# unitronic stage 2 LONG review.



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

*Unitronic stage 2 review.

First and foremost: It took me long enough to be able to be Unitronic chipped. I “bugged” the company since april 2009, and finally on Nov 20th 2010, it happened. I am Now a Unitronic chipped stage 2 jetta sedan 2009 2.5 5 cyl, engine CBTA. Automatic transmission 09G.*

Now, I feel that I must say that someone is bound to sue em. Its either gonna be: VW of America, the VAGroup, the Dept of Transportation of the USA and Canada, etc. And that the gas stations will prolly be thankfull to Unitronic. 
The car feels a LOT better, so in a way they are making me love my car SO much, that there is no need to ever get anything else, and at the same time they are telling Vw software engineers: “HA! We can do it better than you!” lol.

The DOT is gonna start claiming that Unitronic chipped cars are not “street legal”, since they are a LOT quicker than stock, and with a lot more torque.

And since you love the car THAT much more, then I just don’t want to stop driving, hence all the gas spending!
Now, I tested it inicially, without it being fully adapted, in 3 different ¼ mile runs. And in total I did 5 runs: 2 with the car “stock” and 3 with Unitronic chipped stage 2.

*Quarter mile runs:*

Now, I am NOT going to post the slips cause it would make this all VERY heavy, but you can trust me, I have no intentions of liying. And the 0-60 times, along with the 10 final speed was calculated with Vag com logs of the quarter mile runs.

*1st run: stock software*
-	60’ ---2.563
-	330---6.924
-	1/8 ---10.526
-	Mph ----68.53
-	1000--- 13.571
-	¼ mile: 16.465
-	Mph: 86.35
-	0-60: 9.19secs
-	10 secs:67.61 mph


*2nd run: stock software*
-	60’ ---2.445
-	330---6.806
-	1/8 ---10.416
-	Mph ----68.30
-	1000--- 13.474
-	¼ mile: 16.359
-	Mph: 85.71
-	0-60: 9.36 secs
-	10 secs: 67.60

*3rd run: Unitronic stage 2*
-	60’ ---2.426
-	330---6.736
-	1/8 ---9.994
-	Mph ----70.61
-	1000--- 13.284
-	¼ mile: 15.647
-	Mph: 89.39
-	0-60: 7.8 secs
-	10 secs: 70.71 mph

*4th Run: Unitronic Stage 2*
-	60’ ---2.443
-	330---6.729
-	1/8 ---10.395
-	Mph ----68.38
-	1000--- 13.457
-	¼ mile: 16.042
-	Mph: 86.97
-	0-60: 8.6 secs
-	10 secs: 67.60 mph

*5th run: Unitronic Stage 2.*
-	60’ ---2.409
-	330---6.738
-	1/8 ---10.331
-	Mph ----68.56
-	1000--- 13.385
-	¼ mile: 15.963
-	Mph: 86.89
-	0-60: 8.4seconds
-	10 secs: 69.15 mph.


Now, a section of the review that’s important as an excuse to wives:

* MPG comparison.*

Since I have only had it for 2 days, I have only been able to log 182.3 miles with the software, and so far it has proven to be a 35% better MPGs than with 93oct and the stock software, giving me a total of 33.8125 MPGS since being chipped. Which means a HUGE improvement, and one that leads the next section: AFR.

*note:* mps have "normalized" and now i get a consistent 28mpgs, which is a solid +2mpg gain.
*AFR.*

Air to fuel ratio used by the car. Stock config is set to be 14.7. and usually when the AFR is around the 15s (leaner), it is said to give the most MPGs. And when around 13s (richer) it is said to produce moar power. And it is around 11.5 or 13.5 when at Wide open Throttle.

When on stock software, the afr would be always around the 14s, if bad fuel (lower than 93 oct) was used, it would get a lot leaner (15s or even 16s!!!) which made me have to always get 93oct from shell or chevron, since they PROVED to be the best fuels. BTW, shell is the better one here in Florida.

Now, on the Unitronic’s stage 2, the afr tends to be at the 14s. and when in D mode, it usually stays close to the 14.7 ratio. Now, when in Sport mode, its mostly in the 13s!!! and it does feel betteh.

The funny one is “manual mode”. Because if you aren’t really pressing the accelerator, its around the 14.7s, but as you start rising RPMs and as you start pressing the Accel, it starts going richer, and richer, and by the 5000 rpms, is usually around the high 12s! now, that’s a very well done fuel enrichment.


