Mk6 Golf Acceleration & Performance Data

[AdamD]

Is this Fab_R's older non-GPS GTech unit?

Ah, if that's the case, then that does explain at least some of the discrepancy then.

I've read somewhere that even the new Gtechs rely largely on the accelerometers to start the run timer - so, the same mechanism as the older Gtechs. Once you're on the run you can count on the new version being more accurate (accurate at least to 1/10th thanks to the 10Hz GPS). Checking the speed and time for the first plot point should give you the info you need to determine the approximate delay for the run start (if any).

[Fab_R]

Sorry to hear you're not seeing the numbers you'd like Dave. Still pretty decent - 5.2 is not hanging around, by any means, and it is three tenths better than what VW claims for the stocker. What was the ambient temperature for your runs?

Interesting to see the difference between the Gtech and the PerformanceBox too (although not surprising). The former does actually delay the starting timer to give you the maximum benefit of perfect staging (great excuse for slow response, hehe), and its GPS chip is only 10Hz so there's a significant issue with accuracy there too. I've got one of the latest Gtechs, and I'm sure that my best run was at least a couple of tenths optimistic.

One of the best ways to check how long the Gtech has taken to respond is to look at the detailed plot screen for the run, and see the speed and time for the first plot. If it says you're doing 10km/h inside of a tenth of a second, you know why the run under-read quite so much.

The thing that is wierd to me is the difference in the runs (Gtech -v- Vbox) - 2/10tenths to 4/10 tenths. Its not a consistant difference???!!!

[Bakks]

Has anyone done any quarter mile drag runs with a chipped R?

[Mr_Bob]

The thing that is wierd to me is the difference in the runs (Gtech -v- Vbox) - 2/10tenths to 4/10 tenths. Its not a consistant difference???!!!

Due to 10Hz resolution
It could be that the lower reading is -0.1s and the higher reading is +0.1s (then vice versa in the next result)

[Fab_R]

Due to 10Hz resolution
It could be that the lower reading is -0.1s and the higher reading is +0.1s (then vice versa in the next result)

Hey Bob i dont follow?

[Mr_Bob]

sorry, jsut re-read it and my explanation is pretty poor.
made sense when i wrote it

If the units are 10Hz resolution,
they could be 100% accurate for take-off, or up to 0.1sec out.

2 examples, assuming the exact same run,

1. G-Tech measures 5.2sec (0sec delay) Performance Box measures 5.6 (0.1s delay) - 0.4sec gap
2. G-Tech measures 5.3sec (0.1sec delay) Performance Box measures 5.5sec (0sec delay) - 0.2sec gap

[VW Central]

In a word, disappointing.

Exactly half tank of fuel, driver only (no passenger)

Run	Gtech	PerformanceBox
1	5.25	5.6
2	5.02	5.2
3	5.36	5.7
4	5.09	5.4

Runs 2/4 being the return trip. Outside temp was around 18deg according to the MFD, didn't bother with any VCDS logging.

I was told to expect ~4.9 for an APR Stage 1 tune with the PerformanceBox from the APR dealer who did the tune. As you can see, the car isn't near those figures. Only stock figures I can find are the claimed 5.7, don't have any of the aussie mags near me to confirm their results.

And with LC, its pretty hard to get it wrong...

Yep, I was expecting those sorts of figures. I took the vbox home for a couple of days and I got 5.1 consistently, I'm in a FWD which is obviously much harder to launch, this was done in 34ºC 67% humidity (not sure how much Water Methanol makes a difference in these conditions) . I would say Fab_R's would do a 4.7-4.8 with a Vbox as the HPFP, Exhaust and intake do make a bit of a difference. Can't wait to see his results.

[dave_r]

Just updated my post to clarify some info. The claim of 4.7 was incorrect, its around 4.9 (give or take I'd assume).

I've had a chat with the dealer who is keen to investigate more. I'm going to go past this arvo and he'll flash back to stock so I can do some runs to establish a baseline result.

From that point, I'll leave it with the experts so not going to jump to any conclusions at this stage.

[VW Central]

Just updated my post to clarify some info. The claim of 4.7 was incorrect, its around 4.9 (give or take I'd assume).

I've had a chat with the dealer who is keen to investigate more. I'm going to go past this arvo and he'll flash back to stock so I can do some runs to establish a baseline result.

From that point, I'll leave it with the experts so not going to jump to any conclusions at this stage.

I am not intending on stirring **** here, so mod's please settle down.. Most tuning companies don't actually flash you back to stock, it is still that companies tune that represents a similar stock like map.

[Fab_R]

Yep, I was expecting those sorts of figures. I took the vbox home for a couple of days and I got 5.1 consistently, I'm in a FWD which is obviously much harder to launch, this was done in 34ºC 67% humidity (not sure how much Water Methanol makes a difference in these conditions) . I would say Fab_R's would do a 4.7-4.8 with a Vbox as the HPFP, Exhaust and intake do make a bit of a difference. Can't wait to see his results.

Deano - Mine was running **** numbers on the night also...Not sure what humidity was but it was 18deg amb.

A few days before (day i picked up from Dean) 30deg going up a slight incline - Gtech 4.8 / Vbox 5.00 and f***ing very humid that day.

I was virtually getting the same numbers on a cooler night and flat roads....WTF

I think its worth noting re my car as well, and comparing to Daves results - effectivly both were not running nice numbers.

As where a month or so ago mine ran a clean 4.26 on a think a 10deg late night.

I honestly dont think the APR tune is at fault here. There are other factors.

We really need to go out again.

[dave_r]

Not sure I'd agree DeanCorp. If it was the case, it would negate APR's Back to stock for dealer servicing program entirely since VW's diagnostic computers would surely be able to detect software that is not their own.

I honestly dont think the APR tune is at fault here. There are other factors.

We really need to go out again.

I think Dean's (Volkspower) suggestion of reverting the car to stock and repeating testing is the best place to start. I didn't say the tune was at fault, I just said i was disappointed with the results of my car (whatever the cause might be).

[VW Central]

Not sure I'd agree there. If it was the case, it would negate APR's Back to stock for dealer servicing program entirely since VW's diagnostic computers would surely be able to detect software that is not their own.

Not necessarily mate, the dealers can't really tell as long as when they scan the car it shows 'no of times flashed: 0' that's all they can really go by, and apart from driving the car, most mechanics will know whether it has been chipped as it will be far more responsive. So If they make a similar stock map it will be virtually impossible to tell anyway.

Only way to really know is to get a truly stock golf r and run them both on the dyno your 'stock' vs VW stock

[dave_r]

Not necessarily mate, the dealers can't really tell as long as when they scan the car it shows 'no of times flashed: 0' that's all they can really go by

No offence mate but I'd think their equipment is a bit more sophisticated than just looking at 'no of times flashed: 0'! A simple checksum would show enough difference, the only way that will match is like for like, not a close enough.

Anyway, I don't have any technical experience on this stuff so I'll stop with the assumptions but I wouldn't go as far to say that VW have no way of telling.

[Fab_R]

I didn't say the tune was at fault, I just said i was disappointed with the results of my car (whatever the cause might be).

Sorry mate...my bad...wrong choice of word there.

[dave_r]

All good, just wanted to clarify so people don't go running rife with conspiracy theories