# TT RS for Motorsports - Track and AutoX



## CarbonRS (Jul 15, 2013)

So after much searching, I'd appreciate some input on what this car really benefits from for autox, time attack, etc.

I believe I have a tire solution, so with that out of the way...

Tuning!
- How do you handle breaking stuff. With Audi requiring an ECU scan, how do you avoid getting your car flagged so the dealer can replace parts under warranty?
- I need a tune that will leave the throttle close to 1:1 in sport mode and no lift shift. Does anyone make this?
- Does APR give you a discount going from Stage 2 to Stage 3?
- Haldex flash? Everything I read pimps the benefits with a mild hit to fuel economy, but is this really safe for track use? Coming from a RWD platform I want this more than anything, but this car is designed as a FWD platform and I don't want to be destroying the drive shaft, haldex, rear diff.

Bolt ons
- Has anyone had their turbo upgraded to something other than Loba? I've never seen a more expensive compressor wheel swap and I'm sure a good shop in the states or Canada could do the same without the extra expense.
- I'm pretty well set on an AWE intercooler, but has anyone noticed an IC upgrade adding noticeable turbo lag? IE: AutoX where you are probably doing most courses in 2nd gear and just need linear power, not peak power.
- Is meth worth it? We can get 91 without ethanol or 94 with 10% ethanol here. I'd never consider buying race gas.

Bushings kits?

What am I missing? What will break? I know brakes are not the best, but I want to see how I like them first as I find brakes to be interpreted wildly differently driver to driver.

Thanks!


----------



## pal (Aug 16, 2000)

Bleed the brakes with some good RBF, change pads to a track pad (Pagid Yellow, PFC 08/06/01, Hawk DTC60/HT10- take your pick based on availability), put a good set of tires on there and do an event to see what (if anything) you want to change.


----------



## CarbonRS (Jul 15, 2013)

Thanks Pal. I have 3 bottles of RBF600 ready to go and will be using stock pads for autox. I don't think I could get enough heat into a track pad like DTC60s for them to be predictable. For track, I'd like to try Pagid, I've never had the chance to run those before. Is there a pad you can think of that is easy to bed in and can be swapped with street pads on the same rotors? On my previous car Carbotech XP16 front and XP12 rear were popular with bobcats for street use. I'd hope this car doesn't need an extreme setup given the weight and you can get away with something like a Ferodo DS2500 for lapping days/autox/street.

What oil have you tried? I usually use Amsoil but it isn't on the Audi recommended list...


----------



## derek8819 (Jan 29, 2013)

I have a TTS, so the same suspension as the TTRS and I Auto X a lot. I have the same fears about warranty concerns, if it is a defect I still expect Audi to cover things. The biggest complaint I have about the way the platform auto x's is the steering feel/understeeer. The electric power steering is precise and intuitive, but when you get close to the point of understeer it just loses feel. The wheel will go from nice and firm with good feedback to wet spaghetti in a turn if you are right on the edge. I have not installed a new Haldex controller because of the recent updates Audi was doing to the Haldex modules I did not want to get flagged. I do have a H/R rear sway bar and that has improved turn in significantly. On the soft setting it was better but still not great. On the hard setting it is much better and the car rotates much easier, but I can feel a little more "jerkiness" in the rear end when going over single sided pot holes and such. I would guess the TTRS has more weight over the nose than my TTS and undetsteer would be similar. I do have an APR tune but the TTS uses an older ECU that is less likely to be tagged by Audi. 

I may not win the swooping type autox tracks, there is a just a limit for any platform, but I have the best looking car out there running.

Good Luck!

Derek


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

AST coilovers, full bushes, rear anti roll bar.
Haldex competition as it allows 4 wheel braking, ie haldex clutch remains engaged under braking.
Wavetrac front diff from INA
Michelin PSS or stickier tyres.
DaveB brake upgrade, I anticipate you will warp the stock rotors


----------



## CarbonRS (Jul 15, 2013)

Would an alignment, rear sway bar, and haldex flash be enough to help eliminate understeer? 

And with a tune or haldex flash, is there any way it can be flashed back to stock if you need warranty work done? There must be a way to take a copy of your stock file?

I'll probably start with 275/35/18 PSS and use them for street as well this year.


----------



## pal (Aug 16, 2000)

(Note: My thoughts below are from road course experience so not all will apply to auto-x where speeds are lower and you are only out for about a minute at a time).

