# any dyno numbers



## O2VW1.8T (Jul 9, 2003)

Just wondering what the 2.5's are putting down


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: any dyno numbers (O2VW1.8T)*

i wanted to know as well. im guessing 130whp and 155wtq... just a wild guess until someone comes up with the actual numbers.


----------



## WhiteG60 (Aug 20, 2001)

*Re: any dyno numbers (mujjuman)*

I"m gonna throw down and say 145whp and 160ftlbs... just cuz the car feels quick as hell.


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: any dyno numbers (WhiteG60)*

I have one of the new Rabbits. I still find it hard to believe the 0-60 is 9.0 seconds. It just feels much faster. I of course might be wrong.


----------



## WhiteG60 (Aug 20, 2001)

*Re: any dyno numbers ((In)Sanity)*


_Quote, originally posted by *(In)Sanity* »_I have one of the new Rabbits. I still find it hard to believe the 0-60 is 9.0 seconds. It just feels much faster. I of course might be wrong.

It is NOT 9 seconds... i can guarantee you that much right here and now.


----------



## VW_tayder (Oct 4, 2005)

*Re: any dyno numbers (WhiteG60)*

abd got 130whp stock on there jetta. not sure on the tq..


----------



## Mchu86 (Aug 16, 2006)

I searched around on Google and found an old post here of an Autotech Jetta 2.5L. Stock was putting down 126ish hp/140tq .
I, too, feel like there's no way 0-60 is in 9 seconds. It definitely feels a lot faster!
I have a 06 Rabbit, and it's not the fastest car...but it's not slow at all!!


_Modified by Mchu86 at 5:08 PM 8-21-2006_


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (Mchu86)*

Ok, so on the Rabbit I'm not the only one that feels it's faster then 9.0. It feels more like maybe 6-7 range. Perhaps 8. Most of the time before I can even think about how fast I'm going I'm already over 60. I did notice it has some lag on the drive by wire pedal. Once you get the engine past that however it just flys. I'm running 225/35ZR19 tires....helps a bit to keep the grip.
I would love to see some dyno marks as well. Perhaps some track 0-60 times from more then just one person that wrote a review. I have to wonder if the 0-60 was done as a casual driver or something.


----------



## Mr-VDUB (Apr 12, 2006)

*Re: (Mchu86)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mchu86* »_I searched around on Google and found an old post here of an Autotech Jetta 2.5L. Stock was putting down 126ish hp/140tq .
I, too, feel like there's no way 0-60 is in 9 seconds. It definitely feels a lot faster!
I have a 06 Rabbit, and it's not the fastest car...but it's not slow at all!!

_Modified by Mchu86 at 5:08 PM 8-21-2006_

your rabbit feels faster because of all the low end torque, it makes it seem like you are accelerating a lot faster than you are.


----------



## pricanjetta06 (Oct 30, 2005)

i have a jetta 2.5L without resonator and mann I can see some big difference in power.. this motors have a lot of restriction ..


----------



## windsorvr (Nov 23, 2004)

*Re: any dyno numbers (WhiteG60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *WhiteG60* »_I"m gonna throw down and say 145whp and 160ftlbs... just cuz the car feels quick as hell.

rabbits are slow as hell, stop lying to yourself


----------



## rab_iter (Aug 20, 2006)

*Re: any dyno numbers (windsorvr)*


_Quote, originally posted by *windsorvr* »_
rabbits are slow as hell, stop lying to yourself


they are but they shouldnt be 5cly is duh bigger than 4 and lighter than six you get higher rms like a 4 but also more torq like a 6 i should thow down some numbers if its opened up


----------



## Mchu86 (Aug 16, 2006)

That's true, though...the torque does kinda deceive me into thinking the car is a lot faster than it is. But I wouldn't say it's in the 6-7 range. I've driven a modified MkV GTI...so I know how fast that range feels like. I would say it's more in the high 7 - low/mid 8
But, I honestly could not be happier with my car...maybe just a little more power in the top end...and actually, I would LOVE to have a 6th gear. It seems like there should've been a 6th gear...but it's missing.
From what I can see, the motor is pretty restrictive. Just looking at the stock intake system...it seems pretty restrictive. 
But I still say...the Rabbit isn't a fast car...but it's not exactly slow either










_Modified by Mchu86 at 9:41 PM 8-21-2006_


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (Mchu86)*

Has anyone noticed any better throttle response with a K&N filter in the 2.5? I know my 2.0L Cabrio it was like night and day. With the stock filter you could actually hear it chocking to death.


----------



## Mchu86 (Aug 16, 2006)

*Re: ((In)Sanity)*

The K&N would probably help...but I don't think it would be as efficient as an actual aftermarket intake system. 
The stock piping just doesn't really make sense. It seems to me that because the engine is already relatively loud, the reasoning for the pipes to go around the engine like that is for the sole purpose of sound deadening. Just an idea...haha
Here's the dyno chart that I mentioned. 
****THIS IS NOT MY CAR*****
I found this through Google on an old post here. 
It was an MKV AUTOMATIC Jetta 2.5L with Autotech Prototype CAI































There's only so many varying factors in the performance of an intake. So this leads me to believe that the only factor that could lead to such a HUGE improvement in the torque curve...is simply the stock intake system is too restrictive!
Just some of my ideas


----------



## VW_tayder (Oct 4, 2005)

*Re: (Mchu86)*

damn..thats cool..time to get a CAI...going to make my own cuz i can't justify spending $200-$300 on a filter on a stick.


