My APR Supercharger has arrived!

[AwesomeHAssan]

...

[Jules]

This is just going round in circles,i have driven a lot of fast cars,i had a drive in Lee's
and was very very impressed.
The differnce between the standard car was like night and day,i drive my B7 and thinks its nippy but nothing special
i drove Lee's and was like wow,THIS is how they should have come out the factory.

All these bhp figures dont mean $hit,being side by side and having a race will show the differnce.

I had one run down the 1/4 mile at inters and was quicker than a few cars dyno'd at over 60bhp more.

[bam_bam]

OP's B7 RS ('loon) with a SC aprox.1,700kg ???PS ???Nm - 0-100MPH = 8.4 secs
City Wideboy's '07 Gayhardo Superleggera 1,420kg 530PS 510Nm - 0-100MPH = 8.4 secs

To me, for a unique exotica killing 4 door saloon, it seems like money well spent. IMO torque is going to be the new found muscle in that 0-100 time, not horses.

[adsgreen]

What I can't get my head around is, I can remember 2 very similar cars, mk2 golfs both running 4wd with big turbo 1.8T's one had 450bhp the other 380. The lesser power car would always beat the car with more power all day every day due to it having a low ratio gear box. How can a GPS unit account for vehicle gearing after all the gearing has nothing to do with the engine output but will make a massive difference on acceleration ?

Don't be obsessed with engine output. We're talking output at the wheels which is what counts for the exact reason you mention above.
Assuming level ground (and easy enough to account of this doing a run in the opposite direction) the GPS will tell you precisely how much energy you required to accelerate the car.

[Keith@APR]

Hello everyone!

I thought I would just pop in and offer our philosophy about dynamometer testing, how we rate our products and share some of my professional experience with dozens of different dynamometer makes and operator settings.

To begin, I would like to present our published power information for our RS4 Stage III:





In order to arrive at our WHP or wheel power numbers as measured by our Dynapack, which some may call hub power as a Dynapack requires attachment at the hubs with the wheels removed, we take an average of at least 6 simultaneous runs, throw out the highest and the lowest and there we are. We typically use RAW UNCORRECTED wheel power results or we list the type of WHP correction factor used on the graphs.

We do this because we are concerned that our clients may not always be able to recreate our numbers so we want to eliminate variables such as a Hail Mary One-Time dyno pull that provides data that is simply higher than what most will see, different correction factors (there are 6 or more settings the operator can choose on almost every dyno brand) to avoid confusion and to develop a mean power number or something that is on the conservative side and can be what everyone should expect to make within a small margin of error. Through our experience, when the worst happens and the client cannot recreate our exact numbers, its always better to be at the most a few ponies higher than what the customer gets and if the customer or several achieve much higher than our published numbers, we won't have any problems with that, now will we?

To say that most dyno's calculate the drivetrain or transmission losses as some have stated and that those that measure drag don't calculate the losses is simply 100% incorrect. ALL DYNO"S THAT PROVIDE ANY KIND OF BHP DO SO WITH SOME KIND OF MATHEMATICAL CALCULATION. There is no way around it. The measurement of drivetrain or transmission losses itself during a coast down IS A CALCULATION. The WHP a dyno measures, is guess what?, A CALCULATION.

Every brand of dyno on the planet CALCULATES WHP AND BHP in a different way with different calculations that give different weight in the calculation to different factors.

The MAHA measures drivetrain or transmission losses just like Awesome's DynoJet does but CALCULATES the BHP from that measured drivetrain or transmission loss differently than the DJ CALCULATES it.

WHP is a CALCULATION too! Its torque over time. A dyno measures torque. Horsepower cannot be directly measured as HP itself is a calculation whether BHP or WHP.

Let's move on to now what we all know is always some form of CALCULATED BHP from CALCULATED WHP data...

APR arrives at our published BHP data by measuring what the car makes at the wheels on our dyno in standard form and comparing that to what the OEM says that car makes as BHP in standard form.

