|
Hi There,
Anyone had a remap on an Audi S3 8p? Was wondering what to get and most reliable!?
Cheers
|
|
If 260bhp isn't enough for you, I'd recommend some kind of sedative.
The speed limit is 70mph.
|
|
|
I've driven a Golf R with this engine and DSG box and found it hugely quick, though the gearbox was quite frustrating at times, I'd certainly prefer a manual.
Quite frankly though, if 265bhp in a family hatch isn't enough for you and you're not talking about creating some kind of track weapon here then you need help.
As far as whether the car will stand up to it or not, well I know one chap who ruined the (manual) gearbox in his Mk VI Golf GTi not long after a remap.
Manufacturers spend millions to design these cars, there's no shortcuts to more performance without losing out in reliability and durability. You'll put excessive pressure on transmission and engine components and if it's an auto it's bound to go bang. I certainly wouldn't and I can't believe there's any need to upgrade a car with so much power to start with. Relax, there's little on the road that could touch you anyway.
|
Manufacturers spend millions to design these cars, there's no shortcuts to more performance without losing out in reliability and durability. You'll put excessive pressure on transmission and engine components and if it's an auto it's bound to go bang. I certainly wouldn't and I can't believe there's any need to upgrade a car with so much power to start with. Relax, there's little on the road that could touch you anyway.
Not sure I totally agree with you there SLO, although your posts are usually spot on. We had a Saab 9-5 Aero auto (TC) estate with 250bhp and 350 Nm of torque, which was remapped at 90,000 miles with a highly regarded (Maptun) upgraded ECU to 265bhp and 420Nm. It flourished until it reached around 235,000 miles with absolutely no issues (it had the original engine, turbo, and transmission until the bitter end). After being chipped, it was noticeably more lively but the fuel consumption remained unchanged throughout its life. It might have been more "old school" than the OP's Audi, but it demonstrates that. if done properly, an ECU upgrade isn't necessarily a bad thing.....
Edited by Mike H on 11/07/2017 at 23:24
|
Manufacturers spend millions to design these cars, there's no shortcuts to more performance without losing out in reliability and durability. You'll put excessive pressure on transmission and engine components and if it's an auto it's bound to go bang. I certainly wouldn't and I can't believe there's any need to upgrade a car with so much power to start with. Relax, there's little on the road that could touch you anyway.
Not sure I totally agree with you there SLO, although your posts are usually spot on. We had a Saab 9-5 Aero auto (TC) estate with 250bhp and 350 Nm of torque, which was remapped at 90,000 miles with a highly regarded (Maptun) upgraded ECU to 265bhp and 420Nm. It flourished until it reached around 235,000 miles with absolutely no issues (it had the original engine, turbo, and transmission until the bitter end). After being chipped, it was noticeably more lively but the fuel consumption remained unchanged throughout its life. It might have been more "old school" than the OP's Audi, but it demonstrates that. if done properly, an ECU upgrade isn't necessarily a bad thing.....
There was an official version called a Hirsch available in some markets with a 300bhp/400nm version of this engine which was largely an engine map plus some suspension and brake tweaks I believe but you were lucky to get away with pumping so much extra torque through the Aisin AF33 autobox (as used in the Vectra) which wasn't designed to cope with it.
I should alter my statement to say that there are some suitable cars for remap. Volvo's 5cyl 2.5 turbocharged engines (as used in the Mk II ST Focus) were available in various states of tune up to around 300bhp which are again largely down to the engine map, as were VAG's 1.8 turbo 20v in the Audi TT which came with between 150bhp and 230bhp, again if you had one of the lower output cars I don't see much harm coming from an upgrade. If you bumped up the top spec model beyond manufacturer specs I'd expect trouble if you deployed it with much enthusiasm and certainly wouldn't want to buy it off when you were done with it.
Again though I find it curious why you'd find the need to remap a 250bhp 150mph car that already had masses of midrange pull. I ran one (a part exchanged estate) in the identical spec for a few months several years back and never once did I find it lacking in go. I did find the interior quality very poor compared to the previous Saab 9000 and the autobox discouraged any enthusiastic B road fun by constantly hopping around but the engine was brilliant. Sadly the £500 plus road tax killed it for me and murdered resale, though that's why I did get it cheap myself. Very comfy though but you could see why Saab died, the quality and dynamics just weren't up to rivals even if the engine certainly was.
|
|
The S3 does 0-60 in 5.5 seconds and is limited to 155mph. Frankly, I worry about the kind of person who finds this 'inadequate'.
