Dyno Results

[Six Speed Turbo]

I recently got all my mods installed that I had recently puchased. The AWE FMIC, APR FSI pump with programming, Forge DV, and then we put the car on the dyno. I wanted to do a baseline dyno run, but I am 200 miles out from the shop and they are in a different time zone 1 hour ahead of me. But with all the mods I have in my signature I was able to put down 240WHP and 277WTQ on a mustang dyno. As soon as I get the dyno print out I will try to post it.

But first I have to have my wife send the printouts to me here in Iraq. Hopefully it will give me a crank HP/TQ calculation. I know it sucks how she gets to enjoy the car before I do! Look forward to seeing your responses/comments.

[nSun]

lol wow nice to have a wife that actually follow your directions and mod the car for you, instead of spending that money on 2 Chanel bags

[Six Speed Turbo]

lol wow nice to have a wife that actually follow your directions and mod the car for you, instead of spending that money on 2 Chanel bags

Oh I promise not all the money went to the car. I'll probably come home to a couple new purses, 5 more pairs of shoes, and a new dinning set not to mention countless little items that I'll never know about until I get home. Plus she just spent $150 on makeup. But she does what I ask so I guess I can't complain. She likes the mods and the power, she just isn't as excited about it as I am.

[Nico]

Cool so you go away! when you come back your car is modded no hassles you just have to enjoy it!

Great numbers by the way. You will love the pump. I just got mine installed wow! mid to high RPMS way more power feels like a performance car rather than just a diesel with loads of low down torque.

[nSun]

Oh I promise not all the money went to the car. I'll probably come home to a couple new purses, 5 more pairs of shoes, and a new dinning set not to mention countless little items that I'll never know about until I get home. Plus she just spent $150 on makeup. But she does what I ask so I guess I can't complain. She likes the mods and the power, she just isn't as excited about it as I am.

my girlfriend always bitches about how i waste money on my cars and how stupid it is that i just can't leave it as it is. i tell her to stfu

[bhvrdr]

Very solid numbers!!! If she dynod on a mustang in KY I wonder if I may have dynod there as well. I made 210whp without the FSI pump on my 2.0t but with 93 octane APR (stock I made around 175whp). Good stuff.

cheers! Mike

[Six Speed Turbo]

my girlfriend always bitches about how i waste money on my cars and how stupid it is that i just can't leave it as it is. i tell her to stfu

OH all the money spent didn't come without at least a little attitude. But she wont say too much because she understands my hobby and she thinks "I deserve it" in her words.............thanks babe!!

I knew I married her for SOMETHING.......

[Six Speed Turbo]

Very solid numbers!!! If she dynod on a mustang in KY I wonder if I may have dynod there as well. I made 210whp without the FSI pump on my 2.0t but with 93 octane APR (stock I made around 175whp). Good stuff.

cheers! Mike

We got the car on the dyno at Auto Motion in Louisville, Kentucky. So hit up Bryan, who by the way is a great mechanic. I actully had an issue with the car the night we got all the new stuff put on. Bryan drove from Louisville to Fort Campbell a 2 1/2 hour drive the next day to fix the problem. Hows that for customer service.

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND BRYAN AT AUTO MOTION TO ANYONE IN RANGE!!!!

[a4dc89]

congrats! so how much to you think your making at the crank? those are some serious numbers

[lnferno]

What were your baseline #s? I'm interested in seeing the before/after comparison.

[redhott06]

OH all the money spent didn't come without at least a little attitude. But she wont say too much because she understands my hobby and she thinks "I deserve it" in her words.............thanks babe!!

I knew I married her for SOMETHING.......

haha my husband is going to be the one telling me to stop spending money on mods..

[Six Speed Turbo]

What were your baseline #s? I'm interested in seeing the before/after comparison.

Unfortunately I wasn't able to baseline the car. The shop I go to is 2 1/2 hours away from me and they are 1 hour ahead of me as well. I wanted to make sure I was going to get the parts installed. My wife had to get up at 0330 to be there by 0800

I actually asked my wife to baseline the car prior to the upgrades on stock then 93 octane and again after the new mods but Bryan suggested we didn't to ensure that we finished in the same day. I had to also take into consideration she would have the 2 1/2 hour drive home. I really can't be mad at her. What can I say my wife is the S#!t.

