SQ5 APRs Stage 2 claims on 3.0T tunes seem questionable

[gasparm]

All,

I'm looking for some feedback from the community on people who have actually run DYNO's on the SQ5s after a Stage 2 upgrade.

First I want to start this thread off by saying "I AM NOT A DYNO EXPERT". But I have spent some time around Mustang and Dynojets to at least understand how they work. So I just spent about 2 1/2 hours at my local Dyno shop who has a really nice Mustand Dyno system. Additionally I'll say I have a '16 SQ5 with a Roc-Euro Intake and AWE full non-res downpipes Exhaust system. After the parameters for the system where inputted like we set the max rpm in the system to 6500 based on Audi's website, but then found out APR has their system set to 6900, but not sure this matters for us US folks as I found out another tidbit from APR techs that was interesting (i.e. a SQ5 in the US even with a APR tune done still will not let the car max out to 6500 when shifting EVEN in manual mode, yes how crazy is it that even with the APR Tune the system still has a fail safe to shift at 5000 rpms).

The other issue is Audi posts that the 1:1 ratio is at 6th gear, which seem to be fine, but APR tech couldn't confirm this on their side in their tests done. Actually waiting on the tech to email me APR's actual dyno test information.

I am not totally oblivious to marketing claims as I work for a manufacturer myself and we post marketing claims on many of our products which are not always what happens in real life, BUT I really wonder how APR got some of it's claims of i.e. 463 HP, which in their caveats it states at the crank. Interesting how APR though shows they where able to get a '15 SQ5 to 6900 rpms when there wasn't anything we could do at my dyno testing to get to 6900.

So here is is what I do know, based on my sheet below you can see after a Stage 2 APR tune was done I may be able to see the LB-TQ close to 400, but the HP is still VARY lacking.

Mustang Dyno (PEAK TORQUE at rear wheel is 331 lb-tq @ 6077 rpms) - converted to crank using a conversion tool says around 397 lb-tq (which seems to be in line with APR's claims on the website)
Mustang Dyno (PEAK POWER at rear wheel is 334 HP @ 5998 rpms) - converted to crank using a conversion tool says around 400 HP (which is pretty far off from APRs claims on the website of 463 HP)

Now to be a little fair I did even convert to a DynoJet system to compare, which most will know runs about 11% ish higher then Mustang's System.

DynoJet conversion (PEAK TORQUE at rear wheel is 367 lb-tq @ 6077 rpms) - converted to crank using a conversion tool says around 438 lb-tq (which seems to be in line with APR's claims on the website)
DynoJet conversion (PEAK POWER at rear wheel is 370 HP @ 5998 rpms) - converted to crank using a conversion tool says around 442 HP (which is MUCH closer to APRs claims on the website of 463 HP)

With all that being said here is the data from my Dyno.


APRs Claims:


Lastly, a little AWE love from that awesome sounding exhaust they have:

[rgvsq5]

In order to be able to shift at 6900 RPM... You have to disable auto-upshift via VAGCOM and even then can only rev that high when shifting manually. It works, I've done it.

As far as HP numbers are concerned, I've never dyno'd my SQ so I can't comment on that. However I have a best 0-60mph of 3.97... So there's power coming from somewhere that's well above and beyond what these things put out stock. :D

[zcspec]

Gasparm, I personally don't own a SQ5 so I will ask you this, what transmission does your SQ have? Is it the ZF-8 like my 2015 allroad? If so, the APR tech you spoke with, *may* have forgot one small detail regarding the transmission's willingness to auto-shift, even in manual mode.

Take a look here: http://www.goapr.com/support/zf8upshift.html

When this feature is enabled in my allroad, the transmission auto-shifts around 5800 rpms. When I have the feature disabled, I am able to rev up to about 6200rpms. Again, I don't know which transmission your SQ has, but look into this feature if you do have the ZF-8

[LINDW4LL]

Don't put too much stock into the numbers, they don't hold much value without a baseline. These readings are best used for comparing cars only on that same dyno, as calibrations vary between different dynos, not to mention temperatures, other environmental conditions, etc. Also, the DynaPack dyno (which APR uses) reads high even compared to a DynoJet.

