted is 211 kw at the coast and 254kw at the fly, which converts into 340bhp at the fly, almost 80hp down! they took it up with Audi, They actually replaced the engine, so there is hope....

We have seen in the Audi Club that the average produced over 4 cars is around 386hp, at the fly, so 28hp down from factory, bare in mind in South Africa the fuel is not as good, only get 95 ron and even thats dodgy... and tempretures are rather high here all year round... So I wouldnt say there is such a problem with the Rs4's engines, as they almost exact on all our tests...