# Our days are numbered...



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

BClear said:


> Rainer Michel, Vice President of Product Marketing & Strategy at Volkswagen of America, confirmed the MY 2014 Jetta will drop the 2.5 five pot in favor of a 1.8 turbocharged four cylinder. The 1.8T promises improved fuel economy and more torque, especially down low in the powerband where it's really felt. And obviously it has far more tuning potential being a turbo engine.
> 
> Michel also mentioned updates to the steering and suspension.
> 
> http://www.autoblog.com/2012/07/17/2014-vw-jetta-to-drop-five-cylinder-in-favor-of-turbo-four/


Looks like we 2.5l Jetta lovers are headed for the history books.


----------



## psn (May 22, 2012)

Just makes our cars more desirable to real Dub fans, right?


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Eh, maybe. My main concern is that we will lose the already few companies we have. Those companies are doing great things but they can't keep developing parts for a platform that is being phased out.


----------



## psn (May 22, 2012)

Point taken. I could see them stopping in a year or two with new products. But on the other hand, for products that they've already developed, there's no sense in dropping them for at least several years. Given that the money for development is already "in the hole", they might as well keep selling these products as long as possible to recoup their investment and earn some (well-deserved) profits.

(Edited for sleep deprivation-induced errors.)


----------



## kitten_puncher (Apr 5, 2012)

not gonna lie I think this announcement has been a long time coming. The 2.5 in theory is a great platform it seems its just had to many shortcomings. I thoroughly enjoy mine and will continue to do so.


----------



## psn (May 22, 2012)

kitten_puncher said:


> I thoroughly enjoy mine and will continue to do so.


This. :beer:


----------



## jaja123 (Jan 17, 2011)

didn't we already know this? 2005-2013 is not a bad run. Still sad to see it go though. 

Id gladly hear my 5 cylinder over a small 4 cylinder. I almost don't care its turbo. The 5 cylinder was a huge reason why I got my car.


----------



## PhAyzoN (Nov 29, 2010)

We might not get many, if any, new products. However, already existing products should continue to be available. Look at the 1.8T 20v (granted, our 2.5 isn't nearly as legendary), it was phased out for the 2.0TFSI years ago and parts are still plentiful.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 2, 2009)

itskohler said:


> Eh, maybe. My main concern is that we will lose the already few companies we have. Those companies are doing great things but they can't keep developing parts for a platform that is being phased out.


We are still developing products for the 1.8T 6+ years after production stopped. The only difference though is that they built over a million of those engines and a huge % of those ended up being tuned... 

Unfortunately the masses sort of missed the memo about what the 2.5L engine is capable of- and what it really is... It makes it hard to develop products when the parts sales volume is about 1/5th of where it needs to be. 

If they had done a turbo 2.5L in the golf -r, things might be different... The TT-RS is awesome- but sales volume is most likely going to be too low to really change anything.


----------



## Fudgey Memory (Oct 26, 2011)

Personally, I'm welcoming a reasonably priced turbo. The 2.5L has some good qualities, but n/a engines just don't deliver value for tuning dollar the way turbos do. 

$300 or more for tunes that get you 12 or so hp. $400 for a high flow cat. $3-6 thousand for a turbo. $1300 for an intake manifold. And that's not even including installation, if you don't happen to be a mechanic. By the time you get this engine doing anything respectable, you may as well have bought a base GTI.

I heard that the new 1.8TSI has some sort of dual injection that eliminates sludge. Timing chain, etc. We're finally getting some of the cool stuff that the europeans get.

I'm excited.


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

Old news, we already knew and discussed this already.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Looks like it's still being discussed...

Plus that article adds more than just the phased out 2.5


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

4 posts on the actual article isn't a conversation, compared to the views.. 

Why would you think companies will just stop producing parts...


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

I'm not going to argue about what the definition of a discussion is, but thanks for being the go-to authority on post relevance and legitimacy.

I don't think think support for this platform will just drop off. But it certainlywont expand.


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

itskohler said:


> I'm not going to argue about what the definition of a discussion is, but thanks for being the go-to authority on post relevance and legitimacy.
> 
> I don't think think support for this platform will just drop off. But it certainlywont expand.


