# Chipped my 2.5



## LAXlt84 (Mar 24, 2006)

and then woke up and realized it was only a dream.







but i'm serious though. so is there anything even available?


----------



## Jpics (Apr 26, 2006)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (LAXlt84)*


----------



## FlyingTurtle (Mar 26, 2006)

hah haaa


----------



## quantummechanic84 (Feb 25, 2006)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (Jpics)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Jpics* »_









Kinda reminds me of that one time in Arizona...
when I was driving...
and kit a Christmas Tree that thought it was a tumble weed...
it had tinsel and everything...
...In the middle of April...
That tree was DRY


----------



## Airkat (Jul 4, 2004)

...wow... how bout that one time... at band camp...?


----------



## wvvdubya (Jun 3, 2006)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (LAXlt84)*

ABD Racing?


----------



## 2kjetta18 (Mar 13, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (wvvdubya)*

GIAC maybe


----------



## LAXlt84 (Mar 24, 2006)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (2kjetta18)*


_Quote, originally posted by *2kjetta18* »_GIAC maybe


no, both giac and revo only offer for the 2.0T, that's why i asked in the first place


----------



## kaizenro (Dec 15, 2001)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (LAXlt84)*

Fish and chips bump


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (Jpics)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Jpics* »_









OMG that's great, I have one stuck at the corner of my driveway right now


----------



## Gilitar (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (LAXlt84)*

A chip isn't going to do much for a NA motor. You MAY see a 10hp bump with a chip. You would need an intake, headers, exhuast and a chip to see any real difference.


----------



## 2ndTimesACharm (May 28, 2002)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (Gilitar)*


----------



## gtiiiiiiii (Mar 6, 2004)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (2ndTimesACharm)*

*dead*


----------



## Mk5kaM718 (May 16, 2006)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (wvvdubya)*

dont waist your time on a 2.5's performance. go for show not go


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (Mk5kaM718)*

E.I.P. Tuning (hate it or like it) is still working on my chip. i am going in next friday to dyno on 93 octane. they reflashed my chip to be more aggressive, this past friday. when dyno'ing it it was pinging since i was running on 87 octane. i switched over so we will see what it does. hopefully they will start selling the chip, exhaust, and intake soon.


----------



## Deception (Oct 5, 2000)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (vdub_shawty)*

Any pics or clips of your exhaust yet?


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (Deception)*

no not yet... i can take some from inside the car, but i have nothing from the outside.... sorry. but if it helps my mom can hear me coming 1/2 mile away from our house.
pics of the exhuast:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albu...6.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albu...4.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albu...3.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albu...2.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albu...t.jpg
and in the last pic that is the r32!!!










_Modified by vdub_shawty at 9:12 PM 6-17-2006_


----------



## exS4 (Nov 8, 2002)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (LAXlt84)*

I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (exS4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *exS4* »_I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...

just wait... thats all i gotta say. 
oh and you wanna talk about useless... talk about all the thread's about the fast, its all about a toy, there is already one official post about it, why create one more everytime for everyone that gets theirs...
*i have nothing against fast's, i just have something agaisnt repost after repost*


_Modified by vdub_shawty at 10:36 PM 6-17-2006_


----------



## nachtjager20V (Sep 9, 2003)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (exS4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *exS4* »_I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...









so i guess anyone who doesnt have a 2.0t is worthless. didnt realize you had to have that motor to be one of the "cool school kids". take your 2.0t bandwagening to the 2.0t forum, and keep your ignorant comments to yourself. the mk5 forums really amaze me with the arrogance of some a**holes. ill be checking out eip when i get done dealer training and get back to maryland


----------



## QcGTI (Sep 28, 1999)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (exS4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *exS4* »_I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...


----------



## Gilitar (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (exS4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *exS4* »_I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...

Yeah well, you sound mean. The only thing that's worthless in this thread is your post. I have as much respect for the 2.5 or TDI as the 2.0T. We are all part of the VW family.


----------



## Mike Gordon (Apr 11, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (exS4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *exS4* »_I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...

Oh boy, did you just open up a can of worms buddy. 
And Jenn, I agree with you. You want to talk useless? I'll give you useless. "Where is my fast"? "I never got my fast" "VWOA never responded to me about my fast" Blah Blah Blah 
Now that is useless. I would rather hear about UNU and the girl he met. But nope. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 


_Modified by Mike Gordon at 9:00 PM 6-17-2006_


----------



## Deception (Oct 5, 2000)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (exS4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *exS4* »_I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...

I've said this in another thread before, but here goes again:
Is this the GTI elitists forum?


----------



## wolfsburgfanatic (May 27, 2002)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (nachtjager20V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nachtjager20V* »_








so i guess anyone who doesnt have a 2.0t is worthless. didnt realize you had to have that motor to be one of the "cool school kids". take your 2.0t bandwagening to the 2.0t forum, and keep your ignorant comments to yourself. the mk5 forums really amaze me with the arrogance of some a**holes. ill be checking out eip when i get done dealer training and get back to maryland









x2 bro http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif I went and checked out the rabbit 2-dr at fitzgerald the other day, and as much as I'd love to get a GTI its not gonna happen anytime soon. So it'll likely be a 2.5L for me in the near future.
Now hurry the hell up and get back to frederick so you can see the new place


----------



## gtiiiiiiii (Mar 6, 2004)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (wolfsburgfanatic)*

they say it's useless because the 2.5 isn't exactly the epitomy of performance at the moment. neither is the 2.0t either sure, but it's going to take some serious work to have a 2.5 or tdi really keep up with the 2.0t....
like aftermarket turbo kits, and for tdi an upgraded turbo most likely.
As far as aftermarket turbo kit for the 2.0t, well then that's going to be just that much better I'd say. If anything mainly because that's where the aftermarket support is at.


----------



## unreal (Aug 23, 2004)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (exS4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *exS4* »_I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...

