Car underperforming or sth**y driving?

Nonoperational

After a 90 something blue jap thing with an exhaust the size of my head (big) pulled away from me with a certain amount of ease I decided to have a look at the 0-100kph performance. The book time is 7.0s. My best of 3 runs was 8.2...

Im reasonably happy the time is accurate I used pocket Dyno on the iPhone and a stopwatch, they both agreed. A few points to note are that the start was almost definitely not as good as a pro or someone experienced in launching at speed could do. Also I didn't ram it quickly from 1-2. I did it quick enough but I still let the first bit of resistance pass and slid it in.

Do ye think these two factors would account for 1.2 seconds or there abouts or am I looking at a spilt boost pipe or something of that order.

Car is a 2006 VW GTi manual 200bhp.

-Corkie-

Sounds like a clapped out skangermobile to me. That golf will devour most things on the road :cool:

jjd

oh you poor thing
a jap o yoke is about half the weight and bound to get away quicker but the vw would pass it over the long run so dont feel bad

Turbo lag?

Nonoperational

Ah ya I'm not too worried about the jap thing but I did think I'd get under the 8 seconds on a 0-100 run!

KamiKazi

Manafuctarer times are done by professional drivers.

peasant

KamiKazi wrote: »

Manafuctarer times are done by professional drivers.

with very little regard for the life expectancy of mechanical components

Nonoperational

Ya i thought that, I imagine it's not good for the clutch and the synchros in the box....

r3nu4l

SARASON wrote: »

That golf will devour most things on the road :cool:

Lol. The Gof GTI is good but it's no rocket ship!

KamiKazi has it right as does peasent, the quoted 0-60 mph times are performed and recorded by expert drivers in perfect conditions.

Nonoperational

Ya a rocket ship is aint... But it's acceptable all the same. Especially after coming from a 1.6 na petrol.

bad2dabone

gpf101 wrote: »

Ya i thought that, I imagine it's not good for the clutch and the synchros in the box....

aye, they dump the clutch for those 0-60 times so i wouldn't worry about it.

Nonoperational

bad2dabone wrote: »

aye, they dump the clutch for those 0-60 times so i wouldn't worry about it.

I suppose 8.2 is ok so, I have a feeling if I was more agressive on the start and during the gearchange I'd probably have shaved a small bit off it too. Happy days so. It has wetted my appetite for a remap though...

Matt Simis

gpf101 wrote: »

I suppose 8.2 is ok so, I have a feeling if I was more agressive on the start and during the gearchange I'd probably have shaved a small bit off it too. Happy days so. It has wetted my appetite for a remap though...

Yep, remap sounds in order. You get used to car performance, so you may feel its getting slower as you acclimatise to it.

Nonoperational

Matt Simis wrote: »

Yep, remap sounds in order. You get used to car performance, so you may feel its getting slower as you acclimatise to it.

Ya thats exactly whats happening.

copacetic

r3nu4l wrote: »

Lol. The Gof GTI is good but it's no rocket ship!

KamiKazi has it right as does peasent, the quoted 0-60 mph times are performed and recorded by expert drivers in perfect conditions.

For manuals anyway. I did a similar test to the OP in an auto and beat the quoted 0-62 as anyone could have done.

Back to manuals, do magazines do a no clutch test too or are they more careful? 'What Car' for instance seems to consistently beat quoted figures for some cars, or is it just that that some makers are more conservative than others in their quoted figures?

tossy

gpf101 wrote: »

After a 90 something blue jap thing with an exhaust the size of my head (big) pulled away from me with a certain amount of ease I decided to have a look at the 0-100kph performance. The book time is 7.0s. My best of 3 runs was 8.2...

Im reasonably happy the time is accurate I used pocket Dyno on the iPhone and a stopwatch, they both agreed. A few points to note are that the start was almost definitely not as good as a pro or someone experienced in launching at speed could do. Also I didn't ram it quickly from 1-2. I did it quick enough but I still let the first bit of resistance pass and slid it in.

Do ye think these two factors would account for 1.2 seconds or there abouts or am I looking at a spilt boost pipe or something of that order.

Car is a 2006 VW GTi manual 200bhp.

8.2 is very slow to my mind,i pay no heed to manufacturers times but you should be getting better than that.I was getting the guts of a second faster in my similar powered but heavier bora when it was standard (all tested on a private track of course).

As for the jap thing what was it? Jap cars have the knack of packing a decent punch in a light bodied light engined cars.