I'm not looking to argue either, just stating this is very old news.

Of course it will slow. We already have just about everythingyou could ask for, there's a point where there isn't much to release. This will happen regardless if VW got rid of it tomorrow or made it the primary motor in all models.


----------



## Gott ist gut (Jul 2, 2010)

I'm confused and saddened by this news. Why would VW drop the engine all together? Audi has been using the I5 2.5 since 2009 with no plans to drop it. It's now in the RS3 and in the Quattro concept. Seems like it's Audi's go-to engine for adding power while keeping weight down. 
Volvo too has had great success with their turbocharged I5 2.4/2.5 (with the development help of Porsche of course) since 1993.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 2, 2009)

Who really buys economy cars that don't get good fuel mileage? Not very many people....


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Who really buys economy cars that don't get good fuel mileage? Not very many people....


Totally right! As it's been said before, the 2.5L kinda has the power of the 2.slow with the fuel economy of the 3.2L. Slap a factory turbo on it and you have an awesome performance motor for a sports-type car. We need to remember, to 99% of the population, we drive family cars and kid haulers...


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

lessthanalex said:


> Totally right! As it's been said before, the 2.5L kinda has the power of the 2.slow with the fuel economy of the 3.2L. Slap a factory turbo on it and you have an awesome performance motor for a sports-type car. We need to remember, to 99% of the population, we drive family cars and kid haulers...


:thumbup:


----------



## Gott ist gut (Jul 2, 2010)

lessthanalex said:


> Totally right! As it's been said before, the 2.5L kinda has the power of the 2.slow with the fuel economy of the 3.2L. Slap a factory turbo on it and you have an awesome performance motor for a sports-type car. We need to remember, to 99% of the population, we drive family cars and kid haulers...


Well, when you put it that way...it kinda makes sense. 
Still no reason not to use it with a turbo in the R or Scirocco or GLI or GTI.


----------



## MK5golf (Jun 30, 2012)

2.5 is what I love most about my car 
I dont mind the switch over however. I plan on keeping my 2.5 for a WHILE and next time im in the market for a new vehicle, ill be buying something with 4 rings or a cabrio (beetle or if they ever bring the golf cabrio over... why they dont ill never understand:screwy


----------



## michael_reusser (Dec 28, 2007)

is the 2.5 not available in the new beetle? That should keep the interest in this engine and the after market going for a while longer.


----------



## vrsick147 (Jun 18, 2007)

i get 30 miles to the gallon without a tune and the 2.5 is nowhere compared to a 2.slow and well i do my turbo kit beast mode will be on


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

Gott ist gut said:


> Well, when you put it that way...it kinda makes sense.
> Still no reason not to use it with a turbo in the R or Scirocco or GLI or GTI.


Honestly, it would not surprise me if we saw something like this happen in Golf 8. Although I feel like the more likely occurrence would be GTI/GLI gets factory KO4 and .:R would get a turbo 2.5L. I still hate the idea of having any motor other than the VRsex in an .:R. To me, mkiv and mkv were .:R32, their own models. The mkvi, however, I view (and call) them as Golf R, not the true spirit of the .:R like its predecessors.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

lessthanalex said:


> Honestly, it would not surprise me if we saw something like this happen in Golf 8. Although I feel like the more likely occurrence would be GTI/GLI gets factory KO4 and .:R would get a turbo 2.5L. I still hate the idea of having any motor other than the VRsex in an .:R. To me, mkiv and mkv were .:R32, their own models. The mkvi, however, I view (and call) them as Golf R, not the true spirit of the .:R like its predecessors.


It will be interesting no matter what the case may end up being. I agree, the Golf R is not the same spirit as its predecessors. I think it all started to change when they made the R32 come with a DSG tranny.


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

itskohler said:


> It will be interesting no matter what the case may end up being. I agree, the Golf R is not the same spirit as its predecessors. I think it all started to change when they made the R32 come with a DSG tranny.


That's a 1500$ fix.


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

itskohler said:


> It will be interesting no matter what the case may end up being. I agree, the Golf R is not the same spirit as its predecessors. I think it all started to change when they made the R32 come with a DSG tranny.


