PDA

View Full Version : RE: APR stock Dyno results



jimmyrecluse
11-02-2009, 02:03 PM
I am not calling out APR, stop reading if you want drama. Im a die hard APR and revo fan and Eurocode customer. I have had good experince with Revo but have had APR on 2 of my other Audis and will have it on my new S4. I havent asked Dave at Eurocode yet, but what are your thoughts?

I posted this in the other thread but its getting ridiculous.

If APR is seeing estimated 400HP crank, how does MTM get only 430HP and charge $$$ for it, and why wouldnt MTM have got at least 475HP?

Are the dynos in Germany so different? ;p

All Im saying is we should sort out all the details. I highly doubt APR would do something so stupid as fix numbers so lets not suggest that, its probably a waste of time.

How different could the dynos be and what would cause such disparate numbers?

L0U
11-02-2009, 02:11 PM
there is a good chance that if we dynoed the mtm car it would show 45 more hp not 95 more. 14psi, with 6 or 7 more peak psi available...equates to about 42 to 49 more wheel hp. I expect we see 375 at the wheel chipped, or 430 at the crank...which is mtmish.

jimmyrecluse
11-02-2009, 02:18 PM
there is a good chance that if we dynoed the mtm car it would show 45 more hp not 95 more. 14psi, with 6 or 7 more peak psi available...equates to about 42 to 49 more wheel hp. I expect we see 375 at the wheel chipped, or 430 at the crank...which is mtmish.

Bust still, 375WHP Chipped compared to APR's 331whp stock, isnt a big difference. I really expect this car to make more than this chipped.

But still, if it is just a 45WHP gain, then that makes sense, stock is much higher than Audi says, maybe 380.

sworksone
11-02-2009, 02:22 PM
Seeing dyno results (using the same equipment) for stock versions of any combination of the B7 S4, B7 RS4, B8 A4, and B8 S4 engines would go a long way in answering just how powerful the new "V6T" engine really is in comparison. Is this info available from APR or anyone else?

Skyler@Achtuning
11-02-2009, 02:24 PM
Different dynos can read significantly differently, this is why dyno tuning is best used as a tool for before and after comparisons rather than comparisons between different cars or brands.
Did MTM not post before and after dyno plots for their module upgrade?

jimmyrecluse
11-02-2009, 02:58 PM
Different dynos can read significantly differently, this is why dyno tuning is best used as a tool for before and after comparisons rather than comparisons between different cars or brands.
Did MTM not post before and after dyno plots for their module upgrade?

Oh yes, I understand that. Before and after, same car pref same conditions.

I dont remember seeing sock from MTM. Im wondering why it took so long for it to be discovered that the S4 is underrated? Seeing how APR hasnt had the car THAT long, it should have been kind of obvious.

I still doubt its at or around 400hp stock. Even if some dynos read that. There has to be something more accurate.

L0U
11-02-2009, 04:06 PM
Oh yes, I understand that. Before and after, same car pref same conditions.

I dont remember seeing sock from MTM. Im wondering why it took so long for it to be discovered that the S4 is underrated? Seeing how APR hasnt had the car THAT long, it should have been kind of obvious.

I still doubt its at or around 400hp stock. Even if some dynos read that. There has to be something more accurate.

Thats the point....400 is a guess since drivetrain losses are a guesstimate. What it puts out at the wheels is measured, and in this case 330 hp. Guesstimate whatever you like from the 330. I could care less what the crank has. To accelerate 4000 lbs in a 1/4 mile in 13.2 seconds takes a fair amount of wheel hp. Taking 60 lbs of rotating mass off the wheels might give some different dyno results as well. The 19s are heavier than the 18s. My winters are 15 lbs each lighter. I'll have to gtech again with the winters on.

jimmyrecluse
11-02-2009, 05:03 PM
Thats the point....400 is a guess since drivetrain losses are a guesstimate. What it puts out at the wheels is measured, and in this case 330 hp. Guesstimate whatever you like from the 330. I could care less what the crank has. To accelerate 4000 lbs in a 1/4 mile in 13.2 seconds takes a fair amount of wheel hp. Taking 60 lbs of rotating mass off the wheels might give some different dyno results as well. The 19s are heavier than the 18s. My winters are 15 lbs each lighter. I'll have to gtech again with the winters on.

uhhh ya but the "guess" off CHP begins with measured WHP. Audi's claimed 333CHP and APR's results of 331WHP are a HUGE difference to be just different dyno's and 60lbs less rolling mass. Wondering what ELSE there is before anyone else starts calling APR liars and we get to some sort of bottom of what the motor really puts out.

In all of the 5 audis ive owned, not even my only cars, Ive never seen that. My best guess is Audi is understating as they usually do and MTM has adjusted their numbers to that or they read low or APR read high, which I doubt APR did.