[bhvrdr]

We got the car on the dyno at Auto Motion in Louisville, Kentucky. So hit up Bryan, who by the way is a great mechanic. I actully had an issue with the car the night we got all the new stuff put on. Bryan drove from Louisville to Fort Campbell a 2 1/2 hour drive the next day to fix the problem. Hows that for customer service.

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND BRYAN AT AUTO MOTION TO ANYONE IN RANGE!!!!

Yup, that is where I dynod my car and I wholeheartedly agree Bryan is one of the best mechanics I have known. Cool our cars were on the same dyno. That FSI pump is making some great power. Here is a writeup on my car back in the day...


http://www.mjbmotorsport.com/id77.html

[Six Speed Turbo]

congrats! so how much to you think your making at the crank? those are some serious numbers

I don't know exactly how much the conversion is. I know there is a dyno where the conversion is WHP/WTQ and multiply by 1.28, but I am not sure if that was a mustang dyno or not. I don't want to make false statements or make it seem as if I am making more horsepower then I really am.

BUT, If it is the correct conversion then I am making roughly 307.20HP/354.56TQ at the crank. I gotta say I'd be pretty happy with that with just bolt on's.

If I am wrong someone please correct my conversions.

[b6onboost]

^ I'm not going to say the conversion is wrong...however 1.28 is generally used when converting on a Dyno Dynamics dyno...which reads considerably lower than a Mustang dyno.

I'm more skeptical over the numbers themselves. Essentially a K03 with bolt ons...they seem extremely high...even for a Mustang dyno. Which leads me to think the dyno settings may have been wrong. Which is why a baseline on the same dyno, with the same settings, is essential for accurately judging gains and calculating crank power.

No worries though, I'm sure there were good gains and the car will be more fun to drive.

[Six Speed Turbo]

^ I'm not going to say the conversion is wrong...however 1.28 is generally used when converting on a Dyno Dynamics dyno...which reads considerably lower than a Mustang dyno.

I'm more skeptical over the numbers themselves. Essentially a K03 with bolt ons...they seem extremely high...even for a Mustang dyno. Which leads me to think the dyno settings may have been wrong. Which is why a baseline on the same dyno, with the same settings, is essential for accurately judging gains and calculating crank power.

No worries though, I'm sure there were good gains and the car will be more fun to drive.

I sure hope so. I have 36 more day before I come home on leave. I have to be honest I miss my family, but the little car demon in the back of my head misses the car just as much.

I know Bryan knows his stuff, so I want to believe ths numbers are accuratate and not just beacause the numbers are nice but because I trust Bryan and what he says.

[Six Speed Turbo]

On a side note..... He told me that the power should get a little better as the software adapts to the car.

If anyone has the correct conversion please post it. Thanks

[Six Speed Turbo]

Cool so you go away! when you come back your car is modded no hassles you just have to enjoy it!

Great numbers by the way. You will love the pump. I just got mine installed wow! mid to high RPMS way more power feels like a performance car rather than just a diesel with loads of low down torque.

Pretty much. I thought it was pretty cool too. I like the numbers too. I can't wait to come home and drive that 49 mile drive home from the airport. Thanks for the comment.

[bhvrdr]

^ I'm not going to say the conversion is wrong...however 1.28 is generally used when converting on a Dyno Dynamics dyno...which reads considerably lower than a Mustang dyno.

I'm more skeptical over the numbers themselves. Essentially a K03 with bolt ons...they seem extremely high...even for a Mustang dyno. Which leads me to think the dyno settings may have been wrong. Which is why a baseline on the same dyno, with the same settings, is essential for accurately judging gains and calculating crank power.

No worries though, I'm sure there were good gains and the car will be more fun to drive.