DSG or not you didnt get four hundred options either. The choice was, do you want an. :R or not. To me, thats the point of a car like that. Take it or leave it, the only way we offer it from factory. Not, two door or four door, dsg or stick, sunroof or no, etc etc. At that point, might as well start offering ko4s and awd from factory as an option to the gti. Just my 0.02$. 

/rant

Sent from my GT-P7500R using Tapatalk 2


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

lessthanalex said:


> DSG or not you didnt get four hundred options either. The choice was, do you want an. :R or not. To me, thats the point of a car like that. Take it or leave it, the only way we offer it from factory. Not, two door or four door, dsg or stick, sunroof or no, etc etc. At that point, might as well start offering ko4s and awd from factory as an option to the gti. Just my 0.02$.
> 
> /rant
> 
> Sent from my GT-P7500R using Tapatalk 2


They would if it didn't cost millions of dollars to certify every one of those options for the US government.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

kevin FaKiN spLits said:


> That's a 1500$ fix.


lol, right. :facepalm:


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

thygreyt said:


> lol, right. :facepalm:


Well you don't do your work yourself, so ya in that case add another 1000$


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

kevin FaKiN spLits said:


> Well you don't do your work yourself, so ya in that case add another 1000$


shows how much you know.


----------



## A1an (Mar 22, 2007)

Killing off the 2.5 isn't a surprise...but what surprises me is that it didn't happen sooner. Don't get me wrong I do like the motor for the same reasons we all do, but the 2.5 always seems to get slammed on reviews due to the less than spectacular gas mileage. With VW's goal of increasing sales in the US those reviews certainly don't help their efforts.

Introducing a more gas friendly 1.8t is the smart thing to do and is the direction a few other manufacturers are taking. Chevy and Ford already have gas sipping small displacement turbo motors available. We have the 1.4 turbo in my wife's Sonic and so far it has averaged 36-38 in mixed driving (mostly highway though). It would be great to get those sorts of numbers in a base Golf.


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

A1an said:


> Killing off the 2.5 isn't a surprise...but what surprises me is that it didn't happen sooner. Don't get me wrong I do like the motor for the same reasons we all do, but the 2.5 always seems to get slammed on reviews due to the less than spectacular gas mileage. With VW's goal of increasing sales in the US those reviews certainly don't help their efforts.
> 
> Introducing a more gas friendly 1.8t is the smart thing to do and is the direction a few other manufacturers are taking. Chevy and Ford already have gas sipping small displacement turbo motors available. We have the 1.4 turbo in my wife's Sonic and so far it has averaged 36-38 in mixed driving (mostly highway though). It would be great to get those sorts of numbers in a base Golf.


Something about that sonic hatch tickles my fancy. I bet that turbo motor is a lot of fun out of the box and with simple bolt ons would be a super fum daily. That said, its still a chevy... I think I'd rather take an older 1.8T GTI.

Sent from my GT-P7500R using Tapatalk 2


----------



## A1an (Mar 22, 2007)

It is pretty entertaining in stock form. Unfortunately the ECU compensates when minor bolt ons are added to the car. It will pull power to get it back to stock levels after a few miles apparently. 

However, as expected with most factory turbo motors it is seeing some really good numbers with a tune. 

I have been anti-Chevy for as long as I can remember and was hesitant to look at this car. One test drive and I was sold. Build quality on it is excellent. Chevy did a great job although time will tell if this ends up being a hit or a miss. So far I think it is a hit.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

A1an said:


> It is pretty entertaining in stock form. Unfortunately the ECU compensates when minor bolt ons are added to the car. It will pull power to get it back to stock levels after a few miles apparently.


 

Where did you hear that?


----------



## A1an (Mar 22, 2007)

itskohler said:


> Where did you hear that?


Sonicownersforum.com . Supposedly this is the case. I'm not modifying the car so I don't care, but figured I'd pass along the info that others have said.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Oh, thought you were referring to our 2.5 VWs. :thumbup:


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

A1an said:


> I'm not modifying the car so I don't care, but figured I'd pass along the info that others have said.


You should chip it. Just because it would be fun. I'm just saying. I bet it would be faster than a 2.5L with many, many bolt ons.


