From: Doki on 24 Jul 2007 13:05 "Homer" <feckinstupid(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:f84brn$l8p$1(a)energise.enta.net... > "Doki" <mrdoki(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:46a5a407$0$24747$da0feed9(a)news.zen.co.uk... >> What's a realistic power output for an ABF (16V MK3 Golf engine) running >> on megasquirt with standard everything? And what would be realistic with >> a bit of porting? A lot of people wander around claiming "The ABF was >> designed with rally use in mind so it'll hit 170 horses dead easy, the >> reason it makes 150 in the Golf is because they needed a gap between the >> GTI and the VR6". Which smells a bit bullshitty to me. > > > One with a remapped OEM ECU is meant to give 170-180bhp, the standard > inlet system isn't particularily restrictive so you'd probably get the > same with the megasquirt. A bit of porting and a decent pair of cams > should get you to 200bhp, much more gets expensive due to the poor design > of the cylinder head compared to the Vauxhall and Peugeot 16V cylinder > heads of the time. How much porting are we talking? I'm thinking of standard engine, rebuilt, and porting would be with standard valves. OTOH 170BHP would be plenty and would keep costs down - if I were heading for 200 horses, I think I'd prefer the 1.8T route... Who remaps the VW ECU by the way? I was assuming it'd need a custom ecu in the MK2 or run off the existing Digifant setup, but I've not done much research yet.
From: SteveH on 24 Jul 2007 13:08 Burgerman <burgerman(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: > "SteveH" <steve(a)italiancar.co.uk> wrote in message > news:1i1rln9.166epsi3v1o6nN%steve(a)italiancar.co.uk... > > Burgerman <burgerman(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: > > > >> Without the above qualifying statements any power figure is totally > >> meaningless. > > > > Erm, yes. Exactly. > > > > Most internet power claims are bullshit, 'cos you have no idea what > > magical correction figures have been used to make a particular tuner's > > product look good / give the owner bragging rights. > > > > > That wasnt the argument. Yes, it was. > You said > >> You've just guesstimated a guesstimate. > > And I explained to you exactly why a corrected figure is no guestimate and > you cut the rest because you dont like being wrong. "Mr. Pot, Mr. Kettle would like a word with you" Despite what you say, unless you have measured the power on a bench and then in the chassis for that particular car, the 'corrected' figure is pissing in the wind. However, it wouldn't have been good for your business if this was publicised. -- SteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo' www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - Hongdou GY200 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 TSpark - B6 Passat 2.0TDI SE - COSOC KOTL BOTAFOT #87 - BOTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
From: Depresion on 24 Jul 2007 13:15 "Doki" <mrdoki(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:46a63148$0$24762$da0feed9(a)news.zen.co.uk... > > Who remaps the VW ECU by the way? I was assuming it'd need a custom ecu in > the MK2 or run off the existing Digifant setup, but I've not done much > research yet. Where are you? Of the top of my head try: JBS (Chesterfield) http://www.jbsautodesigns.co.uk/ Awesome GTi (Manchester) http://www.awesomegti.com/ Jabba (Peterborough) http://www.jabbasport.com/ AmD (Essex) http://www.amdtechnik.com Star Performance (Fife) http://www.starperformance.co.uk/
From: Homer on 24 Jul 2007 16:12 "Doki" <mrdoki(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:46a63148$0$24762$da0feed9(a)news.zen.co.uk... > How much porting are we talking? I think it's just a basic job cleaning up everything and then three angled valve seats, you don't want to open the ports up too much and lose torque. > I'm thinking of standard engine, rebuilt, and porting would be with > standard valves. OTOH 170BHP would be plenty and would keep costs down - > if I were heading for 200 horses, I think I'd prefer the 1.8T route... Yep, don't waste your time with the 16V if you want over 200bhp, just go straight for the 1.8T.
From: Burgerman on 24 Jul 2007 16:48
"SteveH" <steve(a)italiancar.co.uk> wrote in message news:1i1royr.1uad7drtvs0vyN%steve(a)italiancar.co.uk... > Burgerman <burgerman(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: > >> "SteveH" <steve(a)italiancar.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:1i1rln9.166epsi3v1o6nN%steve(a)italiancar.co.uk... >> > Burgerman <burgerman(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Without the above qualifying statements any power figure is totally >> >> meaningless. >> > >> > Erm, yes. Exactly. >> > >> > Most internet power claims are bullshit, 'cos you have no idea what >> > magical correction figures have been used to make a particular tuner's >> > product look good / give the owner bragging rights. >> > >> >> >> That wasnt the argument. > > Yes, it was. > >> You said >> >> You've just guesstimated a guesstimate. >> >> And I explained to you exactly why a corrected figure is no guestimate >> and >> you cut the rest because you dont like being wrong. > > "Mr. Pot, Mr. Kettle would like a word with you" > > Despite what you say, unless you have measured the power on a bench and > then in the chassis for that particular car, the 'corrected' figure is > pissing in the wind. The corrected figure has nothing whatsoever to do with engine or chassis dynos and obviously both cannot be compared. Ans as I already stated you cannot give a flywheel figure on a chassis dyno anyway. The "corrected figure" only relates to the absolute atmospheric pressure and temperature and both are corrected to a standard pressure of 1019mb and 20 degrees c. I t has nothing whatsoever to do with chassis or engine dynamometer comparisons. A chassis dyno is just as accurate and measures as ir says rear wheel Hp CORRECTED to a standard pressure and temperature if you want it to. Or not if you dont but thats useless.. This obviously includes all transmission and tyre losses as actually happens on the road. An ENGINE dyno does exactly the same thing and it too is corrected in the same way. Unless you have a specific reason not to do so. In which case just like a chassis dyno you instruct it not to bother. Correction factors have absolutely nothing to do with the difference between the two types of dyno or measuring "flywheel" or engine power on a chassis dyno (which is and will remain impossible) Do you get it yet??? > > However, it wouldn't have been good for your business if this was > publicised. Prey tell me why not? What EXACTLY would you publicise??? This should be fun... > -- > SteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo' > www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - Hongdou GY200 - Alfa 75 TSpark > Alfa 156 TSpark - B6 Passat 2.0TDI SE - COSOC KOTL > BOTAFOT #87 - BOTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC # A list of slowish cars and bikes??? |