SARASON wrote: »

Sounds like a clapped out skangermobile to me. That golf will devour most things on the road :cool:

As much as i love the GTI the above statement is nonsense.I hate when people use eating references in relation to the difference of power/performance between cars.

challengemaster

90 something blue jap thing could be anything from a civic, to an Evo to a r33 GTST/GTR putting out over 4-500bhp.

argosy2006

get into 2nd gear quicker,sounds to me your reving it out in every gear,
should be in 2nd at 5 mph not 30

Vertakill

argosy2006 wrote: »

get into 2nd gear quicker,sounds to me your reving it out in every gear,
should be in 2nd at 5 mph not 30

2nd gear at 5mph when doing a 0-60? You'd probably do it in about 15 seconds if that's the case.

8.2 seems quite slow to be fair. I could do low 7s in a 190bhp VVTLi Celica so I would have assumed that GTi would be very close to that.

But yea, unless you're revving to a few K before you're dropping the clutch, you're going to get a higher time than the manufacturer.

Nonoperational

I reved to about 3k then let out the clutch but at a speed that caused only a tiny bit of wheelspin. Hit the limiter in 1st and did a (slowish) change to 2nd. I just couldnt bring myself to rip it into 2nd.

Ok lets try identify the jap, It was a coupe, large enough (not a civic, celic, mitshbishi evo or integra). Metallic blue with the exhaust on the right ( i think even though as far as i recall they are mostly on left). Maybe was a toyota or nissan I really should have paid more attention.

Ya I thought 8.2 was poor alright. Im just slow to try it again I's say its very hard on the car.

Vertakill

gpf101 wrote: »

I reved to about 3k then let out the clutch but at a speed that caused only a tiny bit of wheelspin. Hit the limiter in 1st and did a (slowish) change to 2nd. I just couldnt bring myself to rip it into 2nd.

Ok lets try identify the jap, It was a coupe, large enough (not a civic, celica or integra). Maybe was a toyota or nissan I really should have paid more attention.

Ya I thought 8.2 was poor alright. Im just slow to try it again I's say its very hard on the car.

Well, sounds like you could definitely shave some time off it by being a bit more aggressive. The car won't fall apart the second you're a bit rough with it...

The other car could've been a lot of things really. Could've been anything from a Supra to a 300ZX or Silvia... or anything really.
All of which could blow the GTi out of the water depending on the spec.

Nonoperational

I was thinking Silvia I don't know why the hell I didn't look. Thnk it was 1994 reg. What sort of BHP do they run?

My last car was an alfa 156 with a worn 4rd gear synchro. Im sure I shagged it by doing 0-60s so I have a thing about it!

It did have a run bit of a start on me and wasn't tearing away but definitely had the upper hand...

Vertakill

gpf101 wrote: »

My last car was an alfa 156 with a worn 4rd gear synchro. Im sure I shagged it by doing 0-60s so I have a thing about it!

Lol, ouch.

gpf101 wrote: »

I was thinking Silvia I don't know why the hell I didn't look. Thnk it was 1994 reg. What sort of BHP do they run?

I think stock they're nothing to write home about but they can be modified to crazy figures.

There's an S13 in that year range I think, which, even stock (170bhp), would top that 8.2 figure.

Or if it's a Toyota, could've been the 6th Gen Celica or a Supra (or slightly off the beaten track, a Levin or something like that.)

Too many possibilities.

Nonoperational

Wasn't a levin or a celica certain of that, sur it's not important anyway! Might come across him again some time....

ShiresV2

The problem is the GTI badge on the back of your car, get shot of it and you'll beat everybody off the lights.

Not having a go at you, I'm serious!

Nonoperational

To be fair I had no interest in beating anybody but he came up behind me, swept out and cut in in front so I tried to keep up with him then when the lights went green...

I'll take off the badge in the morning so...!

ShiresV2

gpf101 wrote: »

To be fair I had no interest in beating anybody but he came up behind me, swept out and cut in in front so I tried to keep up with him then when the lights went green...

I'll take off the badge in the morning so...!

Ah OK, that's different then. My point is that Trafifc Light Grand Prix is really easy to win in a car that looks slow (and is slow!).

Vertakill

If you've become too used to the performance (happens to me within the first few months of a faster car!), just get it remapped.

It'll keep you entertained until then next lad tries to leave you in his wake.

challengemaster

Vertakill wrote: »

I think stock they're nothing to write home about but they can be modified to crazy figures.