I dynod on the same dyno he used in Kentucky at Auto Motion and got 176hp stock and 210hp with the APR chip only.

cheers! Mike

[Six Speed Turbo]

Well thats good news. Hopefully there is not two bad dynos on two seperate days. Thanks bhvrdr.

[grizzles]

We got the car on the dyno at Auto Motion in Louisville, Kentucky. So hit up Bryan, who by the way is a great mechanic. I actully had an issue with the car the night we got all the new stuff put on. Bryan drove from Louisville to Fort Campbell a 2 1/2 hour drive the next day to fix the problem. Hows that for customer service.

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND BRYAN AT AUTO MOTION TO ANYONE IN RANGE!!!!

x2 on Bryan's work, knows his stuff and does the work fairly cheap. I haven't done a dyno pull yet, maybe I will with the VW guys the next time they have a meet. You make me feel less dedicated to my car, I only live 5 miles away and have been too lazy to do it!

Btw, great numbers, that fuel pump is sounding more and more enticing...

[Six Speed Turbo]

x2 on Bryan's work, knows his stuff and does the work fairly cheap. I haven't done a dyno pull yet, maybe I will with the VW guys the next time they have a meet. You make me feel less dedicated to my car, I only live 5 miles away and have been too lazy to do it!

Btw, great numbers, that fuel pump is sounding more and more enticing...

I am becoming somewhat of a personal advertising firm for Bryan, and a BIG X2 on fair pricing. All the more reason to pick Bryan over local competition.

BTW...... get off the couch and dyno that car.

[Bryan]

my girlfriend always bitches about how i waste money on my cars and how stupid it is that i just can't leave it as it is. i tell her to stfu

my gf do the same thing...but I am poor...

[Six Speed Turbo]

my gf do the same thing...but I am poor...

Funny, because you probably spent more on you car then I did

[Six Speed Turbo]

I know there are a few other out there with the same mods. If you can chime in, maybe then we can see how accurate the numbers are. I know there are alot of variables but even numbers that are remotely close will satisfy me.

[4-tified]

I dynod on the same dyno he used in Kentucky at Auto Motion and got 176hp stock and 210hp with the APR chip only.

cheers! Mike

If we assume that the chp on your A4 is 200hp, then by the dyno you have a 12% driveline loss. I find that to be quite low for AWD however.
But anyway. At 210whp (chip), adding back the 12% loss, the chp would be about 239chp. 239 x 12%=28.7, 239-28.7= 210.3

The significant thing is the gain. 210-176= 34WHP gain!
Not bad at all for something that's not even "bolt on", simply "plugged in".

[Six Speed Turbo]

If we assume that the chp on your A4 is 200hp, then by the dyno you have a 12% driveline loss. I find that to be quite low for AWD however.
But anyway. At 210whp (chip), adding back the 12% loss, the chp would be about 239chp. 239 x 12%=28.7, 239-28.7= 210.3

The significant thing is the gain. 210-176= 34WHP gain!
Not bad at all for something that's not even "bolt on", simply "plugged in".

I agree, the most important thing is the gain from stock to modded WHP. I am just sorry I was unable to provide the baseline. Not bad though, if you think about the fact that I was able to get all this done from 6000 mile away.

[bhvrdr]

If we assume that the chp on your A4 is 200hp, then by the dyno you have a 12% driveline loss. I find that to be quite low for AWD however.
But anyway. At 210whp (chip), adding back the 12% loss, the chp would be about 239chp. 239 x 12%=28.7, 239-28.7= 210.3

The significant thing is the gain. 210-176= 34WHP gain!
Not bad at all for something that's not even "bolt on", simply "plugged in".

Yes, that's true it is a great gain. The torque was even better gaining over 50 ft lbs at the wheels. To help explain why it seems like our cars are only losing about 12% on dynos when we baseline them stock, IMO it is because they are underrated. The two MAHA dynos I have seen of these cars stock showed MAHA corrected crank numbers at about 215 chp and 220ctq IIRC. This makes sense especially when you look at stock dynos of quattro cars on mustangs putting out 185whp (saw one posted in this forum). On the same dyno I put down 176whp stock with my B7 A4 my buddy did his stock B6 A4 there (170chp) and put down about 135whp which puts it at a 21% loss which makes better sense.

