APR ECU Upgrade MK6 Golf - Customer perspective

[elisiX]

I cannot believe how much crap goes on about fractions of seconds. Seriously, it doesnt matter.

Reminds me of reading the old PerformanceForums back in the day.

At the end of the day, having your ECU remapped provides the best single gain for minimal outlay.

It doesnt matter who you go with (there's plenty of options) - they all offer fantastic value for money.

Personally, I went with APR because its the strongest, most reliable, well known, supported product out there.

That and I can whinge directly to Guy if I need to - not that I ever have had to. His support for APR is incredible.

APR fanboi? Too right.

[Ryan_R]

Wheels/tyres could also have an effect - heavier wheels v lighter wheels make a considerable difference to WHP and to lap times (so a small dif in 0-100)

[Corey_R]

(Before I say anything else, just let me make clear, I'm not trying to antagonise here, just shed some light on the situation and maybe answer a lingering question of REXman's.)

The above times are from VW's quoted times, to a time that's been (regularly) achieved by owners after having a chip done.

Motor Mag has achieved 6.5 (GTI) and 5.3 (R) for stock DSG cars using their VBOX. Both these times are four tenths down on VW's claims. Both are within a second of the times being achieved by stage 1 owners. So maybe the variance here is that VW is conservative in their acceleration figures. Alternatively, maybe not all GTIs and Rs are equal, but those that are driven harder (say, by the demographic that also have a tune done) are more likely to perform better. Just a thought.

Yeah - but as Guy_H pointed out, there are other variables too. Because for every magazine that gets 4 tenths under like you mentioned, there is a magazine that gets 4 tenths over. There's always variation.

[Guy_H]

My 2 cents:

I reckon the winter / summer times are going to worth a least 1/2 a second as well - last night air temp 30 degrees & 90% humidity really suck for a turbo car.

Give us a 7 degree day with 5% humidity, there is probably even more time in it.

[AdamD]

Polo GTI went from 8.2 to 6.5 and less.
Golf GTI went from 6.9 to 5.5 and less.
S3 / R went from 5.7 to ~4.7 and had the least gains as far as number of seconds.

(Before I say anything else, just let me make clear, I'm not trying to antagonise here, just shed some light on the situation and maybe answer a lingering question of REXman's.)

The above times are from VW's quoted times, to a time that's been (regularly) achieved by owners after having a chip done.

Motor Mag has achieved 6.5 (GTI) and 5.3 (R) for stock DSG cars using their VBOX. Both these times are four tenths down on VW's claims. Both are within a second of the times being achieved by stage 1 owners. So maybe the variance here is that VW is conservative in their acceleration figures. Alternatively, maybe not all GTIs and Rs are equal, but those that are driven harder (say, by the demographic that also have a tune done) are more likely to perform better. Just a thought.

[REXman]

No probs. Im leaving it.

[G-rig]

CMON Rexman stop nagging out the ecu tunes, they give great results, better than a typical jap piggy back.

[Corey_R]

What I am saying is not brand dependant.

Yes it is...


And that should be enough. But to summarise:

Polo GTI went from 8.2 to 6.5 and less.
Golf GTI went from 6.9 to 5.5 and less.
S3 / R went from 5.7 to ~4.7 and had the least gains as far as number of seconds.

Don't forget that it's not just about "peak power" increases. It's about HOW the power is increased, and also very much about the torque. Saying that "Volkswagen x gains 50hp peak power" is a very narrow minded view of it. Because it also probably gains over 100Nm of torque over a wider rev range, plus 80hp lower in the rev range etc.

REXman let me say this again. You are trying to tell everyone how something will work out when IT HAS BEEN DONE FOR THE PAST 4 YEARS. Just stop arguing about it mate. Step away....
All this information is all very available if you do the research.

[REXman]

But I am not saying that Volkswagens are not good or they dont make good power.

What I am saying is not brand dependant. I am saying that a Nissan GTR can be expected to make a couple of seconds in the dash because it is a big engined car that responds extremely well to tuning. So going from under 300 to 400 HP with a tune and TBE on a AWD car can get the performance I am talking about.

Gaining 50HP though on a FWD will not do the same thing. That is all I am saying. I am not arguing about the tuning effects on different brands of car. Im saying that to get 0-100 in X amount of time requies X amount of kilowatts.

From the sounds of things it sounds like I am halfway right though as the Polo GTI is a car that realistically does dash in around 6.5 secs, and gets down to 5.5 secs.. at best. So a sec.. or less. Which i have been saying the whole time is heaps in car world, entire races are won by less than that.

So I guess we can both drop i now!

[Corey_R]

Yes, I am serious.
What do Subaru's and Nissans have to do with Volkswagens? That's my point REXman.

I mean no disrespect to you REXman. If we were having a discussion about Subaru's and Nissan's in here, I would defer to your comments, because you have the experience in that area and I don't. But this isn't Nissan or Subaru, it's Volkswagen. So instead of you deferring to people with many years experience as owners of Volkswagens, or even as operating businesses tuning Volkswagens, you're telling everyone here that "you are wrong because I have done this on Nissans and Subarus and couldn't achieve that", even though the MKV GTI's and the APR tunes have been around for 5 years now, and Audi S3's have been around for almost 4 years now, and everything you are saying is not possible, not only is possible, but has been verified time after time after time by numerous difference sources....

Please just drop it unless you have some Volkswagen related information to discuss. Nissans and Subarus are not Volkswagens. I'm not saying Volkswagens are better. I'm just saying that they're different, and therefore the methods and results can be different.

[REXman]

That would seem to be the crux of the issue which has caused the last several pages of discussion.

Are you two serious? I said the Nissan GTR 1994 model, makes 400HP with a tune and exhaust.

Good grief gentlemen I'm loving the passion for the golfs, apparently I'm buying one also. But no the crux of the issue is not about Jap cars now

[Corey_R]

I thought it was the other way around that a lot of Jap car piggy back ECU's didn't gain that much, whereas our cars are more detuned from the factory.

That would seem to be the crux of the issue which has caused the last several pages of discussion.

[G-rig]

I volunteer you G-Rig's GTI. He'll drop it off tomorrow for you!
(hahaha... if only! )

Sounds good, Greg - remove all those giant subwoofer things first please

No worries, you can borrow it and hand it back with an RSC and Intake on it

Don't have any audio upgrades on this one fellas, the stock setup sounds noticeably better than the MK5 so haven't bothered yet.

Either way I don't doubt that the car's 0-100 increased by 1 sec, just like the power/gains are achievable from what is advertised based on a few dyno's in the past (not just the butt-dyno).

I thought it was the other way around that a lot of Jap car piggy back ECU's didn't gain that much, whereas our cars are more detuned from the factory.

[elisiX]

lol - too funnay.

[Guy_H]

Sounds good, Greg - remove all those giant subwoofer things first please