There is another very strange thing... All my comrades that have this same car, have a looong geared box, with a 4th gear that can go up to 211 indicated km/h at 6850 rpm. But... This car has a VERY short gears, for example very short 4th gear, 145 km/h at 6000 rpm XD... this translates to 165 km/h at 6850 rpm... So strange. This 4th gear seems almost geared like the 3rd gear in the cars I know (many of them). Official gear ratios for 1.4tsi 160 maual, in km/h each 1.000 rpm: 1ª 8,4 (57 km/h at 6850 rpm) 2ª 15,0 (102 at 6850!!! 90 at 6000) 3ª 23,4 (165 at 6850!!! 140 at 6000) 4ª 30,9 (211 at 6850!!!, 185 at 6000) 5ª 37,1 6ª 43,4 ------------ Compare with the speeds in the video at 6000 rpm. ALL gears in the car of this video seems way shorter than should be, even 1st and 2nd gear. Seems that it has a modified shortened final ratio???
@@berkperformance Wow, Ok, I was misleaded by the fact there was no indication about being in D or S mode, but it is because my car have red FIS and the indication is different. With DSG there are shorter gear ratios, OK
Downpipe and filter its as fast as the base Gti is cause 1.4 engine in this car is a little bit lighter. Gti comes alive when it is mapped though. Its slow standard.
100-160 and 100-200 times seem coherent. But I find 0-100 times too fast, both stock and remapped. You need to do well to get 6.2 secs on a Scirocco R 265, I have seen many 6.1 in Sciroccos R with 310 bhp in Stage 1. For a 1.4tsi 160, even 6.9 stock is waaaay faster than claimed 7.8... almost by a second? Rare. None of my friends with this same car stock have come close to that. Even those remapped do it around 6.5-7.1 secs Even myself with a 2.0tsi DSG with Launch Control and high grip tyres, my best 0-100 time with stock power (209 bhp on dyno) on a 100% flat surface is a 6.6 secs. I don't get how a manual car with no more power and basically same torque, no launch control, can beat this by so great margin. My 6.6 secs for my car is 100% consistent with many other sources and people. I think the 0-100 part of the tarmac was on some downhill slope. I know also how a bit of slope affect the result
Thanks Almos for your response, but it wasn’t. Dragy would have been far more reliable to measure, but did not had it at that time. The trick is to not even have the “pedal to the metal” during launches and greater power with FWD cars don’t always get much faster 0-100 times because its even harder to launch. Think this car hits the sweet spot with it’s power and slip. I was suprised too to be honest. Nevertheless, 0-100 in a FWD is pointless since it can fluctuate A LOT. 100-160 and 100-200 is far more reliable to look at here.
@@berkperformance Yes, you are right, I even myself became addicted to compare car performance on the 100-160 range because it can be done in almost any car in 4th gear, so no gearbox type and driver quality involved. My colleagues were all too focused on 100-200, but then manual cars against DSGs give poor idea about comparing engine power/torque, and you also need much longer patch of road and go to more ilegal speeds. 100-160 is much easier, safer, and compares just raw power/torque (given not too muuch diference in wheel/tyre setup) I introduced this measure among my comrades and all of them have become fond of it. We now even have an "official" list of 100-160 times for many different cars and states of tune, on the same road. More than 40 entries so far in the list and growing, lol
The best of videos, simplicity
Decent 100-200 difference
I notice you said this was a DSG, is your box the dq200? If so i thought they were rated to 250Nm torque how is it keeping up
There is another very strange thing... All my comrades that have this same car, have a looong geared box, with a 4th gear that can go up to 211 indicated km/h at 6850 rpm. But... This car has a VERY short gears, for example very short 4th gear, 145 km/h at 6000 rpm XD... this translates to 165 km/h at 6850 rpm... So strange. This 4th gear seems almost geared like the 3rd gear in the cars I know (many of them).
