Mk6 Golf Acceleration & Performance Data

[AdamD]

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???!!!

Well, if the Gtech being tested here is a non-GPS unit, then that's to be expected. And when you have a margin for error, thre's going to be variance within that range. As I mentioned above, because there is some degree of reliance on the accelerometers even in a new (Fanatic) Gtech, there's going to be the potential for some error. I would hope that this should be no greater than about 0.2s worst case for the Fanatic.

[bwen]

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.

I'm pretty sure all bar one tuning company, when they put you back to stock. It's their 'stock' map. Not the same map that you had when you originally bought their car. The only company that doesn't do this is Bluefin as your map is stored elsewhere and you tune your car with the hand held device.

Not 100% sure but I've heard that on the grapevine quite a bit in the past, so take it with a grain of salt

[Glennb]

I've got a stock 5 door DSG with 1500 odd kms on the clock. I might have some time free later this week or weekend to do a run for comparison if you like.

[Fab_R]

I've got a stock 5 door DSG with 1500 odd kms on the clock. I might have some time free later this week or weekend to do a run for comparison if you like.

Sounds like a good idea....what suburb you in Glenn?

[REXman]

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...

One person on board, 18 degrees is nice and cool.. And what might be a slightly downhill 5.2 secs.. Mate I am disappointed for you and the tune, only because of the claims being so outrageous that are made by various tuning companies.

4.7 is an obvious tell em there dreaming.

I just like how everyone was sort of trying to say that they would be happy with the times published once they were done with a VBOX.

Well here they are children, and uncle REXman's predictions were pretty much spot on.

With Coreys run of 13.6 down the quarter, and times ranging from 5.2-5.7 with a VBOX.. There is no denying it. A STG 1 (and almost definitley STG 1 from all tuners) will NOT turn the GOLF R into a 4.7 sec car.

There is also no questions the GTECH thing that corey has is very optimistic. It gave me 5.57 0-100 with 2 people in the car, on a hot night that was very humid. ( my car is stock). And apparently the road surface wasn't that great either. do the math and you'll see that the Gtech suggests on a nice cool night, with one person, on a better bit of road.. I might do a 4.9 stock or something. No it's 5.7 sec car 0-100 on a good day. It just doesn't launch hard enough with the power it has to go quicker.

[VW Central]

One person on board, 18 degrees is nice and cool.. And what might be a slightly downhill 5.2 secs.. Mate I am disappointed for you and the tune, only because of the claims being so outrageous that are made by various tuning companies.

4.7 is an obvious tell em there dreaming.

I just like how everyone was sort of trying to say that they would be happy with the times published once they were done with a VBOX.

Well here they are children, and uncle REXman's predictions were pretty much spot on.

With Coreys run of 13.6 down the quarter, and times ranging from 5.2-5.7 with a VBOX.. There is no denying it. A STG 1 (and almost definitley STG 1 from all tuners) will NOT turn the GOLF R into a 4.7 sec car.

There is also no questions the GTECH thing that corey has is very optimistic. It gave me 5.57 0-100 with 2 people in the car, on a hot night that was very humid. ( my car is stock). And apparently the road surface wasn't that great either. do the math and you'll see that the Gtech suggests on a nice cool night, with one person, on a better bit of road.. I might do a 4.9 stock or something. No it's 5.7 sec car 0-100 on a good day. It just doesn't launch hard enough with the power it has to go quicker.

For what it's worth this was a MK5 GTI with k04 upgrade a year ago: VWVortex.com - Hit 112.8 mph at the strip this weekend with a K04'd TSI with few other mods

[REXman]

Something inside me said, "Hey, DeanCorp might be making a relevant point amongst this STG 1 madness!".

The car in question (DeanCorps post) , is a GTI. Its lighter. It has had the **** worked out of it in comparison to a stock car with a flash.

The thing is almost all stripped out, (no seats except for the drivers, it has the K04 R's turbo, It is running METHANOL INJECTION!!! ffs and has the lot installed on it.

Mods:

GIAC high output TSI K04 file with optional race mode.
AWE TSI K04 kit
AWE CC|B intake
AWE 2.5” Downpipe with HJS high flow cat
AWE 2.5” cat-back exhaust
AWE PCV hose and diverter valve
Snow Performance Stage 3 methanol injection with 50/50 water/methanol mixture, 375ml nozzle
VMR 18” V710
Mickey Thompson E.T. Street Drag Radials 245/45/18

Pieces removed: spare tire, rear seat, and front passenger seat (as noted in the pictures)

So I dont know what your going for DeanCorp, but a Methanoled, Stripped out, STG 3 R would smash it.

On the other hand.. it shows that this car gets a repeatable 12.888 quarter mile time with a LOT done to it. And to think a stock R with a flash could compete.. is just misleading and highway robbery.

APR need to change their claims. Cause they arent real. As proven by everything so far, and even the STG 3 R they had int he MOTOR magazine.. almost being as quick as a (claimed) DSG STG 1????

How could that be possible? THE DSG's gear changes?? Really..

[Fab_R]

REXman.
If we assume the Vbox is dead on and 2/tenths slower than the Gtech that i was using here were my results. Keeping in mind that my best runs were done on flat roads, and favorable temp's.

My first one was with 1200k's and around a 4 degree icy morning.