Next; already mentioned but to shift at 6900, you need to disable auto upshift in manual mode with VCDS. The car keeps gaining power as it revs, so this hurt you slightly.

Select control module
Select Auto Trans
Select Adaptation
Load Automatic Upshift from the dropdown
click "not active"
Hit Do it
Hit Yes
Hit no
Here it may say it was not accepted. If that's the case, hit OK.
Hit Yes this time around for using the default values
It should accept it.

[colby7]

APR claims 463hp at 6900. It looks like they claim about 445hp at 6500. If you're using APR's latest SQ5 Stage 2 software, you need to go into VCDS to disable auto-upshift in order to rev to 6900 in manual mode. Whomever at APR told you that you wouldn't be able to do that as a US Audi customer is sadly uninformed. Dozens of guys on this board so this all the time.

[gasparm]

Gasparm, I personally don't own a SQ5 so I will ask you this, what transmission does your SQ have? Is it the ZF-8 like my 2015 allroad? If so, the APR tech you spoke with, *may* have forgot one small detail regarding the transmission's willingness to auto-shift, even in manual mode.

Take a look here: http://www.goapr.com/support/zf8upshift.html

When this feature is enabled in my allroad, the transmission auto-shifts around 5800 rpms. When I have the feature disabled, I am able to rev up to about 6200rpms. Again, I don't know which transmission your SQ has, but look into this feature if you do have the ZF-8

I do believe the SQ5 is the 8speed. And that link and from what "rgvsq5" says seems to be inline that I will have to go in through vagcom and disable the autoupshift. Dang it. Great find.

[gasparm]

APR claims 463hp at 6900. It looks like they claim about 445hp at 6500. If you're using APR's latest SQ5 Stage 2 software, you need to go into VCDS to disable auto-upshift in order to rev to 6900 in manual mode. Whomever at APR told you that you wouldn't be able to do that as a US Audi customer is sadly uninformed. Dozens of guys on this board so this all the time.

Thanks for the insight. Agree'd he should have mentioned the auto-upshift thing.

- - - Updated - - -

BTW, this is WHY I LOVE THIS FORUM. You all are so great and damn quick on the information.

[SQive]

I have a '16 SQ5 with APR stage 2-93, NRDP, 034 intake hose, and auto up-shift disabled. I use the JHM pulley and stock SC pulley. I had it on a dyno Saturday and it was producing 454 HP (crank) at 6500 RPM. I do not yet have the other details as their printer was down and they still haven't emailed me the PDF they saved.

[rusq5]

I have a '16 SQ5 with APR stage 2-93, NRDP, 034 intake hose, and auto up-shift disabled. I use the JHM pulley and stock SC pulley. I had it on a dyno Saturday and it was producing 454 HP (crank) at 6500 RPM. I do not yet have the other details as their printer was down and they still haven't emailed me the PDF they saved.

What was your whp and what are you using for drivetrain loss?

I'm interested in seeing a stock vs apr stg 2 dyno from someone other than apr.

[SQive]

What was your whp and what are you using for drivetrain loss?

I'm interested in seeing a stock vs apr stg 2 dyno from someone other than apr.

As I said, I'm still waiting on the detailed report. They had it set to account for parasitic loss with a calculated crank value. It was consistent on all three runs 451 to 454 HP. I'll share that report as soon as I have it.

[riceboy22]

I've got some bias here admittedly, but just curious why it seems like some people are implying that APR isn't delivering (potentially compared to other tunes). I've personally only got my butt dyno so far, but in looking at the AudiRevolution 1/4 mile list for the S4 3.0T, the fastest cars are a pretty even mix of mostly APR and GIAC Stage 2 cars. That would suggest to me that they are likely putting out comparable power on their 3.0T tunes.

Also, +1 to what @LINDW4LL said as far as dyno numbers not meaning much without some sort of baseline comparison. There are way too many variables in play.