There's an S13 in that year range I think, which, even stock (170bhp), would top that 8.2 figure.

most common engines would be SR20DE / SR20DET, 200-250bhp or so?

Or if it's a Toyota, could've been the 6th Gen Celica or a Supra (or slightly off the beaten track, a Levin or something like that.)

Too many possibilities.

Definately... Could have been a Soarer either. Twin turbo supra though, he hadn't got a chance.

Vertakill

challengemaster wrote: »

most common engines would be SR20DE / SR20DET, 200-250bhp or so?

Yeah you're right. Just had a gander there and it looks like the SR20DE / SR20DET engines were used from '91-'94. I'm not really up on Silvia's despite liking them!

challengemaster wrote: »

Definately... Could have been a Soarer either. Twin turbo supra though, he hadn't got a chance.

Yeah that's a fair shout too. They're fairly scarce on our roads though which is a shame.
I'd say the OP would be explaining how he was left in the absolute dust if it was a TT Supra!

Matt Simis

gpf101 wrote: »

My last car was an alfa 156 with a worn 4rd gear synchro. Im sure I shagged it by doing 0-60s so I have a thing about it!

It did have a run bit of a start on me and wasn't tearing away but definitely had the upper hand...

You were power shifting to 4th on a 0-60 run? :pac:

Here is the perfect solution for you, come to the Dyno day we have organized over on the Modified board:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055935237&page=3
Cheap and effective.

There are several common technical issues that can cause bogging down on turbo cars, a dyno run would confirm if you are actually putting down the stock power and will help figure out what you can do next. Also like minded people there etc. Maybe even a selection of Jap cars you can identify from a line up.

Nonoperational

Matt Simis wrote: »

You were power shifting to 4th on a 0-60 run? :pac:

Here is the perfect solution for you, come to the Dyno day we have organized over on the Modified board:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055935237&page=3
Cheap and effective.

There are several common technical issues that can cause bogging down on turbo cars, a dyno run would confirm if you are actually putting down the stock power and will help figure out what you can do next. Also like minded people there etc. Maybe even a selection of Jap cars you can identify from a line up.

It was 3rd I meant to type but I didn't change it because someone had quoted me!

I'm working June 24 I afraid...

skyhighflyer

If you go to the Millbrook proving ground in the UK the amount of mechanical components lying twisted and destroyed near the spot where the manufacturers do their 0-100kph runs explains why you wouldn't want to be matching the times their drivers set.

For a 4wd car like the Golf, you just give it max revs and slide your foot sideways off the clutch till it springs back and try not to wince when the smell of burning clutch fills the cabin.

tossy

skyhighflyer wrote: »

For a 4wd car like the Golf, you just give it max revs and slide your foot sideways off the clutch till it springs back and try not to wince when the smell of burning clutch fills the cabin.

The GTI Golf is 2wd.

Matt Simis

gpf101 wrote: »

It was 3rd I meant to type but I didn't change it because someone had quoted me!

I'm working June 24 I afraid...

But the Dyno day is the 26th!

Nonoperational

Same deal... if I was off I would def go up.

Edit: What time is it on until?

Matt Simis

gpf101 wrote: »

Same deal... if I was off I would def go up.

Edit: What time is it on until?

Till its done! 7 or 8 cars and starts at 11am. Its not all that quick to get a car on a dyno and complete the runs, then another etc, so a while I would imagine.

Nonoperational

Working in Cork till 2 so wouldn't make it.

Nonoperational

Just an update to this, changed the diverter valve and it's like I'm driving a new car. Old one had a rip in it and was releasing boost. Feels like I gained 40 bhp!

gpf101

gpf101 wrote: »

After a 90 something blue jap thing with an exhaust the size of my head (big) pulled away from me with a certain amount of ease ..................... Also I didn't ram it quickly from 1-2. I did it quick enough but I still let the first bit of resistance pass and slid it in.

gpf101 wrote: »

I reved to about 3k then let out the clutch but at a speed that caused only a tiny bit of wheelspin. Hit the limiter in 1st and did a (slowish) change to 2nd. I just couldnt bring myself to rip it into 2nd.

Sh1t driving coupled with a decent Jap car me thinks. You probably lost a second or more on the gearchange from what you say. Not to worry though

Nonoperational

Did 2 more runs tonight after getting the valve changed, 7.6 and 6.8s. Some improvement. That's the end of my 0-60s now!