BillyBlackspins Posted January 6, 2006 Report Share Posted January 6, 2006 (edited) . Edited January 20, 2006 by BillyBlackspins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyW Posted January 6, 2006 Report Share Posted January 6, 2006 I think your the second person to have the AMD remap, sounds good, and certainly I'll go for it come end of warranty in 2007. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) 136bhp standard sound like an optimistic read to me! But still, a 5bhp gain is pretty damn good for NA remap, good stuff! Edited January 7, 2006 by MattyB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_chris1981 Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 thought they were 125 at the fly standard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigz™ Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 So has AMD mapped it, then afterwards put it on the rollers and said "oooh look, you have 14bhp now"?Or is that figure of 139.7 the first run before the remap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBlackspins Posted January 7, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) . Edited January 20, 2006 by BillyBlackspins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBR Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Sorry i'm lost style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":confused:" border="0" alt="confused.gif" /> Standard Gti's are 125/6 BHP... Yours Standard pumped out 130+??? What am i missing???Also how much did it cost to get the re-map if you don't mind me asking... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 To get a true comparison I think ou really need to get it back on the same set of rollers at Advantages. Ech set of rollers are configured by the company owning them, and I would hazard a guess that AMD might be slightly kind when configuring theres style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":confused:" border="0" alt="confused.gif" /> By taking it back to advantage at least then you have a true before and after reading, so even if the original reading was optimistic, then the second reading should take this into account Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigz™ Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 I would hazard a guess that AMD might be slightly kind when configuring theres Agreed.Didn't you ask for a before run, to prove they had actully made an improvment?Ive seen more than 10bhp diffrence between the rollers at Stealth, and the rollers at Northampton Motorspot with the same car.Remember a rolling road reading is only an estimate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBlackspins Posted January 7, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) . Edited January 20, 2006 by BillyBlackspins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicki Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) thought they were 125 at the fly standard?Sorry i'm lost style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":confused:" border="0" alt="confused.gif" /> Standard Gti's are 125/6 BHP... Yours Standard pumped out 130+??? What am i missing???Yup, 125ps per the book... think most people have managed 125-132 standard though. I got 130.8bhpI've said it before & I'll say it again... they only figure actually measured by a rolling road is the bhp at the wheels. The bhp at the fly is calculated using *estimated* losses through the drivetrain & as such can be easily "tweeked".Thus, the only true comparison is to run a car on the same setup before & after any work is done. If you're comparing to other cars, then its only fair to compare to cars run on the same rolling road, under the same conditions. Edited January 7, 2006 by nickilupo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigz™ Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Nicki the bhp at the wheels is also estimated style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />The whole thing is estimated.But the people who sell these rolling road days dont tell people that.Other wise they wouldn't make any money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubya Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Any car manufacturer will under-estimate their power/torque figures, to ensure their competitors don't actually know what they're producing. Also, in the business of manufacturing, they can then guarantee that any car off the line, will have atleast 125bhp as standard. Anything over that is a bonus.If they claimed 135bhp as standard, and yours only produced 125 or 130bhp, then you'd moan... right? Makes sense for them to massage their figures, so that everyones a winner. Get me?Mine... brand new... with 1500 miles on the clock, produced 135bhp at the CL Rolling Road day last year. Fyggy's 'run in' Lupo, produced even more. Both standard. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> Nice result on the remap, but how much did it cost you? I'd want more than 141bhp after mine was re-mapped, even if the rest of the engine was standard. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />Nicki the bhp at the wheels is also estimated style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />The whole thing is estimated.But the people who sell these rolling road days dont tell people that.Other wise they wouldn't make any money.Actual rolling road power figures are determined by the calibration of the rollers themselves. If calibrated correctly, and still within calibration when your running the car, then figures quoted are actual, and not estimated. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigz™ Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 But the calibration is done by lots of estimates.Car weight, tyre size, tyre pressure, braking force etc etc Now there is no way a rolling road operater is going to spend time adding all this up for each car they put on the rollers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicki Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) Nicki the bhp at the wheels is also estimated style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />The whole thing is estimated.But the people who sell these rolling road days dont tell people that.Other wise they wouldn't make any money.True, but its certainly more accurate than the fly figure!!!If you put a 4wd car on the rollers, put the handbrake on 1 click & see what it does to the results... extra resistance = extra torque as far as the rollers are concerned!(Edit: I can't spell tonight...) Edited January 7, 2006 by nickilupo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubya Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 But the calibration is done by lots of estimates.Car weight, tyre size, tyre pressure, braking force etc etc Now there is no way a rolling road operater is going to spend time adding all this up for each car they put on the rollers!Actual calibration is measured. When you run your car on the 'road, you enter the cars make/model into the computer, along with the tyre size on the car at that time. Within that program is a pre-determined calculation for gearing - it allows for a difference in tyre size, and re-calculates accordingly. Unless your tyre is flat, your rolling radius will be the same as that specified on the side of your tyre. 1 or 2 psi either way, doesn't have an effect on your overall size - you'll only have better/worse traction from lower revs. When you drive the car on a run, the pc measures the power it takes to turn the rollers, and calculates the actual power produced by the car in turn.The only estimated figure to come out of a rolling road session, is the power at the flywheel. This can only be measured with the engine on a Dyno. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigz™ Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) My point is, how many of these places acutely change the settings for car to car?Ive never seen one do it!The PC doesn't measure the wheels turning the rollers.The rollers are trying to stop the wheels from moving, the PC measures the amount of braking pressure the rollers have to make to hold the car to a set speed. Edit, my spelling is just as bad!The only estimated figure to come out of a rolling road session, is the power at the flywheel. This can only be measured with the engine on a Dyno. Agreed. Edited January 7, 2006 by Tigz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicki Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Actual calibration is measured. When you run your car on the 'road, you enter the cars make/model into the computer, along with the tyre size on the car at that time. Within that program is a pre-determined calculation for gearing - it allows for a difference in tyre size, and re-calculates accordingly. Unless your tyre is flat, your rolling radius will be the same as that specified on the side of your tyre. 1 or 2 psi either way, doesn't have an effect on your overall size - you'll only have better/worse traction from lower revs. When you drive the car on a run, the pc measures the power it takes to turn the rollers, and calculates the actual power produced by the car in turn.The only estimated figure to come out of a rolling road session, is the power at the flywheel. This can only be measured with the engine on a Dyno. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />Thing is, if you go to a RR day, chances are that they won't do all that... they certainly didn't do anything when I went to the Corrado RR day at Engine Advantages last year! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubya Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) I've owned and run a 4wd rolling road in the past, and with the software I was using, you could not run one car after the other on random settings. You had to enter a set criteria for that vehicle, for the pc to do the calculations. If you didn't, it became null and void - a pointless exercise.I've also worked with people like Mike at Jabbasport, and Vince at Stealth, and when doing a run on the 'road, they setup the program for that car. At the end of the day, it's a set of parameters in a drop down menu. It takes seconds to setup, and easily missed by the untrained eye. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> Edited January 7, 2006 by Dubya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTi T Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Yup, 125ps per the book... think most people have managed 125-132 standard though. I got 130.8bhpI've said it before & I'll say it again... they only figure actually measured by a rolling road is the bhp at the wheels. The bhp at the fly is calculated using *estimated* losses through the drivetrain & as such can be easily "tweeked".Thus, the only true comparison is to run a car on the same setup before & after any work is done. If you're comparing to other cars, then its only fair to compare to cars run on the same rolling road, under the same conditions.My book (vehicle wallet) says 125 bhp (92kW) style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":confused:" border="0" alt="confused.gif" /> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicki Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Says 125ps in my book, but that makes less than 2bhp difference!Mine is an older book though, so it may be that they revised it to bhp & kept the models at 50/75/100/125 because it looks better.Manufacturers always under estimate though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTi T Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 (edited) Oh well style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> Edited January 8, 2006 by GTi T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.