# APR Europe - 2015 GTI & A3 2.0 Stage 1 Numbers



## Bamm1 (Oct 17, 2013)

326.9 HP

355 ft-lb (@ 3500 RPM)

_*crank*_


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

S3 tune is going to be BEASTLY...


----------



## trueunion (Apr 15, 2008)

stage 1 wow !


----------



## ProjectA3 (Aug 12, 2005)

HOLY POOP. Let's hope US stuff is similar.


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

Wow. Thats impressive.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Bamm1 said:


> 326.9 HP
> 
> 355 ft-lb (@ 3500 RPM)
> 
> _*crank*_


TD1 be damned!! seriously. I'd take the risk. Although, the new 2015 Mustang 2.3 Ecoboost is gonna be putting out similar numbers stock...


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

Nice. How much boost? What octane?


----------



## Bamm1 (Oct 17, 2013)

caliatenza said:


> TD1 be damned!! seriously. I'd take the risk. Although, the new 2015 Mustang 2.3 Ecoboost is gonna be putting out similar numbers stock...


Ford does not have the official SAE rating for the Mustang Version of the 2.3 Ecoboost yet (not sure if the Lincoln MKC 285/305 numbers are official yet either). But 305 HP / 300 ft-lb was their initial estimate with some reports stating "more than" those numbers. 330 HP and 355 ft-lbs seems a big step up from those initial estimates.


----------



## Zorro83 (Sep 10, 2011)

Dan Halen said:


> S3 tune is going to be BEASTLY...


Definitely! At that pace the S3 should be hovering the 400hp...I'm too chicken to do it though, so perhaps a couple years down the line. Being that the fastest car I've owned had 175hp, the S3's 290ish should suffice for a long while


----------



## Pathfinder2041 (Sep 20, 2003)

I would like to know how under rated the engine was before the tune was added.

Sent from my KFAPWA using Tapatalk HD


----------



## MaX PL (Apr 10, 2006)

so they're getting another 100hp from the 2.0?


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Pathfinder2041 said:


> I would like to know how under rated the engine was before the tune was added.
> 
> Sent from my KFAPWA using Tapatalk HD


Yup.


----------



## Bamm1 (Oct 17, 2013)

Chimera said:


> Nice. How much boost? What octane?


93 Octane.

Should have baseline numbers along with boost, etc. at the official launch.


----------



## Dan Halen (May 16, 2002)

Zorro83 said:


> Definitely! At that pace the S3 should be hovering the 400hp...I'm too chicken to do it though, so perhaps a couple years down the line. Being that the fastest car I've owned had 175hp, the S3's 290ish should suffice for a long while


That's me as well. I figure it will be a good bump if I ever begin getting bored.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Bamm1 said:


> Ford does not have the official SAE rating for the Mustang Version of the 2.3 Ecoboost yet (not sure if the Lincoln MKC 285/305 numbers are official yet either). But 305 HP / 300 ft-lb was their initial estimate with some reports stating "more than" those numbers. 330 HP and 355 ft-lbs seems a big step up from those initial estimates.


its going to be more than the V6 Mustang for sure. If the V6 is at 300, the ecoboost will have to be at like 320-330.


----------



## Pathfinder2041 (Sep 20, 2003)

Comparing the Ecco-Boost engine in a Mustang with a GTI W/PP or S3 running APR software is like comparing apples to jackhammers. I would only be in the market for an Mustang Ecco Boost as a stripped track or SCCA car, and there may be quite a few used Miata's I would consider first. The S3 would be my daily driver and a much enjoyable drive when compared to a 300+ HP rear wheel drive car.

Ford is going to sell a ton of Mustangs, and they always do because the car is such a performance bargan when compared to current Muscle Cars from Dodge or GM. I drive the Audi I have for the refinement, and the enjoyment that it gives me as compared to sub standard (MHO) Muscle car from one of the the big three.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Pathfinder2041 said:


> Comparing the Ecco-Boost engine in a Mustang with a GTI W/PP or S3 running APR software is like comparing apples to jackhammers. I would only be in the market for an Mustang Ecco Boost as a stripped track or SCCA car, and there may be quite a few used Miata's I would consider first. The S3 would be my daily driver and a much enjoyable drive when compared to a 300+ HP rear wheel drive car.
> 
> Ford is going to sell a ton of Mustangs, and they always do because the car is such a performance bargan when compared to current Muscle Cars from Dodge or GM. I drive the Audi I have for the refinement, and the enjoyment that it gives me as compared to sub standard (MHO) Muscle car from one of the the big three.


i can't decide between the Mustang Ecoboost and the A3 2.0. I was firmly in the A3 camp but then the pricing leaked for the Mustang (its Canadian pricing but one could extrapolate) and a fully loaded Ecoboost seems like a great deal. I keep coming back to the A3 though...:thumbup:


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)

326/355 stage 1? :sly:

Where is this information coming from?


----------



## p.r.walker (May 31, 2000)

APR posted an image on their FaceBook page of a Mk7 GTI being tuned & tested. The HP & TQ numbers could be read off the dyno screen. 