NWS4Guy
11-02-2009, 05:19 PM
uhhh ya but the "guess" off CHP begins with measured WHP. Audi's claimed 333CHP and APR's results of 331WHP are a HUGE difference to be just different dyno's and 60lbs less rolling mass. Wondering what ELSE there is before anyone else starts calling APR liars and we get to some sort of bottom of what the motor really puts out.

In all of the 5 audis ive owned, not even my only cars, Ive never seen that. My best guess is Audi is understating as they usually do and MTM has adjusted their numbers to that or they read low or APR read high, which I doubt APR did.

I don't think that anyone has called APR liars, I think there were some assumptions and misunderstandings on what others have said.

I think there is a question as to which is right, but I think neither are. I would be willing to say that the Dyno run might be a little optomistic, AND that Audi undersold the ratings of the V6T engine, so there is a middle ground. Of course, it is also not unheard of that some engines are much stronger stock than others, all depending on the build - which also could play into this.

vjma
11-02-2009, 05:49 PM
I don't have experience in either company but from what I saw on the MTM site just didn't make sense at all from the very beginning. They quoted 430hp but the 0-60mph only dropped from 5.1s to 4.6s.

leviathan18
11-02-2009, 08:18 PM
again go and checkthe 2.0tsi engines they are under rated also.

zillmc
11-02-2009, 08:52 PM
If this is eating people alive so much to the point of pointing fingers at reputable aftermarket modding companies, go get the dyno done yourself!

Voltrons_Head
11-03-2009, 06:31 AM
If this is eating people alive so much to the point of pointing fingers at reputable aftermarket modding companies, go get the dyno done yourself!

This!

jimmyrecluse
11-03-2009, 07:05 AM
I don't think that anyone has called APR liars, I think there were some assumptions and misunderstandings on what others have said.

I think there is a question as to which is right, but I think neither are. I would be willing to say that the Dyno run might be a little optomistic, AND that Audi undersold the ratings of the V6T engine, so there is a middle ground. Of course, it is also not unheard of that some engines are much stronger stock than others, all depending on the build - which also could play into this.
this is what im thinking.

jimmyrecluse
11-03-2009, 07:06 AM
again go and checkthe 2.0tsi engines they are under rated also.

I remember, I had one.

jimmyrecluse
11-03-2009, 07:06 AM
If this is eating people alive so much to the point of pointing fingers at reputable aftermarket modding companies, go get the dyno done yourself!

I dont think anyone is pointing fingers.

leviathan18
11-03-2009, 08:23 AM
I dont think anyone is pointing fingers.

but everyone is running in circles around screaming because the car they got come under rated [headbang]

L0U
11-03-2009, 08:47 AM
It is as under rated as this scooter.

http://www.vidmax.com/video/3296/Drag_racing_a_custom_Trans_Am_versus_a_tiny_little _scooter/

NWS4Guy
11-03-2009, 09:20 AM
It is as under rated as this scooter.

http://www.vidmax.com/video/3296/Drag_racing_a_custom_Trans_Am_versus_a_tiny_little _scooter/

Haha, I don't even wanna know the kind of road rash he would have if he had to bail on that scooter at those speeds.

sakimano
11-03-2009, 11:56 AM
I am not calling out APR, stop reading if you want drama. Im a die hard APR and revo fan and Eurocode customer. I have had good experince with Revo but have had APR on 2 of my other Audis and will have it on my new S4. I havent asked Dave at Eurocode yet, but what are your thoughts?

I posted this in the other thread but its getting ridiculous.


thanks for starting this thread. These are some of the questions I was trying to ask in the other thread before the APR fanboys went nuts thinking I was questioning APR. I just want to know what's really up!

Call it the scientist in me...but when results are dramatically different to what is expected, it's interesting to know the reason.

sakimano
11-03-2009, 12:00 PM
If this is eating people alive so much to the point of pointing fingers at reputable aftermarket modding companies, go get the dyno done yourself!


This!

Looks like the drama-hungry, hyper-sensitive APR fanboys (who can't read) referenced in post 20 are here. This thread is fucked too. Oh well.

APR knows nobody has questioned them...everyone's just looking for answers from Audi more than anything else.

Maybe APR can actually answer...?

Arin/Keith: Do you guys think that the disparity between your dyno results and Audi's claims are

1. dyno reading a little higher than we should expect?
2. Audi has figured out a way to limit drivetrain loss?
3. Audi is understating the performance on the car?
4. something else?
5. some combination therein...(if so please let us know what you think the biggest contributors are)

Thanks!

Arin@APR
11-03-2009, 02:05 PM
The problem is some tuners are overlaying their calculated crank figures against Audi's ratings. They are not actually showing their measured stock figures vs their measured chipped figures.

Here's an Example:

Audi says the engine makes 100 HP.