[Six Speed Turbo]

Yes, that's true it is a great gain. The torque was even better gaining over 50 ft lbs at the wheels. To help explain why it seems like our cars are only losing about 12% on dynos when we baseline them stock, IMO it is because they are underrated. The two MAHA dynos I have seen of these cars stock showed MAHA corrected crank numbers at about 215 chp and 220ctq IIRC. This makes sense especially when you look at stock dynos of quattro cars on mustangs putting out 185whp (saw one posted in this forum). On the same dyno I put down 176whp stock with my B7 A4 my buddy did his stock B6 A4 there (170chp) and put down about 135whp which puts it at a 21% loss which makes better sense.

I would be nice if Audi did under rate their engine output figures. I always thought the car was peppy for only 200HP!

[4-tified]

I would be nice if Audi did under rate their engine output figures. I always thought the car was peppy for only 200HP!

The assumption has always been that the A3/GTI 2.0T puts out more power.
But, if that were true, then we should see the lighter and less frictional loss FWD 2.0T's make much better accel numbers. However, they don't get that much better. The best I've seen for a manual quattro 2.0T is 6.4-6.5.
The best I've seen for a DSG GTI is 6.2, plus, I'll have to double check, but I think the DSG and manual GTI's have shorter gearing, which improves 0-60 times.

So, our 2.0T quattro's with more weight and AWD friction and slower manual shifting is not that much slower. Either the quattro doesn't lose as much as we think, or the 2.0T in the A4 puts our more than is told, or the GTI/A3 have more loss than is told.

[bhvrdr]

The assumption has always been that the A3/GTI 2.0T puts out more power.
But, if that were true, then we should see the lighter and less frictional loss FWD 2.0T's make much better accel numbers. However, they don't get that much better. The best I've seen for a manual quattro 2.0T is 6.4-6.5.
The best I've seen for a DSG GTI is 6.2, plus, I'll have to double check, but I think the DSG and manual GTI's have shorter gearing, which improves 0-60 times.

So, our 2.0T quattro's with more weight and AWD friction and slower manual shifting is not that much slower. Either the quattro doesn't lose as much as we think, or the 2.0T in the A4 puts our more than is told, or the GTI/A3 have more loss than is told.

Their dynos are showing the same thing with dyno sheets i've seen showing stock GTI cars dyoing 195 hp at the wheels. I saw a GTI MAHA dyno of 215chp and 223ctq. If you check out their 1/4 mile slips though their trap speeds are quite high but where they lose out on time is on their 60ft times...common for them to have well over 2.0sec 60ft times. Their cars are fast, it's just their wheels spin. The folks that put on race slicks up front and went out there were doing well enough.

cheers! mike

[Six Speed Turbo]

When I come home in May, I will go to the 1/4 mile track and see what I get. I would like to be in the 13sec range. But we'll see.

[Sanjman]

nice... but i would like to see that dyno sheet for the mods you have!!!

[4-tified]

Their dynos are showing the same thing with dyno sheets i've seen showing stock GTI cars dyoing 195 hp at the wheels. I saw a GTI MAHA dyno of 215chp and 223ctq. If you check out their 1/4 mile slips though their trap speeds are quite high but where they lose out on time is on their 60ft times...common for them to have well over 2.0sec 60ft times. Their cars are fast, it's just their wheels spin. The folks that put on race slicks up front and went out there were doing well enough.

cheers! mike

Don't get me wrong, I think the A3 and GTI are very quick.
I really liked the GTI more than the A3.
Their traps speeds are high, but that is in part due to their lighter weight and lower friction driveline. I wouldn't say it's the higher HP in this case.
The A3/GTI is a fun quick car, but my point is that the heavier 4 door, AWD, sedan with the same engine should be quite a bit slower, yet it's not that slow overall.