Let me get some new tires on my beast and let's go run the 89A downhill towards Jerome...
Disclaimer: I should really stop drunk posting.










_Modified by unreal at 2:19 AM 6-18-2006_


----------



## Mike Gordon (Apr 11, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (gtiiiiiiii)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gtiiiiiiii* »_they say it's useless because the 2.5 isn't exactly the epitomy of performance at the moment. neither is the 2.0t either sure, but it's going to take some serious work to have a 2.5 or tdi really keep up with the 2.0t....
like aftermarket turbo kits, and for tdi an upgraded turbo most likely.
As far as aftermarket turbo kit for the 2.0t, well then that's going to be just that much better I'd say. If anything mainly because that's where the aftermarket support is at.

Well then, I guess we should all just leave then.


----------



## Mr Bigs (Apr 29, 2006)

The 2.5 is a very strong platform for upgrades and I believe it's also detuned as to not outperform the 2.0. Be patient.


----------



## Gilitar (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: (Mr Bigs)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mr Bigs* »_The 2.5 is a very strong platform for upgrades and I believe it's also detuned as to not outperform the 2.0. Be patient.

Are you saying that the 2.5 should have more power than the 2.0T? I wonder why Honda can produce 197 hp with a NA 2.0 while VW needs a turbo to do the same? Maybe both the 2.5 and 2.0T are detuned...


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (Mike Gordon)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mike Gordon* »_
Now that is useless. I would rather hear about UNU and the girl he met. But nope. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 


hahahah so x2 on that one!!! im still waiting for part 4, but oh well!!! 
on a side note i will keep yall posted on the work that will be done to improve my 2.5's performance.


----------



## x9t (Sep 19, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (vdub_shawty)*

Once again the 2.0T has about 215hp and 225ft/lb of torque.. it was underated.. the honda may have 197hp but nothing close to torque at any rpm.. the turbo is added for torque and low end power. the 2.5 is a good engine, has as much hp and the 2000 1.8T and more torque. But to be honest, i dont think modding the 2.5 is a good idea.to much $$ and not enough gains.

JT


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (x9t)*

well thats your opinion sweeety, but i can tell you for what i am getting the parts for is a really good deal. they are all mock ups off my car so i am not paying what they would be retail. so if price is the issue with the 2.5 you got something else coming to you. one of these days the 2.5 will suprise you and change your mind. 
but untill that day all the 2.5 haters keep being closed minded. im ashamed to be in the same generation with some of ya'll who do nothing but hate b/c yall *think* its a smaller engine, think its not good enough compaired to yours, will never amount, or not worth it. get over yourselves. 
*those who *dont *hate, thanks, and this was not towards yall. *thanks* for the support*


----------



## rj11c (Jun 4, 2002)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (vdub_shawty)*

hopefully a tunner will come out with a real stg 3 turbo kit or a sc kit for the 2.5 before the 2.0 than will talk and don't even mention the k04 kit because that only adds 30 hp and no aditional trq


----------



## racercx2 (Mar 16, 2006)

*Re: (Mr Bigs)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mr Bigs* »_The 2.5 is a very strong platform for upgrades and I believe it's also detuned as to not outperform the 2.0. Be patient.

The fact is that the 2.5L engine is a very limited production engine only really offered in the USA and Canada for the omst part...Such small numbers mean most tuner companies just don't want to bother...All the more reason why the 2L NON TURBO FSI engine has to come to America..It has about the same performance numbers as the 2.5L but it gets significantly better MPG..


----------



## x9t (Sep 19, 2005)

Hey im not hatting on the 2.5L but just like the 2.8 VR6 you have to spend money on a turbo system.. and im sorry but im on the cheap side.. lol thats why i got a 1.8T and will get a 2.0T next time.. im not much of a modder so i dont want to spend 4k on a turbo system... if you got the money and the hook up.. go for it 
JT


----------



## iThread (Sep 27, 2005)

I'm fairily confident there will be a day when there are some 2.5L engines out there smoking 2.0Ts.
Money aside, putting on cams, a turbo, intake, exhaust, and the requisite chip to control all that stuff, will make for a very strong motor that will outperform a stock 2.0T and probably a lightly modded one.
You are not your engine. SO enough with the 2.0T vs 2.5. This topic is about the 2.5 and modding it.


----------



## tucker3434 (Jan 27, 2004)

I still don't have a rabbit... yet, but one of the main reasons I want one is they won't be dime a dozen for the performance crowd like the gti and gli's will be. A built 2.5 that is running 12's or 13's will be a whole lot more respectable than a 2.0t running the same times.


----------



## IWantAnA2 (May 7, 2004)

*Re: (tucker3434)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tucker3434* »_I still don't have a rabbit... yet, but one of the main reasons I want one is they won't be dime a dozen for the performance crowd like the gti and gli's will be. A built 2.5 that is running 12's or 13's will be a whole lot more respectable than a 2.0t running the same times.

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


----------



## Bigvin122 (Apr 18, 2006)

*Re: (tucker3434)*

I mean i can understand you people out there that just want to be different. Go make your car stand out, thats what we all try do do. I just don't understand wanting to drop a turbo into a 2.5 I mean these cars weren't meant to be fast. Its dropped into these cars to save you money, gas, and give you reliability for everyday driving. If you people have this money to do these kind of upgrades why not use that money to get a fast car. I hate to say it but you're turning these things into civics. Like what that one guy said earlier Go for show not go. This isn't a fast car. Any car can be fast but after you look at the receipts it took you to get there you could of had a car thats meant for speed and looks good doing it. Good luck to ya though. i hope to see a 2.5 pullin 12's.