For example, the RS4 measures ~315AWHP on our dynapack pretty much any day of the week in any season of the year on 97 RON fuel quality in completely standard form as long as the carbon buildup in the heads is at a reasonable amount or completely clean. Take the difference between Audi's published BHP of 420 and our WHP of 315 and you get 105. Divide that 105 by Audi's 420 and you get 25%. That means at peak HP Audi has determined the difference between their BHP and what is measured as WHP on a dynapack dyno is 25%. This assumes Audi has accurately measured/relayed the BHP for the RS4.

Now, everyone should know that drivetrain losses are not linear from low rpm to high rpm. Drivetrain losses are actually a type of cosine curve when plotted on a graph through a polynomial expression. Yay, trigonometry.



All dyno software that provides BHP but measures at the wheels uses some kind of polynomial to apply a calculation to arrive at BHP EVEN IF MEASURING COAST DOWN.

This simply means that there is no way to consistently and accurately CALCULATE whp to bhp. The ONLY way to do it is by taking the engine out of the car, putting it on an engine dyno and then return the engine to the car and measure on a chassis dyno. This will give you the entire drivetrain losses as its also IMPOSSIBLE to isolate the transmission losses from the rest of the drivetrain like wheels, hubs, axles, etc. by measuring WHP.

Back to how APR does it. After we determine Audi's peak drivetrain loss at peak RPM or HP which happens to be 25% in this case, we also develop a polynomial and cosine curve that matches Audi's BHP plots to our WHP plots.

When we are done, we get a cosine curve similar to the one posted above.

Remember, we took at least six WHP runs and averaged after removing outliers to get the WHP. We then apply that cosine curve to our averaged WHP and that will be our advertised BHP.

To summarize, we have learned the following:

All dyno's regardless of make and operator CALCULATE WHP and BHP and all do it differently.
Drivetrain losses are not linear.
Dyno's cannot measure drivetrain losses consistently across dyno makes and models.
BHP is ultimately decided by the mathematicians that write the dyno software.
APR uses a method to arrive at BHP that is more specific to the make and model of car being tested but is reliant on the accuracy of published info from the OEM.
Dyno's calculate BHP across a wide range of OEM brands, models, etc. with no specificity or regard to the actual ratings and testing procedures used by each OEM.
BHP, unless measured with an engine dyno, is not comparable from dyno to dyno and car make and model to car make and model.
APR applies a conservative BHP calculation and WHP average with the intent of every client being able to recreate both BHP and WHP calculations across several makes of dyno's and environmental conditions.

Now, why does Awesome's DJ read calculated BHP so low on this client's RS4 but the WHP is consistent if not more than what we have seen on several dyno's across the world?

I don't know to be honest but maybe Andy and Hassan should get their information straight.

http://uk-mkivs.net/forums/p/286903/1898076.aspx

See the first reply to the OP's question in the link above.

Apparently, Awesome's calculated transmission losses are used for a couple of different purposes. When its the competition's products, the BHP is correct and the competition has over rated their power. When its Awesome's products, the BHP is incorrect and should never be paid attention to.

[Stoffle32]

on page 5 Lee mentions and shows that he got 453BHP at the Wheels...
now you add around 23 to 25% drive train loss and you get close to APR's quoted figures.
We all know that the Rs4 does not dyno well and is prone to very bad heat sink and then pulls the timing back, I for one do not trust Dyno's at all and all they good for is to get a good gauge of a certain mod, Dyno operators can manipulate figures how they see fit... I believe all Dyno figures should be quoted at the wheels
Just my opinion
But id say Lee's figures are very good, maybe some small adjustments can be made to the map but otherwise very good result

[AwesomeHAssan]

...

[Keith@APR]

Keith:
Thank you for your post explaining the difference between the rollers, we did mention earlier that it is always a dyno lottery.

