Stage III speculation

[ilspazzaneve]

To me that sounds more like stage 2+, I'd have to reserve calling a kit stage 3 until a larger supercharger is introduced.

Now we're talking! Aren't we done waiting for the 1650?



It's only 1" longer, less than 1/2" taller, has been designed CW or CCW. Sure it can fit...


Sure we'd be bypassing most of the boost until we do a bottom-end build. Sure we'd be throwing away some HP and mpg to a bigger, less efficient supercharger. But we seem to fit in the bottom of the efficiency range, and it seems to work well in the 500-600 WHP range, isn't that where we are headed eventually?

We'd be hitting mostly dark blue in this map. imagine 1.8-2.0 PR, from 600-1200 m^3/hr. We could spin it only to 17000, getting back some efficiency.



I dunno. I'm speculating on what is possible with manufacturer's resources like those following the forums (i.e. one of those who have made seven figures on the B8 S4 already). I'm sure eventually someone will hit kevkev's 11.5 on stage II, but I'd be disappointed if it took a 3600lb car to do it. I want a street-able setup.

Meaningful discussion please?

[autoluxe]

This would be awesome...we'd be beyond R8 V10 territory....around Lamborghini territory, with two more doors though. I'd be curious to see this tried, even more curious about real world numbers i.e. mpg, awhp/awtq, reliability etc. Downside is that we would have to relinquish our factory warranty. Then theres the question of the trans/clutch and lower end. We'd be into a fully built motor at this point...so in reality we'd be going from $1100 tunes and exhausts to $$$$$$ engine/drivetrain upgrades becuase we'd be doubling our hp...if there was like a package to do it all for 10-12K i think it would be worth it...it would be like making our own RS4, minus the widebody and other features...

EDIT...just emailed Eaton inquiring about the 1650.

[madmadS4]

What is the clockwise or counter-clockwise bit about? How does that factor in? This seems new to me. I thought the two screws spin opposite directions to each other. Is this about the input shaft?

[81bear]

This would be awesome...we'd be beyond R8 V10 territory....around Lamborghini territory, with two more doors though. I'd be curious to see this tried, even more curious about real world numbers i.e. mpg, awhp/awtq, reliability etc. Downside is that we would have to relinquish our factory warranty. Then theres the question of the trans/clutch and lower end. We'd be into a fully built motor at this point...so in reality we'd be going from $1100 tunes and exhausts to $$$$$$ engine/drivetrain upgrades becuase we'd be doubling our hp...if there was like a package to do it all for 10-12K i think it would be worth it...it would be like making our own RS4, minus the widebody and other features...

EDIT...just emailed Eaton inquiring about the 1650.

I don't see anyone buying the R1900 unless it comes in a complete package. I believe Keith said APR looked at the possibility of using the R1900 and said it wouldn't happen. If I remember correctly I think he even commented on going TT as the stage 3 upgrade if the R1650 does make it into production.

*Hold on I'll try to find the thread*

http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...ighlight=r1900

[apexit1]

Post #16 Arin says "Hold your breath"

http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...le-is-Now-Live!

[ilspazzaneve]

Well I think they said "its way too big". But 1" longer, sitting in the v maybe 1" higher with careful manifold design., hmmm. Imagine the aftermarket industry on hoods with centre bumps.

My main point is I think the motor would handle the blower in terms of flow. It's a packaging issue. And some custom manifold design. I've sure seen enough welded manifolds to know its doable.

Although not sure how we'd fuel this thing now. I'm guessing stage II people are already about 70% of the current fueling, so that maybe leaves us with 500-550 whp on the current injectors?

Speculation, perhaps, but I'll bet in one of these shops there are some ideas or maybe even parts floating around.

[81bear]

^^he said it was to long. I believe it's an issue of having the charger perfectly in line with the pulley(s).

[NWS4Guy]

He is talking the 1650, but there is no map for it (not in production currently) so he used the 1900 map I feel sure.

[81bear]

He is talking the 1650, but there is no map for it (not in production currently) so he used the 1900 map I feel sure.

LOL! I see...I thought when he said "aren't we done waiting for the R1650" that he was suggesting we move to the R1900...Or maybe that was what I was hoping!

[PsYkHoTiK]

lol @ kevkev's 11.5 (you'd need a Mercedes S600 for that).

APR's CPS certainly makes sense for a future Supercharger release...

Though if they do introduce a new FI on our engine, will we need internal components replaced?

[sciblades]

never say never...


putting a smaller pulley on this and then running your boost control through the ecu could do wonders for our car. I for one am very excited to see who comes out with a bigger supercharger or twin turbos our cars first.