----------



## tucker3434 (Jan 27, 2004)

Why is this motor not meant to be quick? It is almost like a fusion of the 2.0l and and vr6 (in style, not actual design). It is somewhat quick while offering good gas mileage and realiability. It has very close hp and tq numbers to the 12v. There eventually have to be some mods to be done to this engine as there is no other na motor on the mkv platform and not everyone loves having a turbo making all their power. In what way is anyone turning the 2.5 into a civic?


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: (Bigvin122)*

its comments like these that make you wanna


----------



## Bigvin122 (Apr 18, 2006)

*Re: (tucker3434)*

I meant tuning the 2.5 is like people tuning a civic. making a slow car into something thats some what fast. Look i have nothing against the 2.5s. i like the whole vdub family. I'm just sayin y make a car that isn't race inspired fast. Save your money and buy something fast. I don't know. I just don't understand why people want every car to be fast. A car that was meant for reliability and daily driving turned into a 1/4 mile beast. Just my opinion. I just think theres better things to waste your money on.


----------



## tucker3434 (Jan 27, 2004)

Well is the gti race inspired? Because the rabbit and gti share almost everything except the engine, wheels, and hids except i'm pretty sure the rabbit weighs less. Why not pay 10k less and invest that into the engine? I'm pretty sure the 10k you save on a rabbit could make it race inspired.


----------



## Bigvin122 (Apr 18, 2006)

*Re: (tucker3434)*

i bought the gti so i didn't have to do anything. Its perfect the way it is. The only thing i did was the chip. And its definitely raced inspired. When i want to go fast i ride my vette c6.


----------



## IWantAnA2 (May 7, 2004)

*Re: (Bigvin122)*

The 2.5l engine is sporty. If you take the turbo out of the GTI, it's just another slow dopey 2.0l. Instead of spending the extra $7,000 or $8,000 on the GTI, I can make a unique Rabbit that will eat a stock or mildly modded GTI, save half of the difference, and have a much lower car payment. 
I'm not all about buying a fast stock car. I'm about buying a mildly fast car and making it faster than yours.








Plus, I don't like the stock GTI's look. So I'd spend more money converting the exterior over to that of the Rabbit. 
Now manufacturers, get some parts out for this beast before I throw all my money at the suspension, looks, and wheels.







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


----------



## tucker3434 (Jan 27, 2004)

*Re: (IWantAnA2)*

^amen


----------



## jaysvw (Oct 15, 2001)

*Re: (Bigvin122)*

lol there is so much 2.0t fan boi'ism in this thread. Look at when the MK3's came out, everyone was all wet for the VR6 so thats what the first mods were tailored towards. However in due time the 2.0 got mods-o-plenty.
so to sum up

_Quote, originally posted by *Mk5kaM718* »_dont waist your time on a 2.5's performance. go for show not go

ignorant

_Quote, originally posted by *exS4* »_I don't mean to sound mean...
But these 2.5 & TDI threads are pretty-much useless in my opinion...

ignorant and a dick

_Quote, originally posted by *gtiiiiiiii* »_ but it's going to take some serious work to have a 2.5 or tdi really keep up with the 2.0t....


negative ghostrider

_Quote, originally posted by *racercx2* »_
The fact is that the 2.5L engine is a very limited production engine only really offered in the USA and Canada for the omst part...

say what? So using the 2.5 in the Jetta, Golf, Beetle and probably others make it a 'very limited production engine'? VW used the same equation with the old 2.0 and guess what, there are probably more 2.0's floating around than VR's, and those 2.0 are supported in the aftermarket to an equal extent despite being a North American only motor.
Some people


----------



## Bigvin122 (Apr 18, 2006)

*Re: (tucker3434)*

What are you guys talking about. There are no good uprgrades out for the 2.5s. Thats the topic of this thread, and when the day happens the gti will have even more options. When you pay more you get more. I don't want to argue. I just want to make a point. Gti and rabbit are like neon and srt4. The neon aint beatin the srt mod for mod.


----------



## racercx2 (Mar 16, 2006)

*Re: (Bigvin122)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Bigvin122* »_What are you guys talking about. There are no good uprgrades out for the 2.5s. Thats the topic of this thread, and when the day happens the gti will have even more options. When you pay more you get more. I don't want to argue. I just want to make a point. Gti and rabbit are like neon and srt4. The neon aint beatin the srt mod for mod. 

Actually if we had the 2L non turbo FSI it would be more mod friendly...maybe that is why VWoA went with the 2.5L they won't have to concern themselves with warranty disputes....


----------



## jaysvw (Oct 15, 2001)

*Re: (racercx2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *racercx2* »_
maybe that is why VWoA went with the 2.5L they won't have to concern themselves with warranty disputes....









yet still gave us the 2.0T? Do you even have any idea what your talking about?


----------



## GLIFLaTN (Jan 23, 2006)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (LAXlt84)*

No one is asking whether any of us think it is a good idea or a bad idea to try and mod the 2.5, I don't recall the original post asking for an opinion at all - they want help answering a simple question. 
If you can't answer the question - don't bash the idea just to share your 0.02


----------



## iThread (Sep 27, 2005)

Folks, I really don't want to lock this up. The 2.0T vs 2.5 debate needs to end NOW.
We're not going to have much of a forum if people get jumped on for their engine choice be it 2.0 2.5 or TDI.
We have engine specific forums for each one as well. As the moderator of the 2.0T forum I invite the 2.0T owners to drop in and learn as well as contribute information about their engines. The 2.5ers have their forum as well.
And, this topic is ok to be here as the 2.5 forum is up and coming as the aftermarket scene for it is just starting to emerge.
If you want to debate the merits of each engine start a debate topic.
However this topic was opened not to have a debate but about mods to the 2.5 engine. As such any debate about which engine is better than the other is offtopic and will be delete in order to keep this topic on track and informative for the 2.5 crowd.
That is all.