Ferodo DS2500 will be a weak pad on a road course given the weight and power levels of the car. I have successfully switched between street pads and Hawk DT60 or HT10 on same rotors without issue. 

If you want to try Pagid, I'd recommend the yellow RS19 or RS29 (I am running 29s on the ///M). The reason for using an endurance pad like the yellow is that it helps keep you out of ABS leading to smoother transitions from braking to corner entry and the also helps with trail braking. For the TTRS you want to stay out of ABS so ESP does not switch back on as well.

On my TT 3.2 (with TTRS springs w/MagRide and TTRS rear sway bar) I run about -1.7° camber up front with zero toe and stock settings out back. That, coupled with a Haldex controller upgrade has helped cure most of understeer. The rest you have to just play with lines and entry speeds. In the coming weeks I plan to switch to MSS springs which were quite amazing on a Stage 2 TTRS at Watkins Glen (see Daytona BeauTTy's post). 

I think you need to focus on getting seat time and see what you can cure with understanding the car and driving it optimally vs what is something that absolutely needs mods.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

CarbonRS said:


> Would an alignment, rear sway bar, and haldex flash be enough to help eliminate understeer?
> 
> And with a tune or haldex flash, is there any way it can be flashed back to stock if you need warranty work done? There must be a way to take a copy of your stock file?
> 
> I'll probably start with 275/35/18 PSS and use them for street as well this year.


Usually the haldex controller is replaced entirely but if you switch the ESP in sport mode or completely off it may get close to what the haldex controller is doing (permanently engaging the rear wheels) --> If you can test one without spending the money you might decide to skip the investment.

Suspension: If you have mag-ride you should try WIlliam's MSS suspension (he might even refund if you don't like it but so far I don't think there was any case of a refund) --> This way you might keep the stock ARB as the rear springs are much stiffer than OEM. (it is said that a very good suspension doesn't need ARB upgrade).


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

pal said:


> (Note: My thoughts below are from road course experience so not all will apply to auto-x where speeds are lower and you are only out for about a minute at a time).
> 
> Ferodo DS2500 will be a weak pad on a road course given the weight and power levels of the car. I have successfully switched between street pads and Hawk DT60 or HT10 on same rotors without issue.
> 
> ...


I'd expect a harsher pad will only kill the stock TTRS rotors. Brembo blues killed mine pretty much straight away.

ABS doesn't trigger ESP to come back on with the TTRS, at least not in the euro market.

The haldex controller is switchable but Audi would never need to check or notice that anyway.


----------



## pal (Aug 16, 2000)

Poverty said:


> I'd expect a harsher pad will only kill the stock TTRS rotors. Brembo blues killed mine pretty much straight away.
> 
> ABS doesn't trigger ESP to come back on with the TTRS, at least not in the euro market.


Pagid yellows are supposed to be rotor friendly from what I have read. Will know after I run through a couple of sets. I was able to get almost 25-30 track days out of my StopTech rotors with Hawk DTC60/HT10s. Rotors still have life but they are sitting as a backup.

On US cars ABS turns ESP back on; maybe we can switch coding via VAG COM to Euro coding. Do you happen to have a VAG COM and can post ABS and ESP coding here or IM me and we can see differences compared to US?


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

pal said:


> Pagid yellows are supposed to be rotor friendly from what I have read. Will know after I run through a couple of sets. I was able to get almost 25-30 track days out of my StopTech rotors with Hawk DTC60/HT10s. Rotors still have life but they are sitting as a backup.
> 
> On US cars ABS turns ESP back on; maybe we can switch coding via VAG COM to Euro coding. Do you happen to have a VAG COM and can post ABS and ESP coding here or IM me and we can see differences compared to US?


Yeah but you have decent rotors!! Stock TTRS are rubbish! Also would the pages yellows get up to temp on a autox? 

I think in the UK the 3.2 TT will also turn ESP back on if it demands things are getting out of hand, but the TTRS doesn't. I'm not sure if it is adjustable via vagcom, as the Aussie TTRS puts ESP back on also. Would need to be mapped out


----------



## pal (Aug 16, 2000)

Poverty said:


> Yeah but you have decent rotors!! Stock TTRS are rubbish! Also would the pages yellows get up to temp on a autox?
> 
> I think in the UK the 3.2 TT will also turn ESP back on if it demands things are getting out of hand, but the TTRS doesn't. I'm not sure if it is adjustable via vagcom, as the Aussie TTRS puts ESP back on also. Would need to be mapped out


I have only done one rain out event in my 3.2 so not sure if it turns back on. But a 5th Gear video had Tiff Needle (sp?) drift the 2007/8 3.2 Coupe with ESP off but he was not hitting ABS so not sure.