[autoluxe]

This is a cool concept, but by the time we got this all buttoned up between the new charger, built motor/trans/clutch etc, we are up in new RS4 territory, I know I know its still speculation for the US...but still. I would personally save my money and get the RS. More exclusivity, refinements, newer technology and loads of power WITH a factory warranty. Although that is with the belief that the new RS4 will be V8TT....idk....its definitely interesting but I don't know if it makes sense monetarily.

[t0mt0m]

Why not dual charge our cars w a turbo for more high end umph. :). Turn off and on.

[richib86]

its definitely interesting but I don't know if it makes sense monetarily.

with the amount of platforms running this motor i disagree with your statement its not just the s4

[autoluxe]

with the amount of platforms running this motor i disagree with your statement its not just the s4

I don't mean from a company stand point....i mean from a personal standpoint....

[ilspazzaneve]

LOL! I see...I thought when he said "aren't we done waiting for the R1650" that he was suggesting we move to the R1900...Or maybe that was what I was hoping!

Yes I am talking about the 1900. Maybe under spun a little to fit our application.

lol @ kevkev's 11.5 (you'd need a Mercedes S600 for that).

APR's CPS certainly makes sense for a future Supercharger release...

Though if they do introduce a new FI on our engine, will we need internal components replaced?

I have that w220 s600 TT, my wife likes it too much and won't drive this S4. So unfair of her...;-)

I dunno how far someone is willing to push the stock internals. One thing I learned from Honda days is that a mildly tuned car can run stock internals, ie. not much ignition advance and rich fueling. I'd be willing to go to 450-500 AWHP on the stock bottom end, tuned mildly. Assuming the injectors can go there...

Let's put it this way, if I were APR or someone with big resources, and a strong B8 S4 customer base of 1000s, I would have a mock up intake, a TVS1900, make sure it can fit it, using the stock intercoolers. Then I'd get a plate mani welded up with all the right bungs, etc. Leave it too tall for now, just to get it going. Start with it way under spun and work up with tuning. I'm sure there would be problems along the way, but hey, that's part of the game. Cooling, injectors, eliminating those intake flaps in the ECU programming, etc etc.

And if I were APR, I would keep this top secret until a month or two before product release. Speculation? Sure! But hey, what else is possible for stage III.

[madmadS4]

^^he said it was to long. I believe it's an issue of having the charger perfectly in line with the pulley(s).

If the SC snout is too long, then shouldn't it be possible to extend the main shaft instead so they match up vertically? Remember we have two belts - it is only the front pulley which would need to be moved forward....

[ilspazzaneve]

If the SC snout is too long, then shouldn't it be possible to extend the main shaft instead so they match up vertically? Remember we have two belts - it is only the front pulley which would need to be moved forward....

Look at the drawings. The shortest snout 1900 looks pretty short, and only 22mm longer body than the 1320. And since it blows upwards, it shouldn't be a big deal to have the discharge port further back towards the firewall, flow will equalize across the face of the intercoolers anyway.

But obviously, a custom intake is required, and I'm sure it would have been required for the 1650 anyway even if it was only longer, so I'm not sure why the big deal for the 1650 was made.

[sciblades]

Yes I am talking about the 1900. Maybe under spun a little to fit our application.



I have that w220 s600 TT, my wife likes it too much and won't drive this S4. So unfair of her...;-)

I dunno how far someone is willing to push the stock internals. One thing I learned from Honda days is that a mildly tuned car can run stock internals, ie. not much ignition advance and rich fueling. I'd be willing to go to 450-500 AWHP on the stock bottom end, tuned mildly. Assuming the injectors can go there...

Let's put it this way, if I were APR or someone with big resources, and a strong B8 S4 customer base of 1000s, I would have a mock up intake, a TVS1900, make sure it can fit it, using the stock intercoolers. Then I'd get a plate mani welded up with all the right bungs, etc. Leave it too tall for now, just to get it going. Start with it way under spun and work up with tuning. I'm sure there would be problems along the way, but hey, that's part of the game. Cooling, injectors, eliminating those intake flaps in the ECU programming, etc etc.

And if I were APR, I would keep this top secret until a month or two before product release. Speculation? Sure! But hey, what else is possible for stage III.

I don't mean this in a negative way but apr's business model is not to push the car, there MO is to be first to market grab up people new to the platform push stage I then stage II their stage III's are always as close to oem as possible (aka slow) so i do not see them pushing the car to the limits as finacially they make much more money selling 1500 dollar tunes to 100 people then selling 10 15,000 dollar stage III kits. Once again this is not meant in a negative way or trying to start a fight it is just a simple fact.