----------



## pitchblackgti (Jun 1, 2006)

ex 2.0 owner, now proud owner of a 2.0T. im definitely not against modding the 2.5, my 2.0 was well equipped with chip, exhaust, intake, etc... it was much better than stock. so i say go all out if you want to. HOWEVER, dont try to make yourself believe it will compete with the 2.0T. maybe in the years to come a select few will get their 2.5 running 13's, maaaaybe 12's, but if you think that is realistic goal and good use of your money, you are mistaken.
in short: mod away, but dont expect much.
and again, not hating, just being realistic.
*edit: oh and, no im not aware of any chips for the 2.5 yet (gotta stay on the topic right







)


_Modified by pitchblackgti at 4:28 PM 6-18-2006_


----------



## syncro87 (Apr 24, 2000)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (nachtjager20V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nachtjager20V* »_








so i guess anyone who doesnt have a 2.0t is worthless. didnt realize you had to have that motor to be one of the "cool school kids". take your 2.0t bandwagening to the 2.0t forum, and keep your ignorant comments to yourself. the mk5 forums really amaze me with the arrogance of some a**holes. ill be checking out eip when i get done dealer training and get back to maryland









I don't think he means the 2.5 is worthless. I think the gist that most people are getting at when they question the 2.5L performance threads is the following: to get any performance gain from the 2.5L that is worth your time, you are probably going to have to do intake, exhaust, and chip at the minimum. Even at that point, how much real world performance have you really gained? By the time you add up the money to do those things, and any other minor mods, you could have just bought a 2.0T non-GLI to begin with, or pretty close to it. At that point, you'd have a far better foundation for the future. In other words, the amount of money you have to spend to get a measurable performance gain of any significance out of a 2.5L car puts you at the point where you could buy a 2.0T car, stock, and still have far more performance than a modded 2.5L car. Not to mention the future potential in a stock 2.0T car.
I must admit, I wonder sometimes as to the wisdom of buying any car with the most base engine and then spending a bunch of money over time to get a realtively meager improvement when a much more attractive performance option is available from the factory at a relatively minor cost differential.
I could spend a bunch of money trying to get my ultra-slow 1.7L Pickup faster, or just face reality and swap in a 2.0 ABA or 1.8 or 2.0 16V.
I have no issue with those who have a 2.5L car. If you buy one for the right reason, not a bad choice. Getting performance out of it, kind of a moot point IMHO, but to each their own.
Personally, I'd stretch like hell and get a more basic 2.0T -engined car versus a 2.5L car with more options.
The TDI is a whole other ball game. You don't generally see people buying TDIs to go fast. They are buying purely because it is a TDI and there are major advantages to this engine. Other than up front cost, I see no such inherent advantage to the 2.5, and when you spend money modding it, even that advantage disappears.










_Modified by mgbrickell at 6:46 PM 6-18-2006_


----------



## iThread (Sep 27, 2005)

So, let me throw this out there. Many people already have the 2.5, what is worse, putting the money into the 2.5 to make it perform better or trading it in, taking the depreciation hit to get something with a 2.0T?
Most likely unless you put a lot of money down on the 2.5 the latter option is going to be the better one is this particular situation. Making the 2.5 perform better.


----------



## omni1 (Mar 21, 2006)

*Re: (thread)*

well its still too early







, only the future will bring us 2.5L's what we need


----------



## Gilitar (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: (omni1)*

I think that we will probably see a supercharger for the 2.5 before long. Can you imagine the torque out of that inline 5 cyl? That thing would be a monster off the line.


----------



## omni1 (Mar 21, 2006)

*Re: (Gilitar)*

yup







. and a turbo would just be as unique as well especially with the 5in


----------



## QcGTI (Sep 28, 1999)

*Re: (x9t)*

I miss the MKII forums, no arrogant *******s!


----------



## racercx2 (Mar 16, 2006)

*Re: (Gilitar)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Gilitar* »_I think that we will probably see a supercharger for the 2.5 before long. Can you imagine the torque out of that inline 5 cyl? That thing would be a monster off the line.


remember that the mods that are attached onto the more pedestrian underpinnings of the Golf/Rabbit have to take this into account....remember that with VW they are very through about covering every aspect of the cars design...when you increase torque you put a great deal of strain on even other component...essentially you have the chain reaction effect...especially on a car such as the 2.5L...remember to compensate for your power mods with your suspension and motor mounts ect.....


----------



## NewsJunkie (Sep 29, 2004)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (gtiiiiiiii)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gtiiiiiiii* »_they say it's useless because the 2.5 isn't exactly the epitomy of performance at the moment.

And your point? It's not like it claims to be "the epitom*E* of performance."
Performance is not the only reason you buy a particular car. ANY VW owner should know that.


----------



## IWantAnA2 (May 7, 2004)

*Re: (Bigvin122)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Bigvin122* »_ When you pay more you get more. I don't want to argue. 

Not necessarily. If you turbo a 2.5l, and then run it against a stock 2.0t with a front mount (only because if you turbo'd the 2.5l, you would do that), the 2.5t would win hands down. 
And point two, you are trying to argue.


----------



## rj11c (Jun 4, 2002)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (NewsJunkie)*

the two biggest advantages that the 2.5 has over the 2.0 is DISPLACEMENT and it's not an FSI motor so fulling issues can be resolved easier, the only down side there isn't that much room for a big turbo will just have to wait and see where the aftermarket will take the 2.5


----------



## racercx2 (Mar 16, 2006)

*Re: (IWantAnA2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *IWantAnA2* »_
Not necessarily. If you turbo a 2.5l, and then run it against a stock 2.0t with a front mount (only because if you turbo'd the 2.5l, you would do that), the 2.5t would win hands down. 
And point two, you are trying to argue.









BUT how will it handle....heavier nose equals less responsive handing...... lighter nose more nimble = more sporty .


