GTI tuning modifications - what would you do?

[decksla]

suspension upgrade will be a later option. i clock 500+kms a week. having stiff sus would piss me off doing all those kms. sure the car would look tits and handle a ****e load better, but id need the comfort.

the brake upgrade, also later. the same as above. alot of driving is in day time traffic. very little high speed or twisty stuff. the brakes would be a waste.

power. can be used when i want, where i want. if i drive 500kms a week, half of it can be used utilising the extra power, or none of it

its still a work car first and foremost. then a fun toy on the weekends.

[BarneyBoy]

suspension upgrade will be a later option. i clock 500+kms a week. having stiff sus would piss me off doing all those kms. sure the car would look tits and handle a ****e load better, but id need the comfort.

the brake upgrade, also later. the same as above. alot of driving is in day time traffic. very little high speed or twisty stuff. the brakes would be a waste.

power. can be used when i want, where i want. if i drive 500kms a week, half of it can be used utilising the extra power, or none of it

its still a work car first and foremost. then a fun toy on the weekends.

You can upgrade the suspension without sacrificing comfort as much as you may think. There's dampers/coilovers out there that are rated as 'street/comfort' as opposed to 'stiff as sh!x'. Plus many of those have a degree of adjustment in them so you can dial up a hard or soft ride.

But if you want a slammed look, then you'll be struggling to extract any degree of comfort out of it. Just dropped 30-odd mm should leave enough suspension travel for nicely matched dampers/springs/bars to work properly.

[POLARBEAR666]

I agree, downpipe and Tune... if your a straight line person.

Then KW suspension. Totally transformed my car in one stroke and allows my car to keep up with GTI's and other sports cars or go faster! They simply lose ground around corners every time.

My KW's are almost on the lowest setting and are still more compliant than my factory suspension was. Coming down off bumps they dont bang down and they control everything better.

[Maverick]

Then KW suspension. Totally transformed my car in one stroke and allows my car to keep up with GTI's and other sports cars or go faster! They simply lose ground around corners every time.

I think you've been racing GT TDI's because the GT TSI has no chance of keeping up with a GTI even if the GTI has stock suspension!

[POLARBEAR666]

I think you've been racing GT TDI's because the GT TSI has no chance of keeping up with a GTI even if the GTI has stock suspension!

My car can pull 6.89 to 100 which is slightly faster than a dead stock DSG GTI.

WE had a get together in perth and the GT TSI's with KW's were keeping up no problems. I often had to slow down because the GTI's were so slow in and out of corners by comparison. They only pulled away on long straights and even then not by much. GT TSI has 140kw stock versus 150kw for the GTI. Not that much in it stock v stock.

I have had no issues passing other sports cars at lower speeds as I am always on boost when they are spooling up or not yet in full revs. 0-80k's the Twincharger is a beast.

Also, Tinto has beaten subaru's and evo's and 2 other GTI's at the short track racing thing he goes too. The video's are on youtube but he can link them if he likes. He even managed 4th in a field of 50 sports cars! All the cars in front and behind up to 10th were evo's or STI's justabout.

So in answer to your question, Yes a GT TSI with $3k worth of suspension will be faster around a track by miles than a GTI with no suspension.

[G-rig]

Well it obviously comes down to the better driver, but it wouldn't keep up with a GTI in a straight line, no way.

Actually i think there are polo GTI's with V3's beating GT Sports, GTI's and R32s!

Edit: i didn't think that iphone application was that accurate?

[POLARBEAR666]

Suspension lets your cars tyres and brakes and engine make the most of what they have got. I think the fact that a TSI with KW's can beat so many sports cars including GTI's, indicates that suspension makes the car faster in real life situations than simply more engine power. Therefore on a GTI the improvement would be even more. You would be getting even more corner speed and power down. Less axle tramp and better grip etc.

Go the KW's first. Then do engine power.

[Maverick]

My car can pull 6.89 to 100 which is slightly faster than a dead stock DSG GTI.

wait let me load up my iphone....

You're comparing your time from a mobile phone with the offical time from VW that is slower then the GTI does in real life.

WE had a get together in perth and the GT TSI's with KW's were keeping up no problems. I often had to slow down because the GTI's were so slow in and out of corners by comparison. They only pulled away on long straights and even then not by much.

Next you'll be telling me a Polo with KW will keep up with the GTI's

I find it increadibly hard to believe that a suspension swap on a GT TSI will allow it to keep up with a more powerful GTI which already has uprated suspension over the standard GT TSI's.

What you're seeing is that everyone drives differently and the GTI owners don't have anything to prove, which is good especially on public roads.

GT TSI has 140kw stock versus 150kw for the GTI. Not that much in it stock v stock.

The TSI has 125kw/240nm and 7.7 seconds to 100 and the GTI has 147kw/280nm and 6.9 seconds to 100.

Also, Tinto has beaten subaru's and evo's and 2 other GTI's at the short track racing thing he goes too. The video's are on youtube but he can link them if he likes. He even managed 4th in a field of 50 sports cars! All the cars in front and behind up to 10th were evo's or STI's justabout.

And it comes down to the driver and how they drive, the facts are the GTI is a heap faster then the GT TSI.

So in answer to your question, Yes a GT TSI with $3k worth of suspension will be faster around a track by miles than a GTI with no suspension.