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (VW_tayder)*

Good info. Like I said, the Cabrio 2.0L was a total dog off the line and on the highway until I put in a K&N. It was not race car after..but at least it got out of it's own way. 
The Intake on the 2.5 makes little sense. It's an air cleaner sitting on top of a hot engine. This is about as stupid as it gets. I'm sure somehow from an emissions stand point it makes sense.


----------



## GiacGti (Aug 11, 2005)

*Re: any dyno numbers (windsorvr)*


_Quote, originally posted by *windsorvr* »_
rabbits are slow as hell, stop lying to yourself


i don't think he has any reason to be "lying to himself" seeing as how he has a 1.8t gti that will ruin 98 percent of the cars on vortex.


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: any dyno numbers (GiacGti)*

The Rabbit has lag off the 0 RPM mark I think mainly caused by the drive by wire throttle. It also fails to hit the high RPM marks needed to get a good 0-60 time. On the other hand tossing it in 3rd or 4th and nailing the throttle leaves many cars in the dust. I just tossed a K&N in mine and it helped out a bit. The throttle responds a bit quicker. I doubt it produced much power gain if any, but it can now breath again. I find stock air filters to really limit the top end. With the stock filter the engine still gets to the same RPM range, but it fights more trying to do so. With the K&N it just flows better. Not sure why I'm bothering to tell you guys what I'm sure you already know.
Bottom line, 170 ft/lbs of torque and 150 hp is not wimpy. The car is not at all slow. The 0-60 times could be much better however. I blame that on low RPM's and pedal lag. Going from 15 mph to 80 the car flys. At least that's my opinion.


----------



## the s is silent (Jul 17, 2004)

*Re: (Mchu86)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mchu86* »_There's only so many varying factors in the performance of an intake. So this leads me to believe that the only factor that could lead to such a HUGE improvement in the torque curve...is simply the stock intake system is too restrictive!
Just some of my ideas









Maybe it has something to do with the stock airbox being positioned directly above the engine, where it is used to actually heat the air before it is put into the engine. This is one case where VW sacrificed power on the 2.5 to get better gas mileage.
Does anybody have MPG figures before and after an intake change...preferably for longer time periods than the week before and the week after?


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: any dyno numbers ((In)Sanity)*


_Quote, originally posted by *(In)Sanity* »_Bottom line, 170 ft/lbs of torque and 150 hp is not wimpy. The car is not at all slow. The 0-60 times could be much better however. I blame that on low RPM's and pedal lag. Going from 15 mph to 80 the car flys. At least that's my opinion. 

i agree dude. the car FEELS faster because of the torque. but what makes the 0-60 times 9 seconds (havent tested mysef yet) it the throttle lag, and the fact that 1st gear is pretty short. 
i bet 10mph - 75mph is prob like 7 or 8 seconds... not bad. 
its not fast, but def not slow either.


----------



## herbehop (May 4, 2004)

Just a note regarding a few posts that were removed...
I encourage you all to post dyno information and results from track days. With that being said, please do not find out how fast your car is by racing others on the *street*. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (herbehop)*


_Quote, originally posted by *herbehop* »_I encourage you all to post dyno information and results from track days. With that being said, please do not find out how fast your car is by racing others on the *street*. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif

i agree, street racing is bad and unsafe, and it is against the forum rules to post about it http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (mujjuman)*

I have to agree with that street racing thing, it is a pretty stupid thing to do. So is talking on your cell phone while driving. Proven to be as bad as drunk driving. I guess the next worse thing would be street racing while talking on your cell phone


----------



## the s is silent (Jul 17, 2004)

*Re: ((In)Sanity)*


_Quote, originally posted by *(In)Sanity* »_I have to agree with that street racing thing, it is a pretty stupid thing to do. So is talking on your cell phone while driving. Proven to be as bad as drunk driving. I guess the next worse thing would be street racing while talking on your cell phone









...while drinking a beer.








go to the track. It's a MUCH better experience than a heads up race on the street. The adrenaline from your first time is the greatest feeling ever.


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

I need to do a whole lot of work to the bunny first. Not sure why I got that 100k mile warranty.


----------



## ~kInG~ (Jun 8, 2005)

*Re: ((In)Sanity)*


_Quote, originally posted by *(In)Sanity* »_The Intake on the 2.5 makes little sense. It's an air cleaner sitting on top of a hot engine. This is about as stupid as it gets. I'm sure somehow from an emissions stand point it makes sense. 

Just to add, this is quoted from my Bentley Publishers Service Manual...

