Cupra 280 Dyno Figures
- Thread starter RabRS
- Start date
Or that yes! Lesson I learnt was don't muck about when under warranty, and you need car for your job.Or get a bigger turbo
Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk
I was a little underwhelmed with my mk2 LCR only running 250bhp standard after reading that most cars make more than the stock 261. Apparently the timing was out (+5.3deg) , it's so much smoother and more powerful now it's been remapped
Different car
Last edited:
No. It was more of a poor design of the IHI turbo. Mine was one if the early problem engines.
Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk
So what about stock power on a 290?
This one did, apparently, 316PS (311bhp) and 391Nm. If correct, pretty neat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLq0-NYdqtU
This one did, apparently, 316PS (311bhp) and 391Nm. If correct, pretty neat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLq0-NYdqtU
Yes, but nice to know the 290 is more than marketing even if the difference is small, some German testers said they notice the 290 being a bit quicker esp. at autobahn speed. Obviously if you're into numbers you're already tuned +100hp but for folks like me staying stock, it's a nice little extra. And more than plenty.
Which mags are you referring to? Sport Auto tested the 290 (DSG) and it was slower or pretty much dead even with 280 (manual) if my memory serves me right. Hard to find figures for 280 DSG. Same with Autobild Sportcars: as slow lol as 280. It seems that the extra grunt isn't there based on the tests so far.
Last edited:
Not updated, mine is very quiet. I'm growing to like it, suits the more serious profile of the estate, coming from a very vocal sportscar previously.
280 ST & 290 ST same exhaust
The 280 St & 290 ST do have the same exhaust. It has no middle silencer in either car. It seems that this exhaust has been carried over to the rest of the range as part of the marketing exercise. It's lighter, possibly helped with keeping the weight down to only +45kg over the hatch. Possibly the wider torque curve explains why the ST was able to match the 280s 'ring time? There was a claim made in Top Gear magazine that it corners better at high speed too, due to a more progressive rear, with the ESC off. In comfort the engine note is mooted. In Cupra or Sport mode it makes a pleasing note and will 'fart' on gear changes. Quite happy with the engine note from my 2015 280 ST. I'd actually gone to a dealership to enquire about purchasing the 'new' exhaust to gain the wider torque curve, only to be told it wasn't necessary. There's another thread with photos on here somewhere.
The 280 St & 290 ST do have the same exhaust. It has no middle silencer in either car. It seems that this exhaust has been carried over to the rest of the range as part of the marketing exercise. It's lighter, possibly helped with keeping the weight down to only +45kg over the hatch. Possibly the wider torque curve explains why the ST was able to match the 280s 'ring time? There was a claim made in Top Gear magazine that it corners better at high speed too, due to a more progressive rear, with the ESC off. In comfort the engine note is mooted. In Cupra or Sport mode it makes a pleasing note and will 'fart' on gear changes. Quite happy with the engine note from my 2015 280 ST. I'd actually gone to a dealership to enquire about purchasing the 'new' exhaust to gain the wider torque curve, only to be told it wasn't necessary. There's another thread with photos on here somewhere.
How do you calculate correction?
Hi Andrew, as posted under another thread, my car came back with 239.6bhp (242.9PS) at the wheels and 288.6 bhp at the fly (292PS)@ 5848rpm. torque 256.98/284.82 @3173rpm I'm unsure about the correction calculation, how does that work or how do you calculate it? Does this mean with the corrected figure that mine is approximately approaching the 318 you got? The temp was 18.6 degrees, humidity 61.8% pressure 999.2 mb, height 129.143m. do you have a link to an online calculator or an equation?
Hi Andrew, as posted under another thread, my car came back with 239.6bhp (242.9PS) at the wheels and 288.6 bhp at the fly (292PS)@ 5848rpm. torque 256.98/284.82 @3173rpm I'm unsure about the correction calculation, how does that work or how do you calculate it? Does this mean with the corrected figure that mine is approximately approaching the 318 you got? The temp was 18.6 degrees, humidity 61.8% pressure 999.2 mb, height 129.143m. do you have a link to an online calculator or an equation?
Corrected hp
I found an online calculator which gave the following:
Horsepower : 288.6 uncorrected
Station Pressure : 29.51 (in/Hg)
Temperature : 65.48 (° F)
Relative Humidity : 61.8 (%)
Correction Factor Horsepower
DIN 1.011 291.85 (295.90 PS)
J607 1.022 294.93 (299.02 PS)
J1349 (SAE) 0.992 286.27 (290.24 PS)
STD 1.016 293.28 (297.35 PS)
Uncorrected 1.000 288.60 (292.60 PS)
So, with all of these different corrections, which is likely to be the most accurate?
Edit: I've read that SAE figures aren't relevant for Turbocharged cars.
Edit 2: The temperature used was ambient in the garage 18.6 degrees centigrade/65.48 degrees F. I'd suspect that is artificially low and therefore would produce an under-reading? What sort of uplift over ambient would be more accurate for inlet temperature, considering the Cupra engine seems to run quite hot. I know it's fresh air coming in, but even in tha short distance there is bound to be an uplift of some description.
I found an online calculator which gave the following:
Horsepower : 288.6 uncorrected
Station Pressure : 29.51 (in/Hg)
Temperature : 65.48 (° F)
Relative Humidity : 61.8 (%)
Correction Factor Horsepower
DIN 1.011 291.85 (295.90 PS)
J607 1.022 294.93 (299.02 PS)
J1349 (SAE) 0.992 286.27 (290.24 PS)
STD 1.016 293.28 (297.35 PS)
Uncorrected 1.000 288.60 (292.60 PS)
So, with all of these different corrections, which is likely to be the most accurate?
Edit: I've read that SAE figures aren't relevant for Turbocharged cars.
Edit 2: The temperature used was ambient in the garage 18.6 degrees centigrade/65.48 degrees F. I'd suspect that is artificially low and therefore would produce an under-reading? What sort of uplift over ambient would be more accurate for inlet temperature, considering the Cupra engine seems to run quite hot. I know it's fresh air coming in, but even in tha short distance there is bound to be an uplift of some description.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Solved