Tuner 1 and Tuner 2's dyno says the engine makes 150 HP stock.
Tuner 1 and Tuner 2's dyno says the engine makes 200 HP chipped.

Tuner 1 reports measured stock vs measured chipped and shows a 50HP gain.
Tuner 2 reports Audi stock vs measured chipped and shows a 100HP gain.

Both Tuners make the same power, but because of how they chose to report the power ratings, results stack in favor of Tuner 2.

L0U
11-03-2009, 04:17 PM
thats the truth of it...comes down to marketing. The truth, just not the whole truth....we buyers do our due dillagence anyway though...no wool over the eyes. mtm hasn't sold any units yet right? to posters of all the known audi boards at least....that is saying something about the price vs. product. I await a joe average to get the S4 mtmm and report back...who's gonna be first.

sakimano
11-04-2009, 09:21 AM
mtm hasn't sold any units yet right? to posters of all the known audi boards at least....that is saying something about the price vs. product. I await a joe average to get the S4 mtmm and report back...who's gonna be first.

that's because we don't live where MTM sells. You guys have had your S4 for weeks...and MTM has barely offered the product here through a very limited supplier network.

In Europe, MTM B8 S4s are not nearly as elusive as they appear to be here on the English speaking/NorthAmerican dominated Audizine.

sakimano
11-04-2009, 09:22 AM
that's definitely a problem for MTM or ABT...taking credit for gains over factory, when the factory number may not be accurate. Kudos to APR for full disclosure!

Of course that doesn't really address why the car is dynoing 320 WHP. Let's forget about the tuners...why is the stock car dynoing way higher than expected?


The problem is some tuners are overlaying their calculated crank figures against Audi's ratings. They are not actually showing their measured stock figures vs their measured chipped figures.

Here's an Example:

Audi says the engine makes 100 HP.

Tuner 1 and Tuner 2's dyno says the engine makes 150 HP stock.
Tuner 1 and Tuner 2's dyno says the engine makes 200 HP chipped.

Tuner 1 reports measured stock vs measured chipped and shows a 50HP gain.
Tuner 2 reports Audi stock vs measured chipped and shows a 100HP gain.

Both Tuners make the same power, but because of how they chose to report the power ratings, results stack in favor of Tuner 2.

leviathan18
11-04-2009, 10:57 AM
i can only speculate why, maybe the next RS4 uses the same engine just retuned to make more power, so you have to limit the number from the S4.

bmw did the same for the 335i its marketed as 300hp but is doing more like 330hp

same for the 2.0tfsi k04 engine they market it as 245hp in the cupra and is making like 230 at the wheels

they wont market the S4 a 400hp car as they would need to make the RS4 and its premium price at least a 500hp engine to make it worth while for the guy that is looking for a luxury 4 door saloon

if you market the S4 only a 333hp engine and the RS4 a 430~450 is a lot easier to sell it, as the difference from the S4 "is a lot" even if its not that true.

switchface
11-04-2009, 08:27 PM
Let's forget about the tuners...why is the stock car dynoing way higher than expected?

Do we assume Audi is underrating the car so they can sell off existing 4.2 FSI engines without making people feel like they were buying into a 'dying breed of old technology'? Just a guess from a marketing perspective, not intended to upset any owners of that engine (different strokes for different folks).

I always thought you wouldn't get as large of a gain from modifying the ecu on a supercharged engine like you could on a turbocharged engine. I thought you needed a different pulley, but I remember Keith saying this setup had more untapped potential.

The fact that MTM didn't release a before dyno leads me to believe they did something similar to Arin's example: taking their final total, subtracting Audi's posted number and taking credit for the delta.

I don't recall if it was posted, but are we comparing the same octane levels? The 91 here in Cali sucks...I miss the 94 Sunoco I used to get in Jersey.

Then again, APR can end all this confusion by releasing their tune to the masses...we're all anxiously waiting!![:D]

Nickyracer
11-04-2009, 09:27 PM
thats the truth of it...comes down to marketing. The truth, just not the whole truth....we buyers do our due dillagence anyway though...no wool over the eyes. mtm hasn't sold any units yet right? to posters of all the known audi boards at least....that is saying something about the price vs. product. I await a joe average to get the S4 mtmm and report back...who's gonna be first.

I desperately wanted to be the first one to buy and install MTM's signal conditioning unit. Contacted MTM dealer here - about 7-10 days between ordering and delivering he said.
But after reading through this and related threads I'd better wait. 3000 euros is not a trifle.
Meanwhile, one fellow in Russia has already ordered Abt's piggy-back offering similar kind of gains as MTM's one. Will keep you guys informed about his commentaries after modding his S4.

riegeraudi
11-04-2009, 09:32 PM
That sounds great nicky. Looking forward to the update.