I've read lots of postings where people way the GTI/A3 2.0T has "more" power and it even capable of more power. However, the engines are quite similar. The main differences being the FMIC and intake farther from the heat of the turbo/manifold.
But, as I said, early on the compression ration was listed as higher in the 2.0T in the A4 compared to the GTI/A3. I don't know if that is true, as current data shows they are the same.
But, overall the power and accel numbers of A4 sedans with 2.0T engines make a great showing for weighing so much more and having AWD.
It just makes you wonder. I mean, you're not going to cheat power to weight, it's physics.
The A3/GTI don't come with tiptronic or CVT. They have either a clutch manual 6spd or the DSG, where the DSG can add .1-.2 sec on accel times.

Do you have 0-60, 1/4, and trap speeds for A4 FWD 2.0T manual?
Stock and "chipped"?

[Sanjman]

Don't get me wrong, I think the A3 and GTI are very quick.
I really liked the GTI more than the A3.
Their traps speeds are high, but that is in part due to their lighter weight and lower friction driveline. I wouldn't say it's the higher HP in this case.
The A3/GTI is a fun quick car, but my point is that the heavier 4 door, AWD, sedan with the same engine should be quite a bit slower, yet it's not that slow overall.

I've read lots of postings where people way the GTI/A3 2.0T has "more" power and it even capable of more power. However, the engines are quite similar. The main differences being the FMIC and intake farther from the heat of the turbo/manifold.
But, as I said, early on the compression ration was listed as higher in the 2.0T in the A4 compared to the GTI/A3. I don't know if that is true, as current data shows they are the same.
But, overall the power and accel numbers of A4 sedans with 2.0T engines make a great showing for weighing so much more and having AWD.
It just makes you wonder. I mean, you're not going to cheat power to weight, it's physics.
The A3/GTI don't come with tiptronic or CVT. They have either a clutch manual 6spd or the DSG, where the DSG can add .1-.2 sec on accel times.

Do you have 0-60, 1/4, and trap speeds for A4 FWD 2.0T manual?
Stock and "chipped"?

I would think the another BIG difference is in the crankshaft orientation where we use longitudinal versus transverse for A3/GTI??

[BPR32]

Just my 2 cents worth but front wheel drive cars average a loss of 14-18% while the Quattro cars lose almost 24% I have all the stock & chipped dyno sheets of my GTI, My R32, my A4 Front track, Todd Winburn's A4 and many others....As well as bhvrdr & sixspeedturbo....and many, many other VW & Audi cars.
Bryan

[Six Speed Turbo]

nice... but i would like to see that dyno sheet for the mods you have!!!

I am working that right now!!!

[Six Speed Turbo]

Just my 2 cents worth but front wheel drive cars average a loss of 14-18% while the Quattro cars lose almost 24% I have all the stock & chipped dyno sheets of my GTI, My R32, my A4 Front track, Todd Winburn's A4 and many others....As well as bhvrdr & sixspeedturbo....and many, many other VW & Audi cars.
Bryan

What's up Bryan. I heard you guys had an earthquake the other day, I hope everyone is ok and noboby got injured.

Hey Bryan I tried to post the dyno sheet but with no luck. If possible can you post it. Crazy I've been a member for over a year and never posted a pic in the forums before. In my defense, I have been in Iraq the majority of that year.

[4-tified]

I would think the another BIG difference is in the crankshaft orientation where we use longitudinal versus transverse for A3/GTI??

That's simply the engine turned 90degrees.

It's the same crankshaft in the same place. It's just the engine sits differently in the bay.

[4-tified]

Just my 2 cents worth but front wheel drive cars average a loss of 14-18% while the Quattro cars lose almost 24% I have all the stock & chipped dyno sheets of my GTI, My R32, my A4 Front track, Todd Winburn's A4 and many others....As well as bhvrdr & sixspeedturbo....and many, many other VW & Audi cars.
Bryan

Yes.
That's my point, basically.

Yet, even with 7-10% less power to the wheels (higher numbers are crank), and the added weight of the whole car, the GTI/A3 isn't a lot faster. It's so close that it would be a drivers race in most street runs.
It feels as if the A4 has a bit more torque than the numbers indicate.
It takes a good bit of power to motivate the heavy pig we love called the A4.