*CITY DRIVING (50 miles logged so far)*

As one can deduce by the AFRs, when in D mode, the car feels a LOT torquier, but nothing really outstanding. I mean, yes it is quicker, but it isn’t going to give you any neck injury or anything unless you STEP on it.
But when in Sport or manual mode, well… that’s another story. Let me just start by saying that the car felt a LOT faster and with a lot better high end power when I was doing the quarter miles, then I was impressed and the car wasn’t fully adapted!

Ok, continuing: when in S and Manual mode, the car feels a LOT better. It pulls like a very high powered car. It truly doesn’t feels like a less-than-200whp-car. (Is it? Maybe I am at 180? I dunno…)

On those modes, the car is like angry and pulling all the time. It is now hard to stay at the 35 or 45mph speed limits. And it pulls so much that I lost that “knowing-feeling” that I had when I reached a certain speed. And by that I mean, I used to know by heart how fast was 50mph without having to look at the gauges, now? I have no clue. It truly is like driving another car. A FASTER car.

*Highway driving. (130 miles logged so far)*

Ok, so I have driven a LOT of highways on GREYT. And by a lot I mean +42 000 miles on 22months. Which includes a 30hr road trip to H2O. so, in highway, I KNEW my car as I know myself.

For me to pass another car “quickly” I would have to downshift to 5th, and then accel. The car at 80 would be “topped”, And since it was at 2700rpm, then it wouldn’t really “pull” until I reached 90mph which happens around 3100 rpm. And then it would MOVE all the way till 115 mph.

Now, the car pulls ALL THE TIME! Holding 80? An issue. Lol. Since by just tapping the pedal once accelerates… by just tapping or dipping your feet a bit more you would get pulled by a freight train. It is that much better. On my way back home (128 miles) I passed all the cars in 6th gear.

There was a moment in which a guy HAD to be passed, and just pressing more the pedal got me to 100ish mph and that took like 6 secs from 78mph. So, no matter where you are in the RPM range, the car has torque to send you running forward.

*Comparison to other cars.*
In my family and friends, we have:

2009 jetta (mine), 2010 mitsubishi lancer (158 hp), 2009 corolla(136 hp), 2008 jeep compass(170 hp), 2008 mercedes benz GL450 (340 hp) and my dad’s 2011 porsche Panamera (300hp).
All I can say is that my car feels:
-	A LOT faster than all the other models…
-	A little bit faster/ more powerful than the GL 450
- a little bit less powerful/ faster than the panamera. 


*Recommendations/ conclusions:*

Get the software ASAP. No need to wait or hesitate, everything has been tested, and done to perfection, and it all was done within safe parameters. No, the engine wont explode!

If I had known that the software was gonna be THIS powerful, I would have shipped my ECU a LONG time ago.
The car seems to have as much as 10-15whp more, which is well enough for a NA vehicle. But it has a LOT more torque available along the entire power band.

This software (stage 2) works well with intake manifolds. It won’t give +40whp at the moment because it isn’t tuned specifically for intake manis, but is the best option there is when comparing with any other software out there that wasn’t done SPECIFICALLY for the manis. At the same time I will say: Unitronic IS going to produce and provide intake manifold software, along with eurojet headers specific software.


*ALL in all. Get CHIPPED and stay TUNED for more.*


----------



## TeamZleep (Aug 28, 2007)

thygreyt said:


> *ALL in all. Get CHIPPED and stay TUNED for more.*


I'm getting chipped... For a turbo!


----------



## IJSTROK (Oct 2, 2007)

Not trying to be a Debbie downer, but those numbers don't seem right for your mods. I've seen bone stock rabbits do a 16.0 sec 1/4 mile and down to the low 15 sec with less mods than you. Maybe it's because of the extra weight of the Jetta and auto tranny? Either way, as long as you're happy with it that's all that matters :thumbup: Makes me sad knowing how much money it costs to get these cars into the sub 16 second 1/4 miles.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

i know. i have seen the low numbers for the wabbits.

in my case, well.. i guess jettas arent as fast. but you can see that in comparison of before and after, the results are, well.. pretty solid.
it isnt a turbo...! lol. but i think it is really impressive.
and my car is on "daily config". which means, 1/2 a tank of gas, all seats, camera and backpack on rear seats, and the spare tire in the car. i could go lower into the 15s by just removing added weight, but that would just be pointless, since i am not trying to be the fastest on the block that way.


AAAND.... auto jettas 2.5 stock have a 0-60 of 9.1secs.... i'm doing 7.8secs thats 1.3 secs faster!

last... a stage 2 apr GLI with dsg and dsg software did 14.6 on the quarter and thats 314tq and 276hp... so 1 sec slower than a turbo 2.0t dsg? 1 sec slower than that? i feel quick!