The only bit of that post that concerns me is " Apparently, Awesome's calculated transmission losses are used for a couple of different purposes. When its the competition's products, the BHP is correct and the competition has over rated their power. When its Awesome's products, the BHP is incorrect and should never be paid attention to."

We have never had any need to fudge anyone's figures, all we do is report on what figures the dyno reports honestly! Awesome is a reseller of other company's performance products, they are not our products to try and make look better than they actually are.

You and I both know if we never had any issues with claimed and actual power figures we would have still been working together very closely as we did for many years!

Awesome Employee,

I am not certain how you misunderstood my position and accusation regarding the way you "spin" the results of your WHP vs. BHP data from your dyno with a claim that you "fudge" dyno numbers. Are you a little defensive in this regard or some such?

I merely stated that when Awesome employees are faced with explaining why their DJ calculates BHP to have such a small % of increase over WHP, you say its not important and not completely accurate in one breath but then use it to suggest that other times it is correct and absolute in another.

To put it simply, does your DJ calculate drivetrain loss correctly and should the readers of this forum believe it or not?

I ask because Andy explained to another forum that you should never pay attention to the calculated BHP from your DJ and was supported by Jim Cotton as to this being the case but then you come on this forum and point out that the calculated BHP was rather low and should be a potential concern for this RS4 Stage III client. Which is correct? Who knows more about your dyno results? Andy and Jim or you?

Regarding our "past relationship" it doesn't seem very difficult to me to understand why Awesome was confused about dyno results after this interaction. Maybe you guys could benefit from a trip to the States to get proper training on dyno operation and how it arrives at its numbers directly from Dynojet? Its a pretty nice little course and should help you guys out a bunch!

[AwesomeHAssan]

...

[Keith@APR]

LOL very funny Mr APR employee, the best form of defense is to attack! Remember your words Keith whilst Awesome was at APR "always baffle you opponents with figures and bull$hit and attack them" just what you told us to do last year! lol

I have not said that our RR figures are absolutely perfect however they are consistent and repeatable though which is why we can accurately use this as a comparison and what we see with the RS4 is an increase of near on 100hp not the 200 claimed,

The way the dyno to me (as not an operator of this equipment) works and the way it arrives at it's figures, calculated, measured even pulled out of thin air, the same as it does to most on this forum doesn't have any significant meaning at all.

All that matters is that the readings are consistent and reliable which they are, it could have been a different story if we hadn't managed to test the car before the mods were done.

You can come on here and baffle us with all you technical jargon and you wealth of knowledge of dynos and make yourself look really cleaver, go back to basics though the car doesn't deliver the power you say it does.

The RS4's base numbers where pretty spot on!

Please don't misquote me, especially so blatantly incorrectly. If ever I said that it was sarcastic or out of frustration from trying to help technically inept people survive in a field beyond their skill set. And if that is all it is, b.s. meant to baffle people and you somehow think I've attacked you, then surely you can respond with more information and eloquence than the above?

Mark Ash said it best when he met me and relayed he just wants to put labels on boxes and doesn't care what's in the box or where it comes from. Pretty sad for a business philosophy considering what Jim, Dan, Andy and Stephen envisioned back in the day.

And you know, you are actually correct on one point, Lee's car doesn't deliver the 438awhp we say it does. It looks like it delivers closer to 454awhp.

But anyways, thanks for playing and have a nice day!

[Arin@APR]

The op of this thread dynoed 453.8 AWHP with his car. This is better than our results.
Original Posters Data
APR Data

The op of this thread dynoed 409.19 AWTQ with his car. This is better than our results.
Original Posters Data
APR Data

Another customer of ours dynoed 450 AWHP with his car on 92 octane fuel and the 91 octane file. This is better than our results using the 93 file on 93 octane fuel. The Stock vs Supercharged Delta is also higher.
Customer Data
APR Data

JBS measured 0-60 times using a heavier avant. His times were better than ours.
JBS Data
APR Data

JBS mesured 0-100 times using a heavier avant. His times were better than ours.
JBS Data
APR Data

JBS measured 60-120 times using a heavier avant. His times were better than ours.
JBS Data
APR Data


I do not believe we have mislead anyone with our results. We've given as much data as possible to ensure customers are able to make an educated assessment of power delivery before purchasing our supercharger system. Multiple customers are producing better results than APR in all categories (torque, horsepower, delta, 0-60, 0-100, 60-120).