Our buttom end is the only thing that needs to be changed as we have a 10:1 compression and can run quite lean with no major issues. Rods are just like the ones in the TSI engines so are much stronger then the ones we used to have in the FSI's for those of you that did the 2.0t builds and those of you coming from the 2.7t builds the top and bottom end are much better. Our injectors also flow pretty well the injectors are not major issue it is the fuel pumps.

But rods and fuel pumps are easy enough to make.

As always the platform is new and will only get stronger as we go i think the stage III concepts will be here in summer since now we have tunes coming that can give some decent power.

[CreoSTi]

I don't mean this in a negative way but apr's business model is not to push the car, there MO is to be first to market grab up people new to the platform push stage I then stage II their stage III's are always as close to oem as possible (aka slow) so i do not see them pushing the car to the limits as finacially they make much more money selling 1500 dollar tunes to 100 people then selling 10 15,000 dollar stage III kits. Once again this is not meant in a negative way or trying to start a fight it is just a simple fact.

The people like me... I usually only keep a car for 2-3 years and then I'm off to other things, so I have no intentions of ever fully building up a car (otherwise I'd have a 500+ WHP 2004 Subaru STi by now). But I do hope (for the rest of y'all), that they come up with a solution for a Stage III type power gain.

[madmadS4]

Look at the drawings. The shortest snout 1900 looks pretty short, and only 22mm longer body than the 1320. And since it blows upwards, it shouldn't be a big deal to have the discharge port further back towards the firewall, flow will equalize across the face of the intercoolers anyway.

But obviously, a custom intake is required, and I'm sure it would have been required for the 1650 anyway even if it was only longer, so I'm not sure why the big deal for the 1650 was made.

Yeah I'm pretty sure you couldn't move the discharge port. Look at the diagram - the entire bottom of the SC unit is the discharge port. I wouldn't even call it a port - its basically a huge gaping hole which mates with the top of the engine proper. You really wouldn't want to re-route that.

Look at page 10 of this doc:
http://www.s4-mtm.com/images/925803_3.0V6TFSIengine.pdf

Basically if the TVS 1900 snout came forward another 22 mm, we'd just need a different main crank shaft pulley which extended forward another 22cm.

[RavinJetta]

I don't mean this in a negative way but apr's business model is not to push the car, there MO is to be first to market grab up people new to the platform push stage I then stage II their stage III's are always as close to oem as possible (aka slow) so i do not see them pushing the car to the limits as finacially they make much more money selling 1500 dollar tunes to 100 people then selling 10 15,000 dollar stage III kits. Once again this is not meant in a negative way or trying to start a fight it is just a simple fact.

Our buttom end is the only thing that needs to be changed as we have a 10:1 compression and can run quite lean with no major issues. Rods are just like the ones in the TSI engines so are much stronger then the ones we used to have in the FSI's for those of you that did the 2.0t builds and those of you coming from the 2.7t builds the top and bottom end are much better. Our injectors also flow pretty well the injectors are not major issue it is the fuel pumps.

But rods and fuel pumps are easy enough to make.

As always the platform is new and will only get stronger as we go i think the stage III concepts will be here in summer since now we have tunes coming that can give some decent power.

Actually they would make the exact same amount in each scenario ;)

[Arin@APR]

finacially they make much more money selling 1500 dollar tunes to 100 people then selling 10 15,000 dollar stage III kits.

We've sold over 100 of the RS4 and S5 supercharger units. I'd expect to sell more on the S4 platform. ;-)

[apexit1]

I don't mean this in a negative way but apr's business model is not to push the car, there MO is to be first to market grab up people new to the platform push stage I then stage II their stage III's are always as close to oem as possible (aka slow) so i do not see them pushing the car to the limits as finacially they make much more money selling 1500 dollar tunes to 100 people then selling 10 15,000 dollar stage III kits. Once again this is not meant in a negative way or trying to start a fight it is just a simple fact.

Our buttom end is the only thing that needs to be changed as we have a 10:1 compression and can run quite lean with no major issues. Rods are just like the ones in the TSI engines so are much stronger then the ones we used to have in the FSI's for those of you that did the 2.0t builds and those of you coming from the 2.7t builds the top and bottom end are much better. Our injectors also flow pretty well the injectors are not major issue it is the fuel pumps.

But rods and fuel pumps are easy enough to make.

As always the platform is new and will only get stronger as we go i think the stage III concepts will be here in summer since now we have tunes coming that can give some decent power.

