APR advertised gains...Real or Fake

[jazzyjames999]

Guys I've very confused with APR at the moment:-

On the APR website, for a Mk7 R it says 283kw but upon picking up the latest Motor mag, Harding Performance have won the Hot Tuner 2015 award with the same Mk7 but its Stage 2 with $20k of tuning additions and only gets 247kw on the rolling road. At this point I thought "hmmm maybe thats at the wheels and not at the flywheel" but its 0-100km/hr time is 4.4sec and "consistently" is the word they used.

APR are claiming 3.8s with Stage 1 and thats a $1650 tune...what in Gods earth is $20k of tuning doing? Can anyone explain this?

Has anyone tested their car after the tune? What are you getting?

[nat225]

you can't win any Motor Magazine tuned cars battle with just a tune, LOL.. if yes the Mk7R will sell like HOT CAKES.. but right now there are 111 mk7R's for sale in car sales and yet only 70 old mk6R's for sale.

There's the BBK $4k, there's the set of wheels $2k+, R compound tyres $2k+, suspensions $5k+, etc... all these EASILY cost $20k in total.

[Lucas_R]

APR advertised gains...Real or Fake

APR's website quote power at the engine/flywheel. Dyno's measure power at the wheels, so the dyno figures quoted in the hot tuner challenge article are lower than what it says on APR's website.

A work mate of mine has a Mk7 R with APR stage 1 tune and the VWR intake and it made 230kw at the wheels on our local dyno a few months ago. He just had a CTS down pipe fitted today along with a revised tune, so he will visit the dyno again soon to see the results.

Mk7 R stage 1 vs Mk6 R stage 2+ dyno results

[tigger73]

In terms of performance mods the car at hot tuner had a tune and exhaust. The intake and intercooler would give minimal gains - mainly for sound and repeated runs/maintaining performance.

It was the stock turbo with no major engine mods - unlike previous years when they had an engine with major work done including turbo swap and engine internals upgraded.

If you read the article again you'll find the track was greasy and everyone had problems with traction. Hence all the 0-100 times were off, however in terms of a comparison everyone had the same conditions to run in so times are all relative.

The problem with the Mk7 is that to date the turbo hasn't been as bullet-proof as the previous gen units. Anyone tuning their car is taking a reasonable risk with warranty hence why people are probably waiting longer or not modding at all.

Also mk7 R is a totally new engine/platform so tuners have had to start from scratch. There's no turbo kits available yet...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jazzyjames999]

APR's website quote power at the engine/flywheel. Dyno's measure power at the wheels, so the dyno figures quoted in the hot tuner challenge article are lower than what it says on APR's website.

A work mate of mine has a Mk7 R with APR stage 1 tune and the VWR intake and it made 230kw at the wheels on our local dyno a few months ago. He just had a CTS down pipe fitted today along with a stage 2 tune, so he will visit the dyno again soon to see the results.

Mk7 R stage 1 vs Mk6 R stage 2+ dyno results

Thats what I thought, but a quick calculation puts the hot tuner car at 286kw at the flywheel which is what the Stage 1 for $1650 is getting, I just thought Stage 2 and all those mods you would get more.

[AdamD]

Thats what I thought, but a quick calculation puts the hot tuner car at 286kw at the flywheel which is what the Stage 1 for $1650 is getting, I just thought Stage 2 and all those mods you would get more.

You can't (accurately) rely on any fixed formula for determining power at the flywheel from an at-the-wheels figure, or vice versa. Everything is approximate and varies, even from vehicle to vehicle.

You'll always get a substantially greater jump in performance from stock to stage 1, than you will from stage 1 to stage 2. The latter is often only in the order of 10-15kw. As tigger73 says above, the exhaust is really the only stage 2 modification that's really contributing to the power hike over stage 1.

[tigger73]

Stage 2 is more about a fatter torque curve and higher top end. Biggest gains are in stage 1 then it's all about spending $ for small incremental gains.

And yes the mods cost on this car compared to the performance gain doesn't really tell the whole picture. For $24k in mods I'd like to see quite a bit more, however you'll really only get the next step up once you start changing turbos.

[Notso Swift]

Horses come as Clydesdales and Shetlands...

[Guy_H]

There are many ways to put it in perspective.

1: Winner.
2: Winner.
3: 53 more AWKW on Mainlines Dyno run by Mainlines staff than a Willal A45 AMG stage 1.5
4: 57 more AWKW on Mainlines Dyno run by Mainlines staff than a MRT WRX
5: Ran a 12.5 second 1/4 mile on a greasy track and spinning tyres in the first 4 gears. Fastest car (700+ HP Hi Torque Commodore) was .15 seconds faster - it normally runs 10 second quarter miles in that trim.
6: Fastest 0-100 time of the field, despite spinning tyres in the first 4 gears.