[zcd2.7t]

All,

I'm looking for some feedback from the community on people who have actually run DYNO's on the SQ5s after a Stage 2 upgrade...

Question: Why should anyone care what a dyno reads? The delta in measured performance is the only data that matters in the real world, 'cause nobody drives dynos...

Just sayin'...

[gasparm]

Question: Why should anyone care what a dyno reads? The delta in measured performance is the only data that matters in the real world, 'cause nobody drives dynos...

Just sayin'...

I'll agree to disagree. Getting a dyno done after you get a tune done in my opinion keeps the manufacturers semi-honest about what they publish. Most educated buyers don't buy blindly hoping for the sake that the manufacturer isn't screwing everyone. I did the dyno to see how close it was to APRs published numbers and nothing more to give back to the community when others are trying to do an educated purchase on such a product.

[riceboy22]

I'll agree to disagree. Getting a dyno done after you get a tune done in my opinion keeps the manufacturers semi-honest about what they publish. Most educated buyers don't buy blindly hoping for the sake that the manufacturer isn't screwing everyone. I did the dyno to see how close it was to APRs published numbers and nothing more to give back to the community when others are trying to do an educated purchase on such a product.

I definitely appreciate seeing dyno numbers, but I think the point is that dyno numbers without context only mean so much. You really need to have a stock run and a tuned run on the same dyno in order to determine if the tune is doing what it's supposed to do. If a stock SQ5 put up 354 on that dyno and stage 2 only put up 400, then I think there are some legitimate questions that could be asked. If it only put up 310 on that dyno stock, then 400 tuned looks a lot better. It would probably also be helpful if you have some logs of things like timing, boost (spec/act), IAT, etc to ensure that nothing whacky is going on with your car.

In terms of APR delivering, I think the posted 1/4 mile times for 3.0T cars suggests that the APR tune is at least in line with what other tuners are producing.

[tmoe]

I definitely appreciate seeing dyno numbers, but I think the point is that dyno numbers without context only mean so much. You really need to have a stock run and a tuned run on the same dyno in order to determine if the tune is doing what it's supposed to do. If a stock SQ5 put up 354 on that dyno and stage 2 only put up 400, then I think there are some legitimate questions that could be asked. If it only put up 310 on that dyno stock, then 400 tuned looks a lot better. It would probably also be helpful if you have some logs of things like timing, boost (spec/act), IAT, etc to ensure that nothing whacky is going on with your car.

In terms of APR delivering, I think the posted 1/4 mile times for 3.0T cars suggests that the APR tune is at least in line with what other tuners are producing.

Well said! completely agree.

[colby7]

Also, please keep in mind a dyno is about so much more than peak numbers. For example, I'd gladly trade a tune that's 30 hp below an advertised peak, in exchange for one that has a super flat curve.

[gasparm]

Well said! completely agree.

I'd agree with riceboy22 also. I have to go back and get the tune removed and run it again for sure for an accurate comparison. Good thing Eurotech and the Tune place are only about 20min from each other.

[riceboy22]

Also, please keep in mind a dyno is about so much more than peak numbers. For example, I'd gladly trade a tune that's 30 hp below an advertised peak, in exchange for one that has a super flat curve.

I love area under the curve!

I'd agree with riceboy22 also. I have to go back and get the tune removed and run it again for sure for an accurate comparison. Good thing Eurotech and the Tune place are only about 20min from each other.

Or we can all go to a test and tune in the 1/4 mile at Island Dragway lol.

Edit: You should also try and get a hold of a laptop and cable to take some logs while you're on the dyno.

[gasparm]

I love area under the curve!



Or we can all go to a test and tune in the 1/4 mile at Island Dragway lol.

Edit: You should also try and get a hold of a laptop and cable to take some logs while you're on the dyno.

Or you could come out to Englishtown, NJ on July 16th & 17th for Waterfest which allows us to enter the Drag racing.

[zcd2.7t]

...You really need to have a stock run and a tuned run on the same dyno in order to determine if the tune is doing what it's supposed to do...