I hope fueling doesn't become a hang up for us like it is on the N54 motors

[Deckdout2]

We've sold over 100 of the RS4 and S5 supercharger units. I'd expect to sell more on the S4 platform. ;-)

.........and here we go! :)

[Vogz]

Ditch the supercharger and slap on some turbos. :)

[81bear]

We've sold over 100 of the RS4 and S5 supercharger units. I'd expect to sell more on the S4 platform. ;-)

Arin - Have you guys really looked at making the R1900 work? I would be one of the first in line if you could! :-)

[81bear]

Ditch the supercharger and slap on some turbos. :)

Prior to owning the S I would have said TT all the way, but I actually really like the linear power band more than the all out rush of the turbo's once they've spooled.

[clochner]

Prior to owning the S I would have said TT all the way, but I actually really like the linear power band more than the all out rush of the turbo's once they've spooled.

And I wouldn't want to get rid of my supercharger whine either!

[Arin@APR]

Arin - Have you guys really looked at make the R1900 work? I would be one of the first in line if you could! :-)

We are working on something which may also lead to a stage 3+ for the RS4, S5, etc. ;-)

[ADV.1 Tony]

I would love to see this happen! I'm all about stage 3 cars, especially the B8 S4. Great potential on this platform and I'd love to have an S4. I almost ended up getting one but I went smaller and got the DCT 135i and methed it out. She's pretty quick too. :)

[sciblades]

i meant 1000 tunes not 100, any way no matter what the advancement of the platform is the most important thing.

Waterfest i feel is going to be awesome this year for the s4

[mg6045]

I would love to see this happen! I'm all about stage 3 cars, especially the B8 S4. Great potential on this platform and I'd love to have an S4. I almost ended up getting one but I went smaller and got the DCT 135i and methed it out. She's pretty quick too. :)

sweet car, I looked at those as well.

[ilspazzaneve]

No way you are allowed to put a 1900 on the 4.2 V8 before you make one for our car, Arin.

[NWS4Guy]

Yeah I'm pretty sure you couldn't move the discharge port. Look at the diagram - the entire bottom of the SC unit is the discharge port. I wouldn't even call it a port - its basically a huge gaping hole which mates with the top of the engine proper. You really wouldn't want to re-route that.

Look at page 10 of this doc:
http://www.s4-mtm.com/images/925803_3.0V6TFSIengine.pdf

Basically if the TVS 1900 snout came forward another 22 mm, we'd just need a different main crank shaft pulley which extended forward another 22cm.

And the SC idler/tensioner pulley

[ilspazzaneve]

Yeah I'm pretty sure you couldn't move the discharge port. Look at the diagram - the entire bottom of the SC unit is the discharge port. I wouldn't even call it a port - its basically a huge gaping hole which mates with the top of the engine proper. You really wouldn't want to re-route that.

Look at page 10 of this doc:
http://www.s4-mtm.com/images/925803_3.0V6TFSIengine.pdf

Basically if the TVS 1900 snout came forward another 22 mm, we'd just need a different main crank shaft pulley which extended forward another 22cm.

Who said we're moving it forward? We're moving it backwards until it lines up with the original pulley plane. Hmmm if I'm bored tonight I may try and measure the length of the 1320 front drive housing, it looks pretty short.

And the blower blows upwards. We'd b building a new supercharger module, of course, to house a _separate_ 1900 module, not integrated as ours is now. See the first post with the RS4 kit. That is the idea.

Good to take a second look at those drawings, though. I forgot about the oil separator connection at the bottom of the s/c.

[madmadS4]

We're moving it backwards until it lines up with the original pulley plane.

OK - this is exactly what I'm debating. I don't think you can do this. If you move it backwards, the S/C will no longer mate with the engine.

[Brendon1098]

We are working on something which may also lead to a stage 3+ for the RS4, S5, etc. ;-)

So if you're working on something that may also lead to a stage 3 PLUS for the RS4 kit.... then that must be a bigger blower. The blower you guys use on that one is the same blower on the B8... soooo you're saying one of two things. The 1650 or 1900 is coming and you eluded to that in another post when you told us to hold our breath...

i'll bet it's the 1650. Also, the snout isn't that big of a deal I don't think. Who says the pulley can't just be wider and use the rib's towards the back of the pulley?
Basically just using a offset pulley, kind of like turning a rim inside out. So long as the snout is skinny enough to fit within the barrel of the pulley, they should be able to make it work.

[Vogz]

Prior to owning the S I would have said TT all the way, but I actually really like the linear power band more than the all out rush of the turbo's once they've spooled.

Smallish twins can be plenty linear with instant spool. ;)

This is an old dyno of my Z when I was on the stock motor.

[sean1.8t]

Actually they would make the exact same amount in each scenario ;)

actually they most likely would make much more on 100 tunes as R&D as well as hardware costs would be much less. thus their financial return percentage would be much higher on a simple flash than on expensive hardware needed for stg 3 kits. but they sell thousands of tunes so i digress