If you wanted a fast car why didn't you just buy the GTI instead of the poor mans version? The GT TSI is a good car but if you want to go faster the GTI is the way to go.

The GTI is able to produce a much larger increase from a simple flash of the ECU whereas the GT TSI get's a much smaller gain. The GT TSI is a good car but I don't know why you feel the need to compare your GT TSI against the GTI all the time when clearly they are different cars. Mobile phone benchmarks and seat of the pants measurements don't mean anything.

[Maverick]

Well it obviously comes down to the better driver, but it wouldn't keep up with a GTI in a straight line, no way.

Actually i think there are polo GTI's with V3's beating GT Sports, GTI's and R32s!

I see Polo Edition 1.4's all the time beating GT TSI's off the line. Even the R36 doesn't stand a chance against the polo with new suspension installed.

[Greg Roles]

Mav, believe the brochures if you want, but polar is pushing the limits, and good on him. Vag com on my laptop is telling me I can pull a 7.5 0-100k in a manual diesel that is rated over 8 seconds on paper. So is my vag com wrong as well?? I'm sure, like me, polar looked at the piddly dollar difference between the various "sportier" golf's and made his decision. I could have easily afforded the extra for a GTI, but didn't, and don't regret it.

If Polar wants to play, tinker, and ultimately upset a few of you "elite" types, then where's the problem? Same idea as the topic starter in this thread!

[Maverick]

Mav, believe the brochures if you want, but polar is pushing the limits, and good on him. Vag com on my laptop is telling me I can pull a 7.5 0-100k in a manual diesel that is rated over 8 seconds on paper. So is my vag com wrong as well??

VAGCOM/VCDS isn't really an accurate way to measure for a start! Better then a stop watch though.

VW has overstated times for quite a while since they were sued a while ago, but to say that a stock TSI is as fast as a stock GTI is kindoff pointless when they're all fast then the listed times.

I'm sure, like me, polar looked at the piddly dollar difference between the various "sportier" golf's and made his decision. I could have easily afforded the extra for a GTI, but didn't, and don't regret it.

If Polar want's a car as fast as the GTI then buy a GTI, but don't go thinking that your TSI is as fast as a GTI because it isn't. The TSI is priced differently to the TDI and the GTI and they're completely different cars, the TSI is designed for economy with some performance but it's limited on how far you can take it.

If Polar wants to play, tinker, and ultimately upset a few of you "elite" types, then where's the problem? Same idea as the topic starter in this thread!

There's nothing elitist about it but the GT TSI is a different car to the GTI, comparing some people driving on the road and using that as a benchmark to say that the GT TSI is a faster car then the GTI with just a suspension upgrade is ridiculous because it's clearly not the case.

And using mobile phones to determine it's faster is again pointless.

The GT TSI doesn't have 140kw stock either for that matter. Why would the TSI have 15kw over the listed specs and the larger engined GTI only 3kw over the listed specs? All the reviews have shown that it's close to the specs on power and speed.

[POLARBEAR666]

Back on topic... I sure can rant sometimes.

[Greg Roles]

Dude, I understand, and yeah Polar, can't back you on an iPhone mate sorry, nor the 140 idea....but the bottom line is we ALL know the GTI is the car of the year for a reason, and there's no doubt it's king, but the TSI HAS to be quicker than a TDI to 100kph, and I gotta tell ya I've had a squillion drags now, and the diesel is WAY too fast for what it should be. So even if my real world time is about 8 seconds, I'd rate a TSI quicker again, so the gap is less.

Time we all went down some quarters. Vag tells me mid 15's at about 120k. I've only tried 3 times, so far.

[tinto]

The GTI is able to produce a much larger increase from a simple flash of the ECU whereas the GT TSI get's a much smaller gain.

I thought they were much the same with stage 1: +30hp (or are some stage 1 GTI tunes more than that?)
All hearsay until a real-life human actually puts one in a TSI.

In a straight line acceleration, a GTI walks (ok.. strides) away at the top end when the TSi runs out of puff - at the top end it is a 1.4 turbo v 2.0 turbo, as the supercharger is out of the equation.
The TSI supercharger torque down low lets it keep up quite admirably at everyday speeds. It's at those everyday speeds on public roads where the differences are much fuzzier.
Throw in suspension modifications on cars weighing much the same, and as a passenger you'd be hard pressed to know which was which.

Like others in GTs, the car I chose appealed to me more than the GTI.
I don't think I have anything to prove, but also haven't undergone any therapy to dig deeper into that.
I also don't want my car to be a GTI, despite having some GTI side skirts fitted this Thursday
But the GTI is the pinnacle of affordable hot hatch performance + refinement, so you've got to expect a lot of comparisons to be drawn. If I had a GTI I'd find it flattering.

These pissing contests occur on this site once/week, and centre around straight line advocates and those interested in corners. I like a bit of both, and I also like something different, hence the GT TSI.
On that note, I'm off to start a fight with some Polo guys... maybe an oiler too.

Back On topic.. out of the A/B options given, I'd choose A.
Then as most are hinting at - a suspension overhaul after a scary week of realising you can't control the hose-beast.

[POLARBEAR666]

heheh a GT vs GTI fight is funny. It's like a little brother and a bigger brother fighting. We just need a honda owner to pipe up.