Let’s do a dyno run in a GTi

[Rosinfield]

Hardly worth doing, it seems to me (272 HP/440 Nm)

[OomStu_ZA]

I dont sorry. When I first saw it earlier I have to admit it got me thinking anyways,.

Daar is ’n dorpie in die Vrystaat waar al ons motors het sulke nommers gehad

Ja nee boet - ek woon in die Kaap , bietjie ver om te ry Blommies toe My number plate is just as garish:
viewtopic.php?f=71&t=70453&start=315#p556259

[DKPOLOGT]

Well... here it is [emoji4]

Hi fazzy. Is your car with gpf or without?

Cheers

GTIs built before Aug 18 didn't have them as standard. Although depending on where you are, you can do a delete without being in trouble with the law. Mine came without a d it feels somewhere between 5 and 10% more powerful than the wife"s 2019 model.

Typical pre gpf push out 370nm Max, and gpf ones around 340nm Max.

Both push out 200-210hp regardless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fazzy]

Typical pre gpf push out 370nm Max, and gpf ones around 340nm Max.
Both push out 200-210hp regardless.

Would be nice to see some other dyno graphs... but so far just a lot of claims from different people and no graphs.
Even the tuners of different boxes, which claim x amount of horses under the bonnet have no graphs to prove it.
Shame...

Here is another dyno graph of a different 2019 Polo GTi GPF. Stock standard and remap.

[DKPOLOGT]

Gti GPF

Before and after remap.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rosinfield]

Here's mine; chipped on 98 fuel. Stage 1 . No OPF

[monkeyhanger]

Is the RON98 fuel really significant? Everyone imagines that higher octane fuels are more energy rich and potent, when in reality they've got almost the same calorific content, but additives or substitutions make the fuel less volatile and so they can be compressed further without pinking. Cars set up for 97/98/99 can take advantage of this, with a higher compression ratio or a significantly higher level of fuelling per compression cycle.

The Polo is set up for RON95, as is the Golf GTI Performance (245). Only the CS, CSS, TCR and R are set up for 97/98/99 from the factory.

Do you now need Ron 98 because your map is overfuelling at the higher end, to the point that pinking would be inevitable on RON95 fuel?

Those are some pretty smooth dyno readings on the remap - like stock +35%. No choppy power stepping or early steep drops, smoother than stock on the power curve.

[Rosinfield]

It could have been mapped on 95 also of course. And the difference in power is not that exciting (some 5 to 10 HP). But remapped it also runs smoother on 98. In case of stock I would keep it on 95 I guess

[Rosinfield]

The most substantial difference is that it keeps on going much longer. Indicative of this is a much better 100-200 result; 14,5 sec instead of 20+

[Rosinfield]

As there is no like-button here, @monkeyhanger, thanks for the positive reaction. The company in question is very experienced in remapping VAG cars with an outstanding reputation. They know what they're doing. They are keen at keeping within safe limits.

[monkeyhanger]

As there is no like-button here, @monkeyhanger, thanks for the positive reaction. The company in question is very experienced in remapping VAG cars with an outstanding reputation. They know what they're doing. They are keen at keeping within safe limits.

That does look properly done. With VWs not being as reliable in the short term as they should be, I'll be waiting to remap mine or get a good box like a JB4 once the warranty is up (if it'll be a long term keeper). I'll probably only go stock +20% because most UK insurers won't entertain more than that, forcing you to go to specialist brokers which will probably cost an arm and a leg.

[monkeyhanger]

Rosinfield: Forgot to ask, is yours with or without stock GPF? I'm guessing with, as stock torque is around 340Nm. Would really like to see a pre-WLTP GTI+ (without GPF), remapped to +40ps or thereabouts to see what mine would likely be doing.

[Rosinfield]

It's without GPF fortunately