----------



## Yevi (Dec 7, 2005)

*Re: (IWantAnA2)*

i am sick of this, why didn't you buy 2.0 first., like i said doesn't help, the cause
i bought mine in april 2005, cause my other car had emission problems, and i got nice trade in value.


_Quote »_I meant tuning the 2.5 is like people tuning a civic. making a slow car into something thats some what fast. Look i have nothing against the 2.5s. i like the whole vdub family. I'm just sayin y make a car that isn't race inspired fast. Save your money and buy something fast. I don't know. I just don't understand why people want every car to be fast. A car that was meant for reliability and daily driving turned into a 1/4 mile beast. Just my opinion. I just think theres better things to waste your money on. 
And point two, you are trying to argue.









Well, some people just get a kick of making impossible, GTI 2.0T isn't that fast for the money, if I wanted "FAST" I would have gone with Mithsubishi EVO VIII, that will blow majority of stock, and non-stock cars away
Yev


----------



## Yevi (Dec 7, 2005)

*Re: (Yevi)*

I urge you to stop Arguing, unfortunately there is nothing for 2.5 yet
I would work on designing stuff like that, but i have $4000.00 to pay off, so i would rather have my car paid off first, and then back to school.
Unless i can find a sponsor, and time.
Such posts do not do any good for the community, just more separation, and ignorence, just like *THREAD* , take these request in designated forum sections.


----------



## nachtjager20V (Sep 9, 2003)

*Re: (Bigvin122)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Bigvin122* »_I meant tuning the 2.5 is like people tuning a civic. making a slow car into something thats some what fast. Look i have nothing against the 2.5s. i like the whole vdub family. I'm just sayin y make a car that isn't race inspired fast. Save your money and buy something fast. I don't know. I just don't understand why people want every car to be fast. A car that was meant for reliability and daily driving turned into a 1/4 mile beast. Just my opinion. I just think theres better things to waste your money on. 









jesus, if anything they are turning civics into vws. vw was the original hot hatch, and companys like neuspeed, oetinger, and abt were making performance parts before most honda kids were born. personally i dont want a 4 cylinder engine. can you understand that ive wanted a 5 cylinder since i watched and heard the old audi IMSA race cars? they had 600hp turbo charged 2.5l 5 cylinder engines, and they were pretty damn fast. i have the money to get a 2.0t, i dont want a gti because they dont come in deep black, and i think honeycomb is tacky. so let us spend our money how we see fit, and go post in another thread. thanx


----------



## TRLSTYLE (Sep 27, 2004)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (vdub_shawty)*

all i have to say about the VW/Honda arguemant is a good buddy of mine recently dyno'd his 2006 S2000 (with a mere 200 miles on it, despite all of us telling him not to) and it made 205 WHP and just 134 ft/lb of torque. i think my A2 is prety close to that torque figure.


----------



## tucker3434 (Jan 27, 2004)

I have faith that in time the 2.5 will be modder friendly. If eip can do this: http://www.eiptuning.com/eip/v....html with an 8v 2.0L, I have a feeling they will be able to do much better with a 2.5L. Right now I drive a 1.8t that I may be trading this week on a 2.5l base model rabbit. I'm tired of having the exact same engine and mods as every other mk4/b5 owner. I'm looking to swap it up a bit and build a solid performing 2.5L, hoping that when I go to shows I won't be just another face in the crowd. I'm excited about it and can't wait to get one.


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: (tucker3434)*

all i know is that i am trying to get a turbo done. 
a. i do not race
b. i do not go to the track
c. i basically show my car, so the turbo would be for show, being the (hopefully) 1st turbo built for the 2.5l
d. it would be fun to drive 
so i am not looking to race it like most of you are thinking. call it a waste of money but hey, will you be the 1st car to have a turbo built?


----------



## nastybags (Nov 29, 2005)

*Re: (vdub_shawty)*

i love the 2.5 engine,i feel its actually quicker than the 150hp 1.8T that i had http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
I really don't need anything faster,if i had the 2.0T i would just be tempted to drive much quicker and that would not be good since i drive around with tint(illegal in r.i.)no front plate(illegal in r.i.)and i am usually high all the time







i am just being honest.
both engines are very good
2.5= a great base engine
2.0T=a perfect tuners engine
i really wanted a nice looking jetta,and thats what i have now(after a bunch of mods)

Shawty if you want to be the first,thats pretty cool








but most 2.5 people are just going to leave the engine mods alone,and just have fun for what it is


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: (vdub_shawty)*

Wow, who brought the morons? It's like the rejects from the mkIV forum decided to wander in here and start shaking stuff up.
The fact is, dollar for dollar, the 2.0t will be the better deal. It's like the VR6 vs 1.8t debate.
However, when all you want is big power, no doubt, the I5 will downright slaughter the 2.0t. First it has a DOHC design like the 2.0t, so it should breathe quite well. Second, it is a bigger motor, and in a related vein, third, it has more cylinders. So on paper, it has FAR more potential than any 2.0t car. And let's not forget the FSI. Great in theory, but in reality, it's going to very difficult to tune. Fuel pressure are already astronomical in the stock car, what happens when you want to run a big turbo at 22lbs? Good luck finding injectors and modding other aspects of the fuel system.
And guess what, I own a 2.0t car. BUT, I also own a VR6 car. Guess what car all my fun money goes into? The one that has the potential for more power.
The 2.5L motor is the biggest sleeper motor VW has ever produced, yet all you morons with 2.0t's are too dense to realize this. 
If I was going to build a monster mkV golf, it wouldn't be in a GTI. I would buy a stock mkV rabbit, you know the one that stickers at 14,990, and work from there. For the price of a fully loaded GTI, I guarantee, a much faster plain rabbit could be built.
It's only a matter of time. Though I am curious as to what's taking the North Americam tuners so damn long to come out with performance products for the 2.5L. If I was EIP, I'd buy a base rabbit and start the buildup! I mean if neuspeed offered a blower for the awful 2.slow, what's going on with the 2.5L?