Love to see what the power curves look like, usable power is more interesting to me than peak, but as this is Stage 1, it should not be too radical


----------



## Chimera (Jul 6, 2002)

See thread here: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6974369-APR-Mk7-at-SoWo-with-new-19-quot-forged-wheels

Arin also says MPI shouldn't make a difference at stg1 and tune will be available about the time the car is available.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

Chimera said:


> See thread here: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6974369-APR-Mk7-at-SoWo-with-new-19-quot-forged-wheels
> 
> Arin also says MPI shouldn't make a difference at stg1 and tune will be available about the time the car is available.


what's the long term health of the engine with a stg 1 tune?


----------



## p.r.walker (May 31, 2000)

caliatenza said:


> what's the long term health of the engine with a stg 1 tune?


Everyone's going to have their own opinion on this one, but I have a B5 A4 I drove off the dealer lot in new in '99. APR stage 1 tuned many years ago at about 85,xxx miles. I now am at 253,xxx on the original stock turbo. That includes years of autocross and several track days. 

Take it for what you will.


----------



## anti suv (Sep 26, 2013)

> Arin also says MPI shouldn't make a difference at stg1 and tune will be available about the time the car is available.


Thats good to here. I was wondering if they were using the non direct fuel injectors for added fueling to get such great power figures.


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

p.r.walker said:


> Everyone's going to have their own opinion on this one, but I have a B5 A4 I drove off the dealer lot in new in '99. APR stage 1 tuned many years ago at about 85,xxx miles. I now am at 253,xxx on the original stock turbo. That includes years of autocross and several track days.
> 
> Take it for what you will.


well that's good enough for me, i'm sold . Just gotta find a decent service department that will look the other way...


----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

p.r.walker said:


> Everyone's going to have their own opinion on this one, but I have a B5 A4 I drove off the dealer lot in new in '99. APR stage 1 tuned many years ago at about 85,xxx miles. I now am at 253,xxx on the original stock turbo. That includes years of autocross and several track days.
> 
> Take it for what you will.


Did you have to rebuild your engine or is it still the original?


----------



## Bamm1 (Oct 17, 2013)

ChrisFu said:


> 326/355 stage 1? :sly:
> 
> Where is this information coming from?


APR has been posting information about the ongoing tuning process for the EA888 TSI in the Mk 7 GTI and MQB A3 on their social media pages. The Stage 1 MK 7 GTI is currently on display at SOWO.


----------



## p.r.walker (May 31, 2000)

caliatenza said:


> Did you have to rebuild your engine or is it still the original?


Still the original engine. Several timing belt changes, but everything inside the engine (rods, pistons, etc...) is original. I keep hoping the turbo would go so I would "have" to replace it with something better, but it keeps going 


When I got the car, I went in with the intention of replacing "normal" wear items with aftermarket improvements when the time came, but it is still my daily driver. I need reliability over maximum performance. That enlightenment struck a few years ago when I installed solid motor and transmission mounts... That lasted about a week. Great for the track, but way too much for everyday. Once I have a new daily driver, I might be able to justify more extreme modification.


----------



## Rudy_H (Jul 6, 2012)

caliatenza said:


> TD1 be damned!! seriously. I'd take the risk. Although, the new 2015 Mustang 2.3 Ecoboost is gonna be putting out similar numbers stock...


I think I priced out how much a S3 was in relation to the A3 option for option. It wasn't a whole lot different, I think a grand or so above what an ECU will run you. 

Downside is now your TCU will be configured for stock, so would be interesting to see what torque handling numbers look like, shift points won't be as smooth anymore...add in another ~$600 and you saved $400 with your A3...and you are still missing out with a LOT of perks of the S3...


----------



## ChrisFu (Jun 9, 2012)




----------



## caliatenza (Dec 10, 2006)

p.r.walker said:


> Still the original engine. Several timing belt changes, but everything inside the engine (rods, pistons, etc...) is original. I keep hoping the turbo would go so I would "have" to replace it with something better, but it keeps going
> 
> 
> When I got the car, I went in with the intention of replacing "normal" wear items with aftermarket improvements when the time came, but it is still my daily driver. I need reliability over maximum performance. That enlightenment struck a few years ago when I installed solid motor and transmission mounts... That lasted about a week. Great for the track, but way too much for everyday. Once I have a new daily driver, I might be able to justify more extreme modification.


Ah okay . I had heard a lot of A4's from that era had to undergo engine rebuilds...how accurate is that?


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

Pathfinder2041 said:


> I would like to know how under rated the engine was before the tune was added.
> 
> Sent from my KFAPWA using Tapatalk HD


Excellent question. I'll bet that the advertised 220hp is actually wheel hp, not crank. And is quite possibly more like 230-240 knowing VW.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

p.r.walker said:


> Everyone's going to have their own opinion on this one, but I have a B5 A4 I drove off the dealer lot in new in '99. APR stage 1 tuned many years ago at about 85,xxx miles. I now am at 253,xxx on the original stock turbo. That includes years of autocross and several track days.
> 
> Take it for what you will.


Similar to my 1999 Passat 1.8T experience. APR stage 1 at mile 300 and currently 225k flawless miles and counting. Never really flogged the car, never babied it either.


----------



## Waterfan (Aug 9, 2012)

caliatenza said:


> Ah okay . I had heard a lot of A4's from that era had to undergo engine rebuilds...how accurate is that?


You might be thinking of K04-modified 2.7TTs in the B5 S4.


----------

