Stage 2+ Cupra vs 911 turbo (996)

[SeanCorky]

Yeah thinking about it you might be right. Think I was getting 330lbft on just stage 1. Either way the FRS has quite a bit more torque.

480nm of the k04 vs 520nm of the frs.

But was that on JKM Rollers?

 

[Poverty]

But was that on JKM Rollers?

I nearly took the RS down to jkm for their rolling road meet. Sorta wish I had now, and lost 20hp on a standard car

 

[Blade]

Yeah thinking about it you might be right. Think I was getting 330lbft on just stage 1. Either way the FRS has quite a bit more torque.

480nm of the k04 vs 520nm of the frs.

Here,s my mates 60 plate RSF. Running full Mountune kit.

 

[Poverty]

Here,s my mates 60 plate RSF. Running full Mountune kit.

That very interesting, that torque curve isnt the most beautiful and its interesting to see that max power is made at a rather low 5.5rpm

Now this could explain why the k04s do so well against the ford as our powercurve is much better.

Odd that the max power is at such a low rpm. The FRS has the same turbo and engine conviguatrion as my titty RS yet my max power is at 6624rpm

 

[Blade]

My mate is non to happy about this Mountune map. It really struggled to make that bhp on the rollers and the torque and boost die away very quickly. Reminds me of the old Revo maps on the early LCR,s.

 

[Ben CTR]

Did they manage to register the boost readings this time Ryan?

 

[micky 32]

Thought it was more like 350 -360lb/ft?

Depends on the dyno . the 2.0T is direct injection and tends to more torquey because of that. The torque on the Focus maybe more peaky?.

As Simon says why could his car with 40bhp less keep up with the Focus? The Ko3 turbo won't make 300bhp.

 

[micky 32]

How do Stage2 + fair against the Evo FQ 400 that Top gear tested?

 

[Rickst3r]

My mate is non to happy about this Mountune map. It really struggled to make that bhp on the rollers and the torque and boost die away very quickly. Reminds me of the old Revo maps on the early LCR,s.

Was the dyno losses set up for a 4 cylinder engine? Have seen this on the RS Owners website where they dyno'd an Focus RS500 and it was well below the 350bhp claims. Think they had to do a run with 4 cylinder losses and again with 6 cylinder losses and average the 2 runs to get a 5 cylinder engine result.

See here;
http://bbs.rsownersclub.co.uk/showthread.php?t=296520

 

[Al]

Not sure what mods it had, but a new Focus RS was doing high 12's/low 13's @ 116/117mph recently at Crail.

 

[Ben CTR]

I've read about that somewhere Al, but I think it was around 450bhp though. Will see if I can find it..

 

[Blade]

Did they manage to register the boost readings this time Ryan?

No, he needs a T piece for that but it was showing 1.4bar on the in car boost gauge.

 

[Ben CTR]

So the other 'Standard' RS owner at Motorscope running 21psi may have been telling porkies then?

 

[Blade]

Was the dyno losses set up for a 4 cylinder engine? Have seen this on the RS Owners website where they dyno'd an Focus RS500 and it was well below the 350bhp claims. Think they had to do a run with 4 cylinder losses and again with 6 cylinder losses and average the 2 runs to get a 5 cylinder engine result.

See here;
http://bbs.rsownersclub.co.uk/showthread.php?t=296520

Yes we are aware of that. Mountune have reviewed the dyno graph and say its spot on for their software

 

[Blade]

So the other 'Standard' RS owner at Motorscope running 21psi may have been telling porkies then?

Suppose we will never know. By the sound of his car I suspect he was running a Decat.

 

[Dan1720v]

I've been in a mk1 golf with a 300/300 set up 20vt. Raced a 996 911turbo on the autobahn and the porsche couldn't pull away until we let off at 165+ needless to say I was rather impressed.

 

[RobH]

I've been in a mk1 golf with a 300/300 set up 20vt. Raced a 996 911turbo on the autobahn and the porsche couldn't pull away until we let off at 165+ needless to say I was rather impressed.

You sure it was a Turbo id fancy a 996 turbo to start pulling away by 120-130ish?

It would certainly be gone at 165mph i suppose the mk1's dont have much weight but still at those speeds.

 

[Rickst3r]

I've been in a mk1 golf with a 300/300 set up 20vt. Raced a 996 911turbo on the autobahn and the porsche couldn't pull away until we let off at 165+ needless to say I was rather impressed.

Right then!

Have you not heard of aerodynamics? Unless the Golf was modified at the front and underneath to cope with the wind resistance at those speeds then his speedo was waaaayyy out. A Mk1 Golf has the same aerodynamics as a shoe box!

All these high powered sports cars are shaped for a reason, which is to avoid lift off. So I guess all that money they spend on design and development and wind testing is a complete waste - seeing as a 1980's Golf with 300bhp can do 165+mph

 

[Ben CTR]

I agree.. I would say the Mk1 would be as quick if not quicker initailly, but once over 100mph the weight advantage is pretty much gone and it's then down to good old bhp and engine capacity..

 

[Al]

And aerodynamics