----------



## pitchblackgti (Jun 1, 2006)

*Re: (vdub_shawty)*

i think that would be way to hard to have a turbo and not want to race, but i have little self control. if its just for "show" technically you can still "show" the car next to you how fast it is right?


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: (pitchblackgti)*


_Quote, originally posted by *pitchblackgti* »_i think that would be way to hard to have a turbo and not want to race, but i have little self control. if its just for "show" technically you can still "show" the car next to you how fast it is right?









hahah i am one, that if i am on the highway and someone gives a lil gas ill take it up to a decent speed to show em. but im not one to go to the track and race it. i drive at a higher speed anyways just b/c i can hear the intake and exhaust better!!


----------



## Mike Gordon (Apr 11, 2005)

*Re: (nastybags)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nastybags* »_i love the 2.5 engine,i feel its actually quicker than the 150hp 1.8T that i had http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
I really don't need anything faster,if i had the 2.0T i would just be tempted to drive much quicker and that would not be good since i drive around with tint(illegal in r.i.)no front plate(illegal in r.i.)and i am usually high all the time







i am just being honest.
both engines are very good
2.5= a great base engine
2.0T=a perfect tuners engine
i really wanted a nice looking jetta,and thats what i have now(after a bunch of mods)

Shawty if you want to be the first,thats pretty cool








but most 2.5 people are just going to leave the engine mods alone,and just have fun for what it is

I agree. I just live so close to work and get out on the highway about only every other day. I just don't need all this power I guess. Having a 2.0T probably would get me in trouble too. So I like the 2.5 and the next car will be a TDI or a Rabbit more than likely. So got any ganga man?


----------



## tucker3434 (Jan 27, 2004)

*Re: (vdub_shawty)*


_Quote, originally posted by *vdub_shawty* »_will you be the 1st car to have a turbo built?

Is that a challenge?


----------



## vdub_shawty (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: (tucker3434)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tucker3434* »_
Is that a challenge?

just a statement.. but it could be if you want?


----------



## Giancarlo (Aug 10, 2000)

*Re: (vdub_shawty)*

Let's get back on topic, Nothing is availible for the 2.5 yet, but sill there be something soon?
What are the limiting factors in getting more hp out of the 2.5? since we know that it is detuned from the factory, did all the detuning come in form of programing? or does it need better flowing head? better bottom end? etc... what is the limit? When they where doing the turbo 2.5 for the show on speed channel, they where doing a turbo and some guy that was doing the software I beleive said that the engine had HUGE potential, but for some reason nobody is actually exploiting it or this guy was wrong.
Will a chip detune the engine to 175hp that the original 2.5 was suppossed to have? I would think that just getting the readline to 6800rpm's would get around there, and if the engine can rev that much as is, then it would be a lot nicer car. I know that the 5800 redline seems low, the car feels like ti want to keep making power.


----------



## Mike Gordon (Apr 11, 2005)

*Re: (Giancarlo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Giancarlo* »_Let's get back on topic, Nothing is availible for the 2.5 yet, but sill there be something soon?
I know that the 5800 redline seems low, the car feels like ti want to keep making power.

It sure does. It seems like it's about to haul ass and then it kind of peters off a little. It could be a monster if it wanted to be.


----------



## AliensWanted (Aug 24, 2004)

*Re: (racercx2)*


_Quote, originally posted by *racercx2* »_...All the more reason why the 2L NON TURBO FSI engine has to come to America..It has about the same performance numbers as the 2.5L but it gets significantly better MPG..

On what octane? The TSI engine REQUIRES 98 octane....and I believe the FSI non-turbo REQUIRES premium fuel to be effective. 
Love my 2.5. Regular 87 and simple to use. Great torque.


_Modified by AliensWanted at 4:59 PM 6-19-2006_


----------



## syncro87 (Apr 24, 2000)

*Re: (thread)*


_Quote, originally posted by *thread* »_So, let me throw this out there. Many people already have the 2.5, what is worse, putting the money into the 2.5 to make it perform better or trading it in, taking the depreciation hit to get something with a 2.0T?
Most likely unless you put a lot of money down on the 2.5 the latter option is going to be the better one is this particular situation. Making the 2.5 perform better.

Neither. Better was knowing that the 2.0 was coming soon, as everyone did, and waiting a few months to get the better engine. I see no advantage of the 2.5 over a 2.0T other than cost. The 2.0T is easier to mod if you like. The real world fuel mileage is similar. Parts availability will likely be greater over the long term for the 2.0T due to the fact that the 2.5 is not shared with much else worldwide. 5 cylinder cars have had a rough time gaining much market acceptance in the US, hence I would imagine less marketable at resale time than a 2.0T, negating much of your original savings. I just don't see the point in a 2.5 if you are into modding. It would be like me spending a bunch of money and effort into modding my measly 2.0 95 Jetta. Why? If I have to have a fast 95 Jetta, I'll go find a VR6 GLX. Modding my 2.0 is largely a waste of effort for small gain per dollar spent.
Maybe someone will shed some light on the sense of modding a 2.5 rather than just starting out with a 2.0T, but until then, I remain unconvinced of the wisdom of this approach. You don't buy a motorcycle and then try to figure out how to make it float, you just buy a Jet-Ski.


----------



## JZoidberg (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (LAXlt84)*

I don't know anything about this product, but a search came up with this link. Hopefully this helps with your original question.
http://www.greedspeed.com/appl...grade


----------



## syncro87 (Apr 24, 2000)

*Re: (Mike Gordon)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mike Gordon* »_
It sure does. It seems like it's about to haul ass and then it kind of peters off a little. It could be a monster if it wanted to be.