Being the age I am, programmes like Magnum pi, then as I got a bit older, Miami vice, had a big impact on my childhood. The OP's Audi already has more power than the Ferrari 308 (at the time, a 'junior supercar' with 255hp) in Magnum, and it's current equivalent is soon to have more power than the testarossa (at the time a 'full fat supercar' with 390hp) in Miami vice. It is totally unnecessary and in my opinion, just a 'willy wagging' (sorry Avant) contest between manufacturers who are more interested in what they can do, than what they should do.
|
It is totally unnecessary and in my opinion, just a 'willy wagging' (sorry Avant) contest between manufacturers who are more interested in what they can do, than what they should do.
While I agree its totally unnessary for manufacturers to make cars that go this quick its criminal that owners and companies decide such cars are not quick enough.
Power makes no difference to driving pleasure. Up until recent times (after the Audi takeover) Lanborghinis might have had loads of poke and looked wild but were widely accepted as being evil driving machines and many Ferraris have been the same. In fact Enzo was only really interested in the engine, the rest of the car did not matter and in many cases this was obvious. But they did look nice in most cases.
Our bi-annual trip to Scotland took about 8 hours including breaks 25 years ago in a Bluebird with 80 BHP. The roads today are virtually the same and the traffic is pretty good at the times we travel yet with nearly double the power in the Superb it still takes 8 hours. The only way to get there quicker is to break the limits and risk fines etc.
I had many good trips in my old Polo diesel with 60 bhp. It was quite an achievment to get to your destination in a good time within legal limits. Avoiding using the barkes really helped.
|
|
Ha! I suspect the OP chose the wrong forum to ask his question.
Others may be more sympathetic (p***ed on heads etc)
|
|
|
I've driven a lot of motors in my time, from supercars with the guts of 600bhp to superminis with 60 and on the road there's nothing to beat a modestly powered lightweight hot/mild hatch (Swift Sport, Fiesta ST, AX GT, 205 GTi) or small two seater such as the Lotus Elise or Mazda MX5 for fun.
Modified cars usually ruin the handling and ride balance and too much power is all too often wasted through torque steer. My gaffers old Focus ST was a case in point, with 247bhp as standard it was a very aggressive and entertaining hot hatch. Wheelspin was an issue but post remap @ 300bhp the car was no quicker as the power overwhelmed the fwd chassis which made it far less enjoyable to drive hard. To me it was a waste of money.
Often it's not the top spec model that's the pick of the range for driver enjoyment but a more modestly powered mid-spec sweet spot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totally worth it, take no notice of these uneducated muppets, literally just joined to post this message :)
|
Totally worth it, take no notice of these uneducated muppets, literally just joined to post this message :)
But most of these 'uneducated muppets' are educated enough to be able to read a time/date stamp on a thread and therefore not respond to it like it was current!.
I mean, do you really think the OP is still trying to decide what to do more two years later?!.
|
|
|
Totally worth it, take no notice of these uneducated muppets, literally just joined to post this message :)
Either utterly pointless or a prelude to you posting some spam?
|
|
|
Totally worth it, take no notice of these uneducated muppets, literally just joined to post this message :)
Posted no doubt by some inexperienced teenager with absolutely zero mechanical knowledge whatsoever, one who will probably and rather sadly be driving around in some tarted up Ned/Chav mobile with no insurance thanks to the undeclared mods that in reality only ruin the handling and drivability of said rot bucket. Thankfully the engine remap will soon see it off the road one way or another.
|
Totally worth it, take no notice of these uneducated muppets, literally just joined to post this message :)
Posted no doubt by some inexperienced teenager with absolutely zero mechanical knowledge whatsoever, one who will probably and rather sadly be driving around in some tarted up Ned/Chav mobile with no insurance thanks to the undeclared mods that in reality only ruin the handling and drivability of said rot bucket. Thankfully the engine remap will soon see it off the road one way or another.
I like it when this sort mods their car by lowering it so much that it gets beached on a speed hump, or at the very least tears off the front/rear bumpers even after crawling over it at slower than walking pace.
|
|
|
|
Totally worth it, take no notice of these uneducated muppets, literally just joined to post this message :)
It takes a certain kind of muppet to join a forum and then write such a first post..
|
|
|
|