----------



## pennsydubbin (Mar 3, 2010)

I think greyt's 1/4 mile times are very good especially the ones in the 15's. I raced against an automatic with GIAC chip, CAI and AWE exhaust and he was running mid 16's.


----------



## KulturKampf (Nov 30, 2009)

Awesome review man...hoping my dealer calls today


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

Don't matter anyway, since I think most of us that actually care about stage 2 will be going to 2+ once intake mani's can be bought and Unitronic gets EJ specific software.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

i wanted to make a document with well provided data as well as hard data that can prove the effects of the flash.
And i wanted to make it as comprehensive as possible, so it kind of answers everyones questions.

hey, i know i would have loved to see this before i got my flash.
its one thing to read peoples posts saying how hard it pulls... i have driven other chipped cars, and they felt quick, but i didnt know how MINE was gonna be...! well... no i think that all or most of us have a starting point.


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

Sorry to sound like I flamed you. I was just trying to say to anyone that might complain about those numbers. Come on man, you know I'm on your side for this one, as a fellow stage 2 Jetta and 2.5 enthusiast. As a courtesy to everyone I should have made a good review about it except that I had nothing to compare against.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

lessthanalex said:


> Sorry to sound like I flamed you. I was just trying to say to anyone that might complain about those numbers. Come on man, you know I'm on your side for this one, as a fellow stage 2 Jetta and 2.5 enthusiast. As a courtesy to everyone I should have made a good review about it except that I had nothing to compare against.


lol, not really.
i just took it as a comment.. nothing special..!


----------



## SQRABBIT (Aug 28, 2008)

Good data! now all I need are some dyno's and I will be all over this.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

i thought of dynos... but in all honesty, dynos are only good as marketing.

what if the car comes out giving 210 whp? what if it comes out giving 165 whp? what dif does it makes?

a dyno sheet works efectively when compared to another dyno sheet, preferably on the same day, under the same conditions on the same dyno, with the only variable being, on this case, the flash.


----------



## inovillo (Nov 12, 2001)

Great review Federico, also thanks for all the help this past weekend at FixxFest! :thumbup:

Ivan 
Novitech Tuning


----------



## Brabbit32 (Apr 13, 2009)

1/4 mile doesnt seem right. my rabbit with just a cat back and CAI ran 15.3. I havnt run it yet with the log manifold but the car is put away for the winter now. Coming out next year on 16lbs of boost


----------



## Golf5spd (Jul 29, 2010)

The 35% increase in MPG sort of negates your whole review, just not possible.

Either that, or you have solved the world's energy crisis.

I hope that they gave you the flash for free in return for that review.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

um, mr nice..!

lol. no, i did pay the 550$ out of the pocket...

but as pointed out in other threads, it shows a 35% increase on MPGs cause i have only logged 180 miles. and of which, 130 were traveling at 79, and the other 50 i was rolling at 55ish.
the resultant mpgs of the trip were compared to the actual average of my car, 25mpg. (25mpg of average in 42000 miles)

today i'm rolling 400 miles more, so expect an update in MPGs.

and, i did the review, as anything i do, just because i wanted to.

It sucks to have a 2.5 in the sense that there is NOTHING out there. (in my build's thread, you can find reviews for every single mod that i have done.)
no parts, low support, and few documented data.

i'm just trying to bring some info, and i just dont ask anything in return. (no free flash)

if i know something, or if someone need my help, i'll gladly give it.

at the moment, i'm making some calls and some deals, in order to bring something to the entire MKV community, around the world, something that isnt available, and something that hasnt been done.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

Brabbit32 said:


> 1/4 mile doesnt seem right. my rabbit with just a cat back and CAI ran 15.3. I havnt run it yet with the log manifold but the car is put away for the winter now. Coming out next year on 16lbs of boost


 it shouldnt be right....
but its right when compared to my other 1/4 miles.

regular auto jettas are WAY slower than manual wabbits. 

this jetta has intake, chip, exhaust. and its doing 17.6 (i know the owner, you can find him: serprime2.5.jettamkv.com)

i'm doing 15.6... thats a HUGE diff.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

GLI, stage 2 apr: 14.7 (again, slower than GTI)






stock GLI, 15.8






stage 2 GLI, 15.1







all help me prove my point.

lol, jetta (sedan mkv) are WaY slower than the hatches. add to that an auto tranny... slow. lol. i just happen to enjoy it.


----------



## pennsydubbin (Mar 3, 2010)

jeez for a stage 2 GLI I though the times would be a lot better than those. My jetta runs a 15.44 with just I/C/E!


