# Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today...



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

And I will have definite numbers and graphs up shortly. 
From memory: 146 hp and 169(!!!) torque. Numbers are at the wheels on a Dynojet, running 87 octane Sunoco. It was cold outside, slightly warmer on the dyno. 3rd gear was used for all 4 pulls.
Needless to say, everyone including myself were surprised.

Car is 100% stock, almost 8000 miles on it. 2 dealer oil changes.

_Modified by silverA4quattro at 4:55 PM 3-17-2007_

_Modified by silverA4quattro at 4:56 PM 3-17-2007_


_Modified by silverA4quattro at 5:01 PM 3-17-2007_


----------



## h-townjetta (Oct 5, 2006)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*

surprised good or surprised bad?


----------



## RogueMotorsport (Mar 17, 2007)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*

i just got a rabbit 2-door and if those numbers are stock whp then im happy


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (h-townjetta)*

Good surprised.
That's a lot of torque. Hopefully I get these graphs back later today.


----------



## h-townjetta (Oct 5, 2006)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## rental_metard (Jul 17, 2006)

those are good numbers. So engine wise its stock except for the K&N ?


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: (rental_metard)*

Completely stock, no K&N.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*

Here's one plot everyone. This is uncorrected numbers, not sure what people go buy usually.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*

Basically about 5hp off the factory ratings for crank/tq HP.


----------



## Jimmy Russells (Feb 4, 2007)

Wow... very cool to know. Is there a graph that shows revs too? We don't know what RPM the values were at. Regardless, awesome numbers for a rock stock Rabbit. Perhaps VW fudged the numbers a bit to keep GTI buyers happy. I'm curious as to what it'll look like with a few bolt ons such as an intake and exhaust, and a header when one comes out. The thing that is most impressive is the torque curve. Again, we need to see RPM, but if that graph is over a couple thousand RPM, that is FLAT... Awesome!




_Modified by RedRabidRabbit at 5:38 PM 3-17-2007_


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: (RedRabidRabbit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *RedRabidRabbit* »_Wow... very cool to know. Is there a graph that shows revs too? We don't know what RPM the values were at. Regardless, awesome numbers for a rock stock Rabbit. Perhaps VW fudged the numbers a bit to keep GTI buyers happy. I'm curious as to what it'll look like with a few bolt ons such as an intake and exhaust, and a header when one comes out. The thing that is most impressive is the torque curve. Again, we need to see RPM, but if that graph is over a couple thousand RPM, that is FLAT... Awesome!
_Modified by RedRabidRabbit at 5:38 PM 3-17-2007_

See the bottom graph, that's showing you engine speed. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: (silverA4quattro)*

OK, here are all 4 runs plotted. As you can see, the 2.5 is amazingly consistent. I think this is a very mildly tuned engine and has the ability to make serious power. Some people may ask why dyno a stock Rabbit? Well, I wanted a baseline so when I add parts I know where I'm getting the most for my cash. Not only that, it's fun to see what your car puts down, stock or otherwise. And 4 runs were only like $55. We ran my GF's stock GTI too. She made more power, but not that much more torque!


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

Not sure if anyone can tell me anything about correction, but with WinPep(dynojet program), it can correct for SAE, DIN and a few other standards. SAE power and torque numbers are a little lower than the uncorrected numbers I'm showing here.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

Not surprisingly, air/fuel looks really good and consistent. N/A engine will do that for ya.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*

Here are the dyno plots again, with SAE correction specified. DIN correction is slightly higher than these numbers.


----------



## rental_metard (Jul 17, 2006)

nice numbers man. They're higher than mine when it was stock. I'm going to check mine because I'm fairly sure my A/F was at 14. I'll check when I get home


----------



## absoluteczech (Sep 13, 2006)

cool


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: (absoluteczech)*

K, sorry I'm such a noob with this program. Here we have uncorrected WHP and WTQ relative to engine speed. Looks like their RPM was a little off, I took it to rev limiter each time.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

looks like this confirms the butt dyno reporting this engine falls on its face after 5K.