Stage 1 only, and nothing else:

First Run 4.68 0-100 (Gtech) Vbox 2/tenths slower which makes it 4.88
Second Run 4.88 0-100 (Gtech) Vbox 2/tenths slower which makes it 5.08

And not so long ago a fairly cool night:

Stage 2+

4.26 0-100 (Gtech) Vbox 2/tenths slower which makes it 4.46

Now, my tests with both Vbox & Gtech where always with exactly 2/tenths difference, never more.

Lets assume that Vbox is dead accurate - these figures are respectable for Stage 1 & the Stage 2+

Im no expert but i reckon amb temps & humidity have a big say in what figures are to be achieved.

[REXman]

Hey FAB_R,

I think someone mentioned but that they wasnt a constant 0.2 or 0.4 difference. And I didnt realise, or missed you mentioning previously that the times were done when it was 4 degrees!

I wouldnt really bother with the GTech times mate.. no offense - its a fun device to use, but it just isnt accurate.

So FAB, with your STG2 +( and few other goodies on your car).. what did the VBOX say about your car when you went for a wrap with DAVE_R??

NOT ADDING 0.2 to your GTECH times. As in the actual VBOX data.

And yeah the times are respectable, but are not near the claimed. That is the point.

[Fab_R]

Hey FAB_R,

I think someone mentioned but that they wasnt a constant 0.2 or 0.4 difference. And I didnt realise, or missed you mentioning previously that the times were done when it was 4 degrees!

I wouldnt really bother with the GTech times mate.. no offense - its a fun device to use, but it just isnt accurate.

So FAB, with your STG2 +( and few other goodies on your car).. what did the VBOX say about your car when you went for a wrap with DAVE_R??

NOT ADDING 0.2 to your GTECH times. As in the actual VBOX data.

And yeah the times are respectable, but are not near the claimed. That is the point.

Hey REXman
See post:

http://www.vwwatercooled.org.au/f112/golf-r-acceleration-performance-data-46834-18.html#post626546

On the actual night the best i got was 4.80 with Gtech & 5.0 with Vbox..

That was actual Vbox data - all the runs on that night were always 2/tenths slower than Gtech.

This is why I referred to my previous "best" runs with Gtech. With the right conditions and the R running on song - quick times are to be had with the Vbox.
Including Dave_R's R.

[REXman]

OK fair enough, but so far just using the VBOX data, with a STG 2+ as well as the other bits and pieces you gotten done, it has run a 5.0.

That I accept as realistic. Thats the time I go off. (and its a great time!)

Only other data I'll accept as legit is the quarter mile time slips.

I think you'll agree that 0-100 in 4.7 for a STG 1 (12 sec quarters) is not realistic and is not possible.

A STG 2+ GOLF R (the car that I own as well I might add) will not keep up with a 2007 Porsche Carrera turbo.

I have to add, with such a compromising launch, the engine power and DSG gear changes will have to be amazing to balance the time to 100.

A golf R with some bolt ons, exhaust FMIC and tune.. running in 5 secs with potential to be a tenth or so quicker in nicer weather is an amazing effort for a car that was never made to be the fastest.

Thats belting a standard STI (or even just one with a TBE or something), which obviously is an amazing effort.

But it is no Porsche 911 beater. You'll need an M3 with bolt ons for that.

[Hay13]

This 0-100ks talk cracks me up. Having owned numerous bikes inc mildly worked GSXR1300R Hayabusa (130kw at the rear wheel - 200 odd kilos wet, you do the math)

If you guys think a stg 2 golf is 1.2 - 1.3 sec slower 0-100k's than a Hayabusa you're kidding yourself.

As rexman says, 5 sec is fair and still a bloody good time, lets not get too carried away!

[MkVIGTI]

And I was thinking of getting one of those GTECHs when I first saw Fab using it. Guess it's no longer a wise idea now...

I also remember Guy_H quoting a 0-100 time of 5s flat for a stage 1 GTI using a Youtube vid.

[VW Central]

I also remember Guy_H quoting a 0-100 time of 5s flat for a stage 1 GTI using a Youtube vid.

Impossible. I will eat my hat if he can do it in front of me.

[REXman]

Impossible. I will eat my hat if he can do it in front of me.

+1. If it's true, DeanCorp save me a chair at the hat eating table.

There is no way that is possible.

If a FWD can do that time 0 to 100km/h, imagine what it could do to the quarter, since it weighs less than the comparative AWDs.

That 5.0 time is saying this; despite FWD traction issues off the mark ( to be expected from a car attaining a time that fast) this thing has that much top end it still nailed a 5.0 and would easily be on it's way to a 12 sec quarter mile time.

It will need a lot more than 188 (claimed) flywheel kilowatts. Try more like 200KWs at the wheels!

With a STG 1? No chance at all.

With a STG 2+?? getting there, but even then it is still tough.. You'd be needing a STG 3 to do these times.

DeanCorp posted a GTI MKV running a ton of mods, including a S3/Golf R turbo upgrade, tbe tune heaps more stuff even methanol injection, and had all the seats and some trim ripped out..!! And that ran a 12.something. THATS how you get a GTI running 12s.

Have a look at post #187 in this thread if you have any interest.

LMAO at a tune only doing something similar.