Probably hard to balance an engine to rev high with an odd number of cylinders is my guess. I don't recall seeing too many 3, 5, 7, 9 cylinder engines in cars successfully over the years, especially in performance apps. There are a few notable exceptions, such as some Audi fives way back when. They even moved away from turbo fives. I've owned 2 five bangers, a Quantum and an Audi 4kq, any my wife had a 96 Volvo 850 Turbo wagon a while back. None of these cars struck me as having smooth high revving engines that had great NVH characteristics. They were all kinda gruff, workmanlike powerplants, felt rough with good low grunt but sketchy high end. Vibey. A great application where you had limited space and were concerned with torque and not upper end or high HP. Like a 1993 Eurovan, for instance.
I'm no rocket scientist, but a lot of engineers that probably could be rocket scientists are working in the auto industry. Just a guess, but there is probably good engineering reason why you don't see everyone jumping on the bandwagon to offer odd-cylinder count engines. Not that it doesn't work, but it probably works better with an even cylinder count with less work most of the time. ?
5 cylinder engines are often touted as having the economy of a 4 with the power of a six. In my experience, you get the performance a smidge better than a good four, with the mileage closer to that of a six.
Triumph does make a sweet triple in their bikes, though...Speed Triple, anyone?


----------



## Mrb00st (Jun 26, 2005)

i'll share my thoughts on the topic:
I want mods for the 2.5.
Not to spank the 2.0TFSi's, because that would be pointless.
But to make the car more fun to drive.
Really, the 2.5 is the weak point of the MKV's. It's a dull engine stuck in a fun car (esp. with the new steering and better rear suspension, both of which i think are huge improvements over the MKIV. Oh, and shift quality is leagues better too.)
What'd i'd like to see is at least BASIC bolt-ons for the 2.5 and some more in depth stuff.
Eventually i'd like to see:
Pulley set
Cold Air Intake that ISN'T 300 freaking dollars
larger Throttle Body
Cat-back and full exhaust systems
chipset
bigger injectors
Header

also a lighter flywheel and a more badass clutch would be great for this car. I just feel really bad launching this car hard, the clutch doesn't feel that strong. I don't know if it ACTUALLY is but i'd like more bite. And a lighter flywheel would be wonderful.
In short, i dont' want my car to be able to spank on 2.0T's. I would've bought one. I want it to be fun to drive, with some top end (Please??), an awesome sound, and a willingness to rev. I'm not going to the track, i just enjoy driving. It's not a comparison, it's improving what you have. If i wanted the fastest car for my approx. 20 grand, why wouldn't i just have an SRT-4?


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: (Mrb00st)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mrb00st* »_
Not to spank the 2.0TFSi's, because that would be pointless.


It wouldn't be that hard to do. 6 psi of anything in the base golf would at the very least keep up with the GTI.
With regard to the otehr parts of your rant....what are you talking about?


----------



## tucker3434 (Jan 27, 2004)

I don't see why there would be a problem ballancing the engine at higher rpms. It is an inline 5 not a v5. IMO it is detuned and has a lower redline so as to not step on the toes of the 2.0t.
Honestly some people Don't want to spend $25k but still want a fun quick car to drive. They buy the $15k rabbit. That doesn't mean the engine shouldn't be modded.


----------



## Mrb00st (Jun 26, 2005)

*Re: (6cylVWguy)*


_Quote, originally posted by *6cylVWguy* »_It wouldn't be that hard to do. 6 psi of anything in the base golf would at the very least keep up with the GTI.
With regard to the otehr parts of your rant....what are you talking about?










yeah, but turbocharging the base RABBIT would probably be more expensive than just buying a GTi
ergo, pointless.
i'm talking about making modifications that make the car more enjoyable to drive, rather than faster than a GTi, because it's not worth it. I"m just saying i'd like to see some basic mods that actually do something.


----------



## tecknoquatt (Jul 2, 2004)

*Re: Chipped my 2.5 (Jpics)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Jpics* »_









not big on internet slang but that pic made me lmfao! in light of the question asked
holy chit


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: (Mrb00st)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mrb00st* »_

yeah, but turbocharging the base RABBIT would probably be more expensive than just buying a GTi
ergo, pointless.


While places like HPA and even EIP would probably charge an arm and a leg for turbo kit, not everyone has this type of price point.
I would expect that Kinetic can make something nearly as cheap as the VR6 kits, which are at around 3.5k if I recall correctly. C2 seems to do decent and cost effective tuning. 
What everyone is missing and not appreciating is that VW inadvertantly gave us a car of a similar mindset as a Scion. Essentially a blank slate which to modify. Do you think it's going to be easy to get 400hp from a 2.0t? It's not all that easy on a 1.8t, yet far easier on a VR6. I mean people buy a GTI and put on kits and suspensions etc. Why? The car already has the sport suspension and body kit? Why buy a car that already has "mods" to it when you know you are going to change them out. 
Simple physics says the 2.5L motor has much more potential than a 2.0t. I really have no idea why no one is understanding this, unless there is some aspect that I am missing like the inability to fit a turbo/blower or some type of internal governer, or inherent weakness, like brittle rods or weak hg's. I don't even own a 2.5l, I have the supposed "performance" motor, and yet even I can see this!








Back in the day one had to spend what, 23k+ to get a 12v VR6? No one bitched about that weak ass motor. 172-178hp in a 6 cyl motor! Everyone realized that the factory tuning didn't reflect the potential of the motor. Heck, I have one of those weezy 12v VR's in my rado and I essentiall slapped on a 10psi blower and have 300hp. There is no reason to think that the 2.5l won't have a similar result.


----------



## inomis (Sep 9, 2005)

Bottom line is that nobody knows anything about the 2.5 that they are telling. Only time will tell. For all we know it's the stoutest engine ever build. 175HP/200TQ chips for $300. 150HP nitrous shot kit for $600 bucks. 300HP/350TQ turbo kits $4000. Or maybe just a $400 3HP chip like for the 2.0. It will be exciting to see where it ends up.