----------



## coloradogoose (Mar 13, 2007)

Just curious, but what would A4's numbers work out to on Crank HP and Crank TQ to give it a true comparison to dealer numbers. 
Also, anyone have any idea where to get a dyno in the Salt Lake City area?


----------



## Jimmy Russells (Feb 4, 2007)

*Re: (silverA4quattro)*


_Quote, originally posted by *silverA4quattro* »_
See the bottom graph, that's showing you engine speed. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Gotcha... Little harder to read. 
Anyway, this is CLEARLY a de-tuned motor. There's just no way you can build something to make such a dead flat torque curve all the way from 2500 (maybe lower) - 5000 RPM without it being pretty restricted. The fact it falls off at 5000 echoes that also. I was into the 5.0 Mustang scene for years, and those are pretty de-tuned out of the box, but even they didn't have a curve that flat. 
It would be very cool to see what these things would do with simple bolt ons when they become available. Nobody really knows how bad the head is, but with cams, intake and exhaust and some software work, I don't think it's too unreasonable to expect 200/200 out of one of these things.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: (coloradogoose)*


_Quote, originally posted by *coloradogoose* »_Just curious, but what would A4's numbers work out to on Crank HP and Crank TQ to give it a true comparison to dealer numbers. 
Also, anyone have any idea where to get a dyno in the Salt Lake City area?

Well, the typical accepted drivetrain loss is 15% for FWD vehicles, so add approx. 15% to the numbers I've posted. 
Also keep in mind, these are "uncorrected" numbers. SAE and DIN numbers will be slightly lower. My max SAE corrected power and torque to the wheels was 140.9 sae wheel HP and 158.33 sae wheel torque. 
I'm not too familiar with the conversions and what is the accepted method of correction. Maybe someone can shed some light. But I would think that VW's claimed numbers are either SAE or DIN, but most likely SAE for North America. So take 140.9 and 158.33 and add 15% and you should roughly have the flywheel output.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: (RedRabidRabbit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *RedRabidRabbit* »_
Gotcha... Little harder to read. 
Anyway, this is CLEARLY a de-tuned motor. There's just no way you can build something to make such a dead flat torque curve all the way from 2500 (maybe lower) - 5000 RPM without it being pretty restricted. The fact it falls off at 5000 echoes that also. I was into the 5.0 Mustang scene for years, and those are pretty de-tuned out of the box, but even they didn't have a curve that flat. 
It would be very cool to see what these things would do with simple bolt ons when they become available. Nobody really knows how bad the head is, but with cams, intake and exhaust and some software work, I don't think it's too unreasonable to expect 200/200 out of one of these things. 

Did you see my updated graph? I finally figured out how to have Torque/HP and engine speed on one graph








But I think you're right, this engine is dead consistent in its numbers, the A/F ratio barely varies at all, even at 5K RPM. It's obviously got enough fueling, just needs more air (ahem...turbo)








Now, the graph doesn't really show lower RPM and I'm not sure why. Runs were in 3rd (and now I checked the ratios and 4th is 1.03:1, nearly direct drive so I'm not sure how that affected the numbers) and I held at 1500RPM and then punched it. Apparently peak torque comes on quite early and you can see that, but I'd be curious just how early it comes on. I know I can tool around in 3rd all day long and never need more torque. But yeah, that's gotta be one of the flattest torque curves I've seen. 
Let me post my GF's stock 1.8T (180bhp/173tq) GTI numbers. Her car is an 06 model, stock and has a 5 speed tiptronic. Runs were done in 3rd gear at full throttle(no kick down, it was in tip mode). Just for kicks/comparison, here is the uncorrected graphs:


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

As you can see from this graph, nothing is even registering until just past 3250 RPM...the 1.8T has already been making peak torque. I don't know why it doesn't start earlier to be honest. 
I bet with my 2.5 graphs we would have been seeing peak torque as early as 2000, if not before. I know my 1.8T STARTS peaking at like 1750. But even with the turbo, the torque falls off where as with my 2.5 it just keeps tugging.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

Another thing we can learn from this graph too is that optimal shift points seem to be just north of 5K. Basically hit 5K and shift, that not only avoids going into the "Dead" zone, but also drops you right back into the meat of the torque curve. I actually played with this today from a roll in 1st, grabbed 2nd at 5K and 50 came up REAL quickly.


----------



## @[email protected] (Aug 29, 2003)

*Re: (silverA4quattro)*

Great numbers! I want to dyno soon also, just gotta find it for free








I found with my CAI I will chirp from 1st to 2nd sometimes without pushing it. Just driving normal and ASR will come on between shifts because the pedal is so much more alive with all that torque down low.








I'm loving it. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## rare (Apr 7, 2005)

With 14.5:1 to 15:1 AFR you would think fuel mileage would be better. I guess the added cylinder brings it down. Wonder what an intake would do to that number.


----------



## Mike Gordon (Apr 11, 2005)

*Re: (silverA4quattro)*


_Quote, originally posted by *silverA4quattro* »_ I actually played with this today from a roll in 1st, grabbed 2nd at 5K and 50 came up REAL quickly. 

Yeah, I noticed this same thing the other day. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## chewy'sjetta (Feb 1, 2004)

*Re: (coloradogoose)*


_Quote, originally posted by *coloradogoose* »_Just curious, but what would A4's numbers work out to on Crank HP and Crank TQ to give it a true comparison to dealer numbers. 
Also, anyone have any idea where to get a dyno in the Salt Lake City area?

IM me.







Thirty20 has a dynojet and keep bugging me about building a turbo rabbit. lol
Talk to Tim, Justin, or Cam 801-977-1200. I'm also down there often working on my project.


----------



## blackflygti (Sep 19, 2001)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*


_Quote, originally posted by *silverA4quattro* »_running 87 octane Sunoco.

Does anyone know if the 2.5 takes advantage of higher octane? For example, for my mk3 2.0L the owner's manual says to run 87 octane or 91 for better performance. I'm wondering if the Rabbit is the same.


----------



## kaptinkangaru (Aug 17, 2006)

i dont have any concrete evidence, but my butt tells me there's barely a noticable difference between gas grades.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (blackflygti)*

Well the Rabbit manual says to run 87 or higher. 
My GTI's manual says 91 or higher, but 87 can be run but you will experience reduced performance. I always run 93 in that.
But my guess is I wouldn't see anything by running 93


----------



## blackflygti (Sep 19, 2001)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*


_Quote, originally posted by *silverA4quattro* »_Well the Rabbit manual says to run 87 or higher.

Thanks. THe manual is very vague with the 'or higher' part. Based on that, the Rabbit could potentially take advantage of 91. I guess the only way to know is to dyno it or monitor the timing.


----------



## silverA4quattro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (blackflygti)*


_Quote, originally posted by *blackflygti* »_
Thanks. THe manual is very vague with the 'or higher' part. Based on that, the Rabbit could potentially take advantage of 91. I guess the only way to know is to dyno it or monitor the timing.

Yeah, when I get a VAG i'll do some logs to see if it's pulling timing. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: Well, I dyno'd the Rabbit today... (silverA4quattro)*

those are some awesome numbers! this engine def looks so promising. the torque curve is just great. i think peak torque hit around 2300-2400rpm, but starts to build up like crazy from 2000rpm. atleast thats how it feels to me








hey silverA4quattro, your gf's MKIV GTI Auto made around 180whp if im not mistaken.... what mods does she have (so i can compare it to similarly built manual 1.8T GTIs)
sorry for the threadjack though. perhaps you should IM me instead


----------