This, exactly.

[zcd2.7t]

...I did the dyno to see how close it was to APRs published numbers and nothing more to give back to the community when others are trying to do an educated purchase on such a product.

OK, but you didn't really prove anything, other than your run didn't show exactly the same results that APR's runs did, which is what EVERY dyno run ever run shows, basically.

Measured performance is the only proof that matters - no bullsh*t conversion factors, or statements like "...everyone knows that this dyno reads this much higher than that dyno" (seriously?? everyone knows this?? and it's been scientifically proven and verified? Yougottabekiddin' me...)

Nevertheless, if it makes you (and anyone else) feel better about your purchase, knock yourselves out.

[gasparm]

Anyone in the Lower NY / Upper NJ area with a stock SQ5 willing to get a DYNO done? I'll pay.

[zcd2.7t]

Anyone in the Lower NY / Upper NJ area with a stock SQ5 willing to get a DYNO done? I'll pay.

Baselining someone else's car won't really prove anything, either...

[LINDW4LL]

Baselining someone else's car won't really prove anything, either...

I disagree. Stock SQs should be extremely close to each other on the dyno. It will serve the general purpose here.

[gasparm]

Baselining someone else's car won't really prove anything, either...

Move along TROLL move along.

[riceboy22]

Or you could come out to Englishtown, NJ on July 16th & 17th for Waterfest which allows us to enter the Drag racing.

Waterfest is a little too crazy for me to try to get in any runs there. I'm going to try and get in on a track during a slower night.

Move along TROLL move along. [IMG]http:/

I don't think @zcd2.7t is trolling you. He's maybe being a little rigid because of your original post. In an ideal world, you'd do a baseline run stock and then subsequent runs under various states of tune with identical conditions. The reality is that's not generally practical or doable. If you can get a stock SQ5 on that dyno with similar conditions that should be good enough. You really should be logging at the same time though to make sure there's no underlying issues.

[zcd2.7t]

Move along ...

Oh, right - I see - you don't like someone point out the relativie inanity of your actions - too bad. I've been here on AZ 5 years, and an Audi owner for 17 years, and am not trolling.

You're the one who started a thread questioning a tuner's products and/or claims with essentially zero valid data to back up your post. Might want to look at the definition of "troll" to see if it fits who you see in the mirror, rather than pointing the finger at someone you don't know who has done nothing wrong...

...In an ideal world, you'd do a baseline run stock and then subsequent runs under various states of tune with identical conditions...

Not in an ideal world, but if I were to post questioning the validity of a tuner's claims, I'd sure as sh*t make sure I had actual, valid data to back up my assertions. The OP's post doesn't. It's that simple.

[gasparm]

Waterfest is a little too crazy for me to try to get in any runs there. I'm going to try and get in on a track during a slower night.



I don't think @zcd2.7t is trolling you. He's maybe being a little rigid because of your original post. In an ideal world, you'd do a baseline run stock and then subsequent runs under various states of tune with identical conditions. The reality is that's not generally practical or doable. If you can get a stock SQ5 on that dyno with similar conditions that should be good enough. You really should be logging at the same time though to make sure there's no underlying issues.

Well if you want to ever meet up or hang at the Bear Mt. Car Show that is every Wed night let me know. Would be cool to hang with another SQ5 owner.

As for the other note, I called it for what I believe it to be. Everyone so far minus him has actually posted useful or constructive feedback, none of his was either.

[zcd2.7t]

I disagree. Stock SQs should be extremely close to each other on the dyno. It will serve the general purpose here.

If by "extremely close" you mean within 20-30 hp of each other, I'd agree, but the delta for the "fail" the OP is suggesting is about that much, so it really won't be valid for the OP's purposes, at least as he's explained them.

[zcd2.7t]

...Everyone so far minus him has actually posted useful or constructive feedback, none of his was either.

Oh, so when I suggest the same as other posters (that what you presented doesn't really prove anything without a baseline to compare it to) it's trolling, but when others say the same thing, it's not.

Right - gotcha.