_Quote, originally posted by *Bentley* »_*Intake and Exhaust Manifolds*
The intake manifold on the 2.5L engine is made of plastic. The assembly includes the throttle body, fuel regulator, EVAP canister purge regulator valve and the pressure and throttle sensor assembly. The exhaust manifold has an isolated air-flow design with a protective plate that serves as a source for heated intake air.
*Engine Cover and air filter housing*
The 2.5L engine cover includes the air filter and part of the system that delivers *heated* intake air to the engine. The engine cover also lowers engine noise

I agree with you that heated intake air may have to do with emissions...


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (~kInG~)*


_Quote, originally posted by *~kInG~* »_I agree with you that heated intake air may have to do with emissions...

oh man that sucks... i bet they just gained like 3mpg anyway.... 
hmm, i wonder how hard it is to make my own CAI (dont want to spend $150+ on a damn filter on a stick)


----------



## aychseven (Oct 31, 2003)

*Re: (mujjuman)*

whats the air filter housing look like anyways? i admit, i've had the car since january and maybe popped the hood once







back in my 1.8t days, i remember seeing some of the best gains when smoothing out the interior of the airbox, and adding some 3in hose from the box to the front of the car. wondering if this is possible on the BGP. i'll have to go take a look


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (aychseven)*

Looks like a nightmare to me. I've had it all apart. I'm not impressed. The K&N filter I installed did help a bit, but I know it could be much better with a CAI.


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (aychseven)*


_Quote, originally posted by *aychseven* »_whats the air filter housing look like anyways? i admit, i've had the car since january and maybe popped the hood once







back in my 1.8t days, i remember seeing some of the best gains when smoothing out the interior of the airbox, and adding some 3in hose from the box to the front of the car. wondering if this is possible on the BGP. i'll have to go take a look 

yeah, ive only popped my hood once.....







been too busy.. and when im not busy its night time


----------



## ~kInG~ (Jun 8, 2005)

*Re: (aychseven)*


_Quote, originally posted by *aychseven* »_whats the air filter housing look like anyways? i 

filter is where the red rectangle is drawn.. ( a bit more to the right...)








Air flow diagram.... 










_Modified by ~kInG~ at 2:34 AM 9-5-2006_


----------



## saceone (Oct 12, 2002)

*Re: (~kInG~)*

so are there any intakes out for the 2.5 ?
edit:
nevermind, I searched and found a few










_Modified by saceone at 3:42 PM 9-5-2006_


----------



## AdamVC (Jul 26, 2006)

*Re: (~kInG~)*

I knew the air filter was under the engine cover, but damn, I had no idea the air flow was so complicated!
Good job with the diagram! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## (In)Sanity (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: (AdamVC)*

Well guys, it's been real. I traded the Rabbit 2.5 in for a 07 GTI FSI with DSG. Umm....the Rabbit really is slow








I'll still hold a place in my thoughts for the 2.5 that can.


----------



## the_q_jet (Mar 19, 2005)

you know whats funny my chipped mk42.0 hung right next to a tiptronic 2.5 til round 80mph and with 2 people in that car i pulled on it!


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: ((In)Sanity)*

wow why is the airflow so complicated? is it JUST so that the air is warmed for better emmisions or someting? (although the PZEV makes me feel better about the environment)


----------



## kaputsport (Jun 28, 2002)

*Re: (mujjuman)*

We used a [email protected] filter, and closed all openings in the intake track, I.E. the holes under the filter, to provide colder air, at least as much as possible. 
If you could find a way to make an extension harness for the Mass Airflow Sensor, then constructing your own intake would be easy and cheap.


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (kaputsport)*

i havent been under the hood of my car for more than 10secs.... but im thinking of making my own CAI


----------



## thedriver (Jul 3, 2006)

*Re: (AdamVC)*


_Quote, originally posted by *AdamVC* »_I knew the air filter was under the engine cover, but damn, I had no idea the air flow was so complicated!
http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

ya too many turns. def. need to get a CAI.


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (thedriver)*


_Quote, originally posted by *thedriver* »_
ya too many turns. def. need to get a CAI.


yep, and simplify things a bit. im so curious to find out how restrictive the stcok intake really is...
howver, on the MKIV it wasnt restrictive at all.


----------



## SvenRasta (Nov 16, 2002)

*Re: (Mchu86)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mchu86* »_I searched around on Google and found an old post here of an Autotech Jetta 2.5L. Stock was putting down 126ish hp/140tq .
I, too, feel like there's no way 0-60 is in 9 seconds. It definitely feels a lot faster!
I have a 06 Rabbit, and it's not the fastest car...but it's not slow at all!!

_Modified by Mchu86 at 5:08 PM 8-21-2006_

That's hilarious...my 16v drops more than that and it runs on CIS


----------



## the.ronin (Feb 22, 2006)

*Re: (~kInG~)*

Wow King, thanks for that post ... I was always wondering how the airflow was.

_Quote, originally posted by *~kInG~* »_
Air flow diagram.... 










Eff that noise!! I'm appreciating this more by the day ...


----------