----------



## A1an (Mar 22, 2007)

I was actually thinking about chipping it for the mpg increase. I'm getting lame at my advanced age of 32.


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

MPG increase is a perfect justification. Same reason people should chip the 2.5L

:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## A1an (Mar 22, 2007)

Been thinking about doing that with my 2.5 just haven't really looking into it much yet.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Sending my ecu into C2 or UM soon. :thumbup:


----------



## endicott (Nov 6, 2002)

Given there is a formula of existing products that give a NA 200 whp I'm not too worried. Not mention reasonably priced turbo kits if you want to go that route.


----------



## AngeloM3 (May 11, 2011)

Does this mean I'm driving a rare car now?! :laugh:


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

endicott said:


> Given there is a formula of existing products that give a NA 200 whp I'm not too worried. Not mention reasonably priced turbo kits if you want to go that route.



NA 200 whp? :sly:






AngeloM3 said:


> Does this mean I'm driving a rare car now?! :laugh:


I think one day you can say that. Non time soon though haha.

Sent from my mobile command post.


----------



## endicott (Nov 6, 2002)

itskohler said:


> NA 200 whp? :sly:


yes, with not a tubro in sight.


----------



## PhAyzoN (Nov 29, 2010)

itskohler said:


> NA 200 whp? :sly:


An SRI manifold on it's own just about does it. UM's makes 198whp, C2's makes a tad less, 194whp I think? Not sure if C2 has shown a dyno.


----------



## Fudgey Memory (Oct 26, 2011)

PhAyzoN said:


> An SRI manifold on it's own just about does it. UM's makes 198whp, C2's makes a tad less, 194whp I think? Not sure if C2 has shown a dyno.


CAI, SRI, Tune, Headers, High flow cat, Performance exhaust = 205whp. All for about $4k + install costs.

Add that to a minimum $18k for a base Golf, and you are easily over the price of a new GTI at under $24k. Just buy the GTI, spend $700 on a Stage 1 tune, and blow away anyone who goes the N/A 2.5l route. And you'll still have warranty. Which even the Stage 1 turbo renders null & void.

If tuning is your thing, this is not your engine.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Interesting...

Like Fudgey said, It takes a little more than just a manifold.


----------



## lessthanalex (Oct 12, 2009)

itskohler said:


> Interesting...
> 
> Like Fudgey said, It takes a little more than just a manifold.


I thought tay made 200+whp on his car with sri and tune?

Sent from my GT-P7500R using Tapatalk 2


----------



## nunumkv (Jul 5, 2010)

good :thumbup:


----------



## tay272 (Aug 22, 2007)

lessthanalex said:


> I thought tay made 200+whp on his car with sri and tune?
> 
> Sent from my GT-P7500R using Tapatalk 2


Nope, only 194whp. With my current mods I might be closer to that number. Need to iron a few things out tho that Ive been neglecting to get it running tip top again.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

PhAyzoN said:


> Not sure if C2 has shown a dyno.


bingo


----------



## vwluger22 (Jan 25, 2005)

PhAyzoN said:


> Not sure if C2 has shown a dyno.





thygreyt said:


> bingo


Wow thygreyt you have even posted in a thread where they posted a dyno of tune+SRI.:banghead:

Anyways C2 does have a dyno it seems they are still finalizing the tune (once they can get the car back in) but they have a dyno only a basline right now but THEY GOT A DYNO with C2 SRI and C2 tune.



[email protected] said:


> As a teaser (since we aren't done dyno tuning just yet  ), we have decided to post up INITIAL number from Victor's FIRST run on the dyno... Needless to say, we're pretty happy.
> 
> First run on the dyno: *197.9whp* :thumbup:
> 
> ...


Full thread here


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

lol, lugger, i know. and yes, i remember...

but do notice that the dyno sheet posted is very much lacking.

i mean: no final numbers other than their post.
no AFR data
no +5300 rpm info? 

still waiting for the full dyno.
i even talked to chris (c2 owner) and he said he'll "post it in a few"... 

anyways, still waiting.


----------



## TeamZleep (Aug 28, 2007)

kevin FaKiN spLits said:


> That's a 1500$ fix.