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: (inomis)*


_Quote, originally posted by *inomis* »_Bottom line is that nobody knows anything about the 2.5 that they are telling. Only time will tell. For all we know it's the stoutest engine ever build. 175HP/200TQ chips for $300. 150HP nitrous shot kit for $600 bucks. 300HP/350TQ turbo kits $4000. Or maybe just a $400 3HP chip like for the 2.0. It will be exciting to see where it ends up.

I think ultimately you're right.
However, simple physics and a std fueling system suggests strongly that it will be a typical NA VW motor (ie- std mods won't do all that much, while FI will go a long way).


----------



## Erik04gti (Sep 28, 2004)

*Re: (6cylVWguy)*

has anybody actually ever ran a 2.5 at the track in either auto or manual form. 
the car seems to do well out of the hole till about 40 mph, but after that it falls on its face


----------



## jetta v (Nov 17, 2005)

*Re: (mgbrickell)*

how about the notable exception of the entire volvo line except for something like 2 motors are I5. 
everytime something is posted about 2.5 mods, everyone with a gli or gti needs to comment. why buy a 27,000 gti and put 8,000 into it, why not but a sti. most of the 2.0t people comment about why bother with the 2.5 think that they already have the fastest out there and can't be touched. so when they do make a chip for the 2.5 get it and keep modding the 2.5!









_Quote, originally posted by *mgbrickell* »_
Probably hard to balance an engine to rev high with an odd number of cylinders is my guess. I don't recall seeing too many 3, 5, 7, 9 cylinder engines in cars successfully over the years, especially in performance apps. There are a few notable exceptions, such as some Audi fives way back when. They even moved away from turbo fives. I've owned 2 five bangers, a Quantum and an Audi 4kq, any my wife had a 96 Volvo 850 Turbo wagon a while back. None of these cars struck me as having smooth high revving engines that had great NVH characteristics. They were all kinda gruff, workmanlike powerplants, felt rough with good low grunt but sketchy high end. Vibey. A great application where you had limited space and were concerned with torque and not upper end or high HP. Like a 1993 Eurovan, for instance.
I'm no rocket scientist, but a lot of engineers that probably could be rocket scientists are working in the auto industry. Just a guess, but there is probably good engineering reason why you don't see everyone jumping on the bandwagon to offer odd-cylinder count engines. Not that it doesn't work, but it probably works better with an even cylinder count with less work most of the time. ?
5 cylinder engines are often touted as having the economy of a 4 with the power of a six. In my experience, you get the performance a smidge better than a good four, with the mileage closer to that of a six.
Triumph does make a sweet triple in their bikes, though...Speed Triple, anyone?


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: (jetta v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jetta v* »_how about the notable exception of the entire volvo line except for something like 2 motors are I5. 
everytime something is posted about 2.5 mods, everyone with a gli or gti needs to comment. why buy a 27,000 gti and put 8,000 into it, why not but a sti. most of the 2.0t people comment about why bother with the 2.5 think that they already have the fastest out there and can't be touched. so when they do make a chip for the 2.5 get it and keep modding the 2.5!










I think the problem with most 2.0t people is that they think that the 2.5L car is identical to the 2.0 SOHC motor that it replaced. That is, it's not really ideal for modifying. And I am in complete agreement. However, due to the motor size and number of cylinders, DOHC arrangement, and superlow compression (9.5:1), the 2.5l motor is just begging for FI. And due to the low compression, I think it may do better (in terms of longevity) than the VR6 which has a compression ratio that is quite a bit higher.


----------



## x9t (Sep 19, 2005)

I dont care if the 2.5 Is the best engine in the world, the bottom line is that your going to have to spend $$$ to get it faster then the 2.0T FSI motor. If i could chip the 2.5 and pass a 2.0T i would get a car with a 2.5, but that wont happen. Even if both engines had 200hp, people would still go for the 2.0T because its so easy to mod. Why do you think most people went for the 1.8T instead of the VR6.. all engines have potential, its just how much does it cost to get there.
JT


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: (x9t)*


_Quote, originally posted by *x9t* »_I dont care if the 2.5 Is the best engine in the world, the bottom line is that your going to have to spend $$$ to get it faster then the 2.0T FSI motor. If i could chip the 2.5 and pass a 2.0T i would get a car with a 2.5, but that wont happen. Even if both engines had 200hp, people would still go for the 2.0T because its so easy to mod. Why do you think most people went for the 1.8T instead of the VR6.. all engines have potential, its just how much does it cost to get there.
JT

What do you expect? It's a base motor. Why would VW give the base motor the same power as the optional one. EVERY SINGLE BRAND in the world does this. Honda, toyota, Audi, Porsche, nissan, dodge, ford, etc all put weaker motors in their base model cars than their sporty cars. So why can't you grasp this concept with VW? The great thing about this VW motor is that even if you can't afford to mod it off the bat, when you can, you can make a motor that will blow away a 2.0t. Your logic is silly to be honest. For the 2.0 SOHC motor in the mkIII and IV it would take a ton of money to even come close to a VR6. With this motor, it won't take nearly as much. I bet once the turbo kit's come out for this car, for $6k, you can make a faster car than a stock GTI. And that's a package 0 GTI. Add options, which most people do, and I will bet you get a faster car that's also cheaper than a package 1+ GTI. 
If you can't get over the fact that VW put a less powerful motor in the base model rabbit than the GTI, I don't know what to tell you. I mean it's just common sense really.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

This has been sent to the 2.5L forum in an effort to start a push for activity in the 2.5L forum. HOWEVER, what we have here is a bad start to the 2.5L forum. I encourage you to post a new topic here about the 2.5L engine if you are reading this thread right now. The only way activity is going to pick up is if folks start posting here.








For reference, http://forums.vwvortex.com/zer...05690.


----------