Thank you!

-Arin

[PetrolDave]

It's funny how every supercharger thread on an RS4 forum anywhere in the world always ends up as a slanging match.

Maybe the £ per hp figure is so high it just makes everyone think "is that good value?", or "I'd have expected more bhp for that many £?".

Maybe it just shows how difficult it is to get much more hp out of the B7 RS4 engine, unlike the B5 RS4 engine...

[RSKiwi]

It's funny how every supercharger thread on an RS4 forum anywhere in the world always ends up as a slanging match.

Maybe the £ per hp figure is so high it just makes everyone think "is that good value?", or "I'd have expected more bhp for that many £?".

Maybe it just shows how difficult it is to get much more hp out of the B7 RS4 engine, unlike the B5 RS4 engine...

Exactly.

Without a doubt if I could allocate the funds from other things to supercharge the RS4 I would. We need more people like Lee doing these things as it pushes innovation and development which eventually benefits all of us. Who here thinks it was cheap for the first few B5 RS4 owners to get theirs in the region of 550BHP?

Other than that the above thread has taught me a few things technically!

[Keith@APR]

It's funny how every supercharger thread on an RS4 forum anywhere in the world always ends up as a slanging match.

Maybe the £ per hp figure is so high it just makes everyone think "is that good value?", or "I'd have expected more bhp for that many £?".

Maybe it just shows how difficult it is to get much more hp out of the B7 RS4 engine, unlike the B5 RS4 engine...

Exactly.

Without a doubt if I could allocate the funds from other things to supercharge the RS4 I would. We need more people like Lee doing these things as it pushes innovation and development which eventually benefits all of us. Who here thinks it was cheap for the first few B5 RS4 owners to get theirs in the region of 550BHP?

Other than that the above thread has taught me a few things technically!

A lot of tuners are trying to accomplish what those that have brought kits to market or are bringing kits to market have been able to share. Some tuners have not had similar successes so as opposed to looking at themselves they look outward and assume or try to insinuate that the accomplishments of others must be false.

It happens, and for those of us that do set the bar time and time again, we are used to the hate that follows.

As with everything, time will march on, another 150 or so supercharger kits will be sold and installed to happy clients and the naysayers will be left with overwhelming evidence that finally convinces them that others were able to accomplish something they could not.

I don't write this only from APR's perspective but I think I echo the sentiments of every company who has successfully supercharged the 4.2l FSI.

As an enthusiast myself, before working in this industry, I too sometimes grew weary of the infighting between companies. However, like you, I did learn something every time I dared slog through what mostly seems like drivel to glean a few gems of insight.

Hopefully, threads like this can move towards the fun the enthusiasts who are early adopters are having with their cars fairly quickly. I've put 5000 miles or so on APR Stage III RS4's and it is one of my favorite cars in the Audi stable when prepared to such a level of performance.

At the end of the day, we are all enthusiasts looking for enjoyment from our vehicles and I hope we never lose sight of that!

[mutantfatcat]

Before the super charger kit went on to the vehicle, the vehicle produced 402.79bhp and 336.73 ft-lb.

Just so all the data is complete, my car dynoed the above figures of 402.79bhp and 336.73 ft-lb with a generic Revo stage 1 map, BMC air filter and Milltek non res valved catback.

Previously it was dynoed at Dyno Demon on a Dyno Dynamics Dyno at 378.0bhp completely stock except for a BMC air filter. The airbox power flap was also non functional at the time.