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

You are 5 sp... Lol
I'm just making do with what i have! Lol


----------



## pennsydubbin (Mar 3, 2010)

No I'm not bashing your auto at all! Are those auto GLI's in the videos also or was that to compare sedan vs hatch? And like i mentioned before, the auto jetta I raced with was in the mid 16's so I think the uni chip is great!


----------



## Golf5spd (Jul 29, 2010)

thygreyt said:


> um, mr nice..!
> 
> lol. no, i did pay the 550$ out of the pocket...
> 
> ...


Don't get me wrong, I would love a flash for my car and I appreciate your pioneering effort.

I guess maybe waiting for a full adaptation might help; you published data before you felt it was fully adapted. Just like manual MPG, I use 3 tanks to get a statistical average. So to publish #'s early.....

Your initial impressions are important, wait 500 miles and then do some data to save yourself some time and effort. Unless you want to measure the level of adaptation over each tank of fuel.

Thanks for your review, and when I saw a 35% increase on MPG i thought I was watching an infomercial for the Tornado, or an Extenz commercial!!! Plus you were running quarter mile times so I don't have a clue what you are doing , but it sounds like fun.

BTW, my MFI read 1.5MPG higher than it actually is.


----------



## SQRABBIT (Aug 28, 2008)

thygreyt said:


> i thought of dynos... but in all honesty, dynos are only good as marketing.
> 
> what if the car comes out giving 210 whp? what if it comes out giving 165 whp? what dif does it makes?
> 
> a dyno sheet works efectively when compared to another dyno sheet, preferably on the same day, under the same conditions on the same dyno, with the only variable being, on this case, the flash.


I want to see a dyno so I can see what the tq curves look like so I can see when and where it goes flat. I won't be drag racing but I love to know when and where the sweet spot is.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

pennsydubbin said:


> No I'm not bashing your auto at all! Are those auto GLI's in the videos also or was that to compare sedan vs hatch? And like i mentioned before, the auto jetta I raced with was in the mid 16's so I think the uni chip is great!


lol, i know you werent. i'm sorry if i made it sound deffensive.
those were DSG gLI, and yep, all the videos are to illustrate the point.
even thou jetta are only slightly heavier than the hatch counterpart, the hatches seem to be quite faster or quicker.

and yep, in comparison to my own numbers, the almost-one-second improvement is substancial.

and compared to other auto jetta 2.5 (+17 secs in the 1/4) i'm doing AMAzingly good.

sill... i need to beat my dad panamera! lol. which should be in the 13s or 14s.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

Golf5spd said:


> Don't get me wrong, I would love a flash for my car and I appreciate your pioneering effort.
> 
> I guess maybe waiting for a full adaptation might help; you published data before you felt it was fully adapted. Just like manual MPG, I use 3 tanks to get a statistical average. So to publish #'s early.....
> 
> ...


just drove 400 miles more. mpgs are at 28, which is a solid 12% over what i had before.

i want to keep this review as updated as possible, so thats why i plublished early data.... so that in the end you can appreciate the transition.

and my car doesnt have the MFD, i calculate mpgs based on fuel ups and milage driven.

so, yeah, when calculating mpgs based on 2 or 3 gallons, the numbers can be deceiving.

i'm now planning the next big mod, and since no one has done it, imma try to get it for free for being a test car... 

lets see if it works.


----------



## pennsydubbin (Mar 3, 2010)

What is it?! supercharger?


----------



## Golf5spd (Jul 29, 2010)

I'm in Socal and it's cooling off, as the temps drop from 75 to 60, my MFI is showing about 1 or 2 MPG more in comparable conditions.

Probably not affecting you in FL.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

pennsydubbin said:


> What is it?! supercharger?


nah. its a looks mod. one that if we (the company and i) do it, it would make things easier and way more accessible for all mkv owners.

the mod HAS been done, but they are always custom 1 time jobs that are worth some couple of thousands. (up to 15k $)

so my goal is to talk, and try to solve the issue... if they say yes, then we could do this little simple cool mod that would come down in price from a LOT of money to about 1k for a complete basic set up.

but before talking to other companies, i need to sort some stuff first, and that may take some months.

now, lets keep the thread on the review.


----------



## eatrach (May 13, 2004)

great review Thy. 
I say it is time to turbo this thing


----------



## Gott ist gut (Jul 2, 2010)

*Fixxfest video*

Hey Fred...I got my video up for FixxFest...your car is in there twice 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...2010-video-right-here&p=68733225#post68733225


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

thanks mang! 

update:

now i have put about 1k miles on the chip...

and the average MPGs is 29. a solid 4mpg upgrade. or a 16% UNDER MY DRIVING CONDITIONS. 
so beware, YMMV


----------