We back our figures & numbers and as above - stage 2 numbers are not about peak - its about spread of the torque curve. The entire power / torque output is capped for the stock clutches.

If you compare the results directly to last years numbers (Stage 3 Golf R 6) and read the story in full, you will understand that the dyno results are skewed and don't reflect a lot in this particular test.

[Guy_H]

P.S. Car was driven to and from Sydney (1000km's each way), it is 100% totally street legal, enclosed airbox, 400 cell catalyst (Milltek) and on street legal fuel. It was running Yokohama AD08R's - not semi slicks either.

[nat225]

There are many ways to put it in perspective.

1: Winner.
2: Winner.
3: 53 more AWKW on Mainlines Dyno run by Mainlines staff than a Willal A45 AMG stage 1.5
4: 57 more AWKW on Mainlines Dyno run by Mainlines staff than a MRT WRX
5: Ran a 12.5 second 1/4 mile on a greasy track and spinning tyres in the first 4 gears. Fastest car (700+ HP Hi Torque Commodore) was .15 seconds faster - it normally runs 10 second quarter miles in that trim.
6: Fastest 0-100 time of the field, despite spinning tyres in the first 4 gears.

We back our figures & numbers and as above - stage 2 numbers are not about peak - its about spread of the torque curve. The entire power / torque output is capped for the stock clutches.

If you compare the results directly to last years numbers (Stage 3 Golf R 6) and read the story in full, you will understand that the dyno results are skewed and don't reflect a lot in this particular test.

why not on hankook rs3 this time?

Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk

[tigger73]

Be interested to see what you're able extract out of the Mk7 R when you have upgraded clutch packs, engine internals and bolt on a BT

The results in hot tuner were quite a bit closer and not so clear cut this year than previous years. Given how close the results were particularly on the dyno (0.2kW) and 0-400m (0.01s) it wouldn't have taken much to change the placing of the top 4 cars.

Not taking away from all your hard work and achievement, however I think you'll agree that you had a bit of luck fall your way to walk away with the win this year.

[Guy_H]

why not on hankook rs3 this time?

Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk

None in stock anywhere.

Be interested to see what you're able extract out of the Mk7 R when you have upgraded clutch packs, engine internals and bolt on a BT

The results in hot tuner were quite a bit closer and not so clear cut this year than previous years. Given how close the results were particularly on the dyno (0.2kW) and 0-400m (0.01s) it wouldn't have taken much to change the placing of the top 4 cars.

Not taking away from all your hard work and achievement, however I think you'll agree that you had a bit of luck fall your way to walk away with the win this year.

Correct Tigger - overall victory was 128.3 points vs second place 126.9 points.

We were happy to win by 1.4 points

Lets face it - we can never compete on points with a car that makes 517kw on the dyno (or even a twin turbo 6 cylinder that makes 321kw).

IMHO - the dyno points should be KW per Litre - anyone can turn up with a blown LS7 and win that, but extracting what we do out of a humble 4 cylinder is much better.

Lets look at it this way (all cars were "blown" so no disadvantage to any NA cars).

And lets use wheel figures & forget that the AWD cars will be disadvantaged 5 - 10% more.

Fiesta St 1.6 l 120kw = 75kw per litre
WRX 2.0 190kw = 95kw per litre
A45 AMG 2.0 195kw = 97.5kw per litre
Blown Toyota 86's 2.0 247kw / 286.6kw = 123.5 / 143.3 kw per litre
BMW M4 3.0 321kw = 107kw per litre
Falcon XR8 5.0 l 345kw = 69kw per litre
HSV Clubby 6.2 l 517kw = 83.3kw per litre

Our Golf R 2.0l 247kw = 123.5kw per litre

Based on those numbers, we would have finished second in that event (instead of fith), and that would have given us a 15 point victory

Anyway - we could have not asked for a better debut of the MK7 R platform - wait until you see what we have coming next

[tigger73]

I think which ever way you score the hot tuner there's always going to be people complaining.

I actually don't have an issue with the way they have done it this year.

Some events favour some cars and other events others. Having a tight circuit evens out things for the lower power better handling cars.

At the end of the day the best all-rounder cars are at the top of the field which is what you want to see.

I know you're only part way through the Mk7 development so will be really interested to see what you guys are able to bring to the next years event.

[Guy_H]

And when our RS3 gets here - watch out