Official gear ratios for 1.4tsi 160 maual, in km/h each 1.000 rpm:
1ª 8,4 (57 km/h at 6850 rpm)
2ª 15,0 (102 at 6850!!! 90 at 6000)
3ª 23,4 (165 at 6850!!! 140 at 6000)
4ª 30,9 (211 at 6850!!!, 185 at 6000)
5ª 37,1
6ª 43,4
------------
Compare with the speeds in the video at 6000 rpm.
ALL gears in the car of this video seems way shorter than should be, even 1st and 2nd gear. Seems that it has a modified shortened final ratio???
You do realize that this is a DSG right..?
@@berkperformance Wow, Ok, I was misleaded by the fact there was no indication about being in D or S mode, but it is because my car have red FIS and the indication is different. With DSG there are shorter gear ratios, OK
Only Downpipe + tune? Dsg tune?
Stock boost 1bar? Tune boost 1.5bar?
Thanks!
Good Stuff Only stage 1 tune.
@@berkperformance ok, boost pressure?
@@berkperformance without sport air filter?
Downpipe and filter its as fast as the base Gti is cause 1.4 engine in this car is a little bit lighter. Gti comes alive when it is mapped though. Its slow standard.
How can u get something sporty and then with automatic...
What is the top speed?
Will that engine last?
Thats what everybody want to know right?
I am running on a similar tune for 9 years so yes
@@mr_vagHave you had to change the chain or turbo on it during your ownership?
@@bakededded no
Weird how the 60-100 time is flipped :O
Hawokki yeah it is not flipped, it didn’t reset from an earlier failed run..
100-160 and 100-200 times seem coherent. But I find 0-100 times too fast, both stock and remapped. You need to do well to get 6.2 secs on a Scirocco R 265, I have seen many 6.1 in Sciroccos R with 310 bhp in Stage 1. For a 1.4tsi 160, even 6.9 stock is waaaay faster than claimed 7.8... almost by a second? Rare. None of my friends with this same car stock have come close to that. Even those remapped do it around 6.5-7.1 secs
Even myself with a 2.0tsi DSG with Launch Control and high grip tyres, my best 0-100 time with stock power (209 bhp on dyno) on a 100% flat surface is a 6.6 secs. I don't get how a manual car with no more power and basically same torque, no launch control, can beat this by so great margin. My 6.6 secs for my car is 100% consistent with many other sources and people.
I think the 0-100 part of the tarmac was on some downhill slope. I know also how a bit of slope affect the result
Thanks Almos for your response, but it wasn’t. Dragy would have been far more reliable to measure, but did not had it at that time. The trick is to not even have the “pedal to the metal” during launches and greater power with FWD cars don’t always get much faster 0-100 times because its even harder to launch. Think this car hits the sweet spot with it’s power and slip. I was suprised too to be honest. Nevertheless, 0-100 in a FWD is pointless since it can fluctuate A LOT. 100-160 and 100-200 is far more reliable to look at here.
@@berkperformance Yes, you are right, I even myself became addicted to compare car performance on the 100-160 range because it can be done in almost any car in 4th gear, so no gearbox type and driver quality involved. My colleagues were all too focused on 100-200, but then manual cars against DSGs give poor idea about comparing engine power/torque, and you also need much longer patch of road and go to more ilegal speeds. 100-160 is much easier, safer, and compares just raw power/torque (given not too muuch diference in wheel/tyre setup)
I introduced this measure among my comrades and all of them have become fond of it. We now even have an "official" list of 100-160 times for many different cars and states of tune, on the same road. More than 40 entries so far in the list and growing, lol
Why 60-100 stock 3,715 and stage 1 4,692?
The 4.6 is not measuring.. it was from the previous run.;)
How is the car after the soft? Any problems till now?
KEEPZ Nope, there won’t be since its a safe tune.
What do you mean safe tune?
@@vojtechulman9534its just software tuning, the mechanical parts of the engine are all the same
Not that much of a difference