Try damn near 3k alone for parts... Not including all of the remapping to make the ENTIRE car not look for the DSG..


I know this because I'm in the process of the switch. It's not like Greyt's damn near straightforward swap...


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

thygreyt said:


> lol, lugger, i know. and yes, i remember...
> 
> but do notice that the dyno sheet posted is very much lacking.
> 
> ...


 Sippin' on that Hatorade.


----------



## TeamZleep (Aug 28, 2007)

itskohler said:


> Sippin' on that Hatorade.


But does make a solid point.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Maybe so, but he bashs C2 because he's in love with Jeff.


----------



## TeamZleep (Aug 28, 2007)

itskohler said:


> Maybe so, but he bashs C2 because he's in love with Jeff.


That's true. Although I've driven his car with both tunes and the UM tune is out of this world compared to the last (he never did use C2, though). My C2 tune was hokey and it never got fixed after sending it back a few times, but I'll leave that alone.


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

TeamZleep said:


> Try damn near 3k alone for parts... Not including all of the remapping to make the ENTIRE car not look for the DSG..
> 
> 
> I know this because I'm in the process of the switch. It's not like Greyt's damn near straightforward swap...


That was a cheeky estimate. Dsg is superior to manual. Why would you want to change that?


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

TeamZleep said:


> That's true. Although I've driven his car with both tunes and the UM tune is out of this world compared to the last (he never did use C2, though). My C2 tune was hokey and it never got fixed after sending it back a few times, but I'll leave that alone.


I'm in love with Jeff too, full ****! I love my tune. Drove a .:R with the um engine and dsg flash, and I was amazed how smooth the dsg operated. I need dsg in my life... Manual sucks for my knee, and tiptronic/auto is gay garbage


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

I didn't mean it in a condescending way. :thumbup:

I drove a tiptronic car now and I love it. Mostly because I realize that my 2.5 is not a race car so why pretend? Its more about comfort for me now.

Sent from my mobile command post.


----------



## gp1988mp (Jul 20, 2012)

itskohler said:


> I didn't mean it in a condescending way. :thumbup:
> 
> I drove a tiptronic car now and I love it. Mostly because I realize that my 2.5 is not a race car so why pretend? Its more about comfort for me now.
> 
> Sent from my mobile command post.


:thumbup:


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

itskohler said:


> I didn't mean it in a condescending way. :thumbup:
> 
> I drove a tiptronic car now and I love it. Mostly because I realize that my 2.5 is not a race car so why pretend? Its more about comfort for me now.
> 
> Sent from my mobile command post.


Your new Jetta is tip?


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Yes sir.

Sent from my mobile command post.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

itskohler said:


> Sippin' on that Hatorade.





itskohler said:


> Maybe so, but he bashs C2 because he's in love with Jeff.


i'm not bashing on C2. 

All i'm saying is that for some unknown reason, they still havent posted a full dyno sheet.

honestly, i really thought you knew me better.

PS: jeff has made the car THAT much better.


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

I repeat. Not being condescending. Everyone has their favorites. 

Sent from my mobile command post.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

itskohler said:


> I repeat. Not being condescending. Everyone has their favorites.
> 
> Sent from my mobile command post.


lol, thats precisely my point.

this is not a matter of favorites, its a more than that.

who cares if i like UM, unitronic or freaking giac?

what i have been posting for a long time is: can we please get a dyno from C2?

to compare: On waterfest ALL the 2.5s under the APtuning/ UM booth had dynosheets posted ON the cars. Most of those sheets were done and printed on sat morning BEFORE the show.

how hard can it be for C2 to post their sheets from their computers from their "on-house dyno"?
why post only half?

in all honesty, is that "sipping hatorade"?


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

Chill.

Sent from my mobile command post.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

itskohler said:


> Chill.
> 
> Sent from my mobile command post.


Lol, I am.

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## endicott (Nov 6, 2002)

kevin FaKiN spLits said:


> I'm in love with Jeff too, full ****! I love my tune. Drove a .:R with the um engine and dsg flash, and I was amazed how smooth the dsg operated. I need dsg in my life... Manual sucks for my knee, and tiptronic/auto is gay garbage


Tell me about it, after 15+ years of manuals I had to go auto for my clutch knee ... but after only 4 months my knee is feeling better. 

Sadly I could not find a DSG equipped VW in my price range. I found an A3 but it had seen better days. So now I'm stuck with an auto and you 2.5L jerks.


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

itskohler said:


> Chill.
> 
> Sent from my mobile command post.


What made you go auto?


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

:heart:

Sent from my mobile command post.


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

endicott said:


> Tell me about it, after 15+ years of manuals I had to go auto for my clutch knee ... but after only 4 months my knee is feeling better.
> 
> Sadly I could not find a DSG equipped VW in my price range. I found an A3 but it had seen better days. So now I'm stuck with an auto and you 2.5L jerks.


Ya my stock bunny is paid off in April its getting sold or traded in for something auto and good on gas. My white one will no longer be a daily once that happens. 2 5 speeds sucks, I don't want to drive either, and rush hour jams are painful!


----------



## itskohler (Jan 7, 2011)

kevin FaKiN spLits said:


> What made you go auto?


Alloy of things. Mostly that I wanted a more refined driving experience without all the work.

Sent from my mobile command post.


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

Manual is fun, but not when it puts you in pain. 6800 rpm is fun and sounds great but my limit has been reached turbo will be for show purpose and looks only don't give a crap what it makes don't plan on pulls so trans stays as is.


----------



## thygreyt (Jun 7, 2009)

kevin FaKiN spLits said:


> Ya my stock bunny is paid off in April its getting sold or traded in for something auto and good on gas. My white one will no longer be a daily once that happens. 2 5 speeds sucks, I don't want to drive either, and rush hour jams are painful!


here we go again.

btw, i thought you were going to get "something fun and RWD"


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

thygreyt said:


> here we go again.
> 
> btw, i thought you were going to get "something fun and RWD"


We are not doing anything again. Made up my mind and am sticking to a show car only. RWD and fun which means manual transmission which I don't want. If someone wants to trade that for my bunny I would say no. 

The UG will be replaced by a used auto Fiesta most likely. 

If someone has a used 6262 t4 flanged let me know. journal bearing doesn't bother me. Turbo and a intercooler is all I need


----------



## TeamZleep (Aug 28, 2007)

kevin FaKiN spLits said:


> That was a cheeky estimate. Dsg is superior to manual. Why would you want to change that?


Because I want to. No more dsg flywheel worries, overpriced maintenance, and no more time bomb status.


----------



## dhenry (Feb 10, 2009)

thygreyt said:


> what i have been posting for a long time is: can we please get a dyno from C2?
> 
> how hard can it be for C2 to post their sheets from their computers from their "on-house dyno"?
> why post only half?


this! when they announced that they were going to get an in house dyno, i thought we would be seeing dyno sheets left and right. 

i have never dealt with c2 personally, but its shady when they give the 2.5 vw community a hard time seeing the results of their products. why cover up half the dyno sheet ( im referring to the c2 sri + c2 software, isnt above 5k+ where the sri is supposed to be most beneficial?)
i dont get why it is such a hassle to get real dyno proven results shown to the public. stop throwing teasers.




> to compare: On waterfest ALL the 2.5s under the APtuning/ UM booth had dynosheets posted ON the cars. Most of those sheets were done and printed on sat morning BEFORE the show.


:thumbup:

this is why i choose UM as the best tune for the 2.5l. like the great company that they are, they have the knowledge and PROOF to back up their claims. whenever i see a UM dyno sheet for their product, it was posted to the public within a relatively short period of time.


back to the topic of the 2.5l days being numbered..... i think we already have just about everything we need to have a fun and reliable 2.5l NA or FI.:beer:
the only thing i am waiting to see come out are cams (hopefully IE pulls through with those and make reasonable power)
and then lastly, i want to see a supercharged rabbit (marcus, counting on you!)


----------



## kevin splits (Aug 23, 2010)

TeamZleep said:


> Because I want to. No more dsg flywheel worries, overpriced maintenance, and no more time bomb status.


Is that bomb status a real thing. Zevion is making so much power his downfall is the clutches not the flywheel. Dsg maintenance does suck for the wallet. Do it up :thumbup:


----------