VW Golf R's could not turn ESP off in the US but someone figured out it was just a coding change via VAG COM and multiple folks I know have successfully turned it off. I would think VAG keeps hardware consistent and changes settings for local markets to keep costs down so would expect it to be the same with TTRS (or 3.2).

Pagid Yellow work just fine on the street under cold braking so may be fine for auto-x. But I cannot speak about auto-x and these as my experience is on street and road course.

There is a TTRS person on QuattroWorld (AchTTung Volgas) whose rotors lasted him 16 track days ad about 2 years- not too shabby for stock I think.

http://forums.quattroworld.com/tt2/msgs/29645.phtml


----------



## joneze93tsi (Aug 8, 2008)

I do more AutoX than anything else in my TTRS.
It's a very forgiving platform which is made 100% easier to drive IMO with the following:

APR Flash
"996cab" Alignment
Haldex Comp
034 RSB

With those, throttle life oversteer and power on oversteer are much easier to induce, and manage.
The other half is learning that power doesn't solve all your problems, and for me, that took a while. Being smooth/consistent is always the better option.

I'm still a novice in my area but I'm fairing much better after the above mods, for the first time, I got an FTD which was very encouraging. Learning how well the car can "hold" a line at speed was also amazing, far less fear than in other cars.


Next up with be 034's RTAB's and the Famous MSS Spring kit.
Going to try and hold out and save those for next year, along with some more serious rubber.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

What's the 996 cab alignment? Arent those just the same settings that Jonnyc/ttshop came up with?


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Poverty said:


> What's the 996 cab alignment? Arent those just the same settings that Jonnyc/ttshop came up with?


max front camber, 0 toe on the front and stock settings for the rear. Don't know who derived those initially but William had shared his results with those settings here and on quattroworld.


----------



## CarbonRS (Jul 15, 2013)

Thanks for sharing guys. I'll slowly work on the car over the winter based on this and how it does on the track.

Has anyone tried a regular 1 piece front rotor? 2 piece rotors are great and all, but for my driving skill level it doesn't make a big difference really besides hurting my wallet. Also a 1 piece will transfer even more heat out the disk and use the wheel as a heatsink.

So can anyone answer the tuning problem? Can you be flashed back to your stock program and be undetectable to Audi? I know this involves a bit of work, but if something seriously fails, I don't want to be paying for their defective part.


----------



## Black BeauTTy (Jun 11, 2011)

I have GIAC tune and I switch mine back to stock when doing dealer visits. It has been scanned on multiple occasions and I have not been told that I am flagged in the system. Our ecu does not automatically report the TD1 code, but nothing stops the dealer from manually flagging your car. My experience suggests that if you keep the mods simple and limited to stage 2 and treat the service department nicely, you'll be fine. At stage 3, you're on your own.


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

Poverty said:


> What's the 996 cab alignment? Arent those just the same settings that Jonnyc/ttshop came up with?


 JC and TTShop recommend something entirely different to what we have tried and tested and works well for us and many people.

Essentially on the front we recommend MAX front Camber and 0 TOE. 
On the rears we recommend Audi recommendation.

Our '_tame_' racing driver, Nick, gave it a thumbs up and I shared the above with people...it has since got the name '_996CAB settings_'...which is humbling given that am reputed to have the slowest TT-RS...though it seems to run with no faults...and we certainly use it alright...


JC recommends -1mm front axle (-0.03 per side) TOE and 1mm (0.03) positive TOE rear setup which works for him. I believe he also recommends Camber which is different to what Audi recommend.

TTS recommendation is noted though never shared, never understood why the secrecy.

Just thought I should clear things up Jason.

William


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

CarbonRS said:


> So after much searching, I'd appreciate some input on what this car really benefits from for autox, time attack, etc.
> 
> I believe I have a tire solution, so with that out of the way...
> 
> ...


 We track a great deal and what I know today has changed my views considerably and here goes some 1st hand experience.

*1) Aftermarket Bushes* – did not work for us. We destroyed two sets and the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] set is collecting dust in the workshop. We went OEM over 8-mths ago and the car felt nice and tight as before and these OEM are still holding up and not torn up. 

RESPOSNE from the aftermarket manufacturer...”_it must be the way you drive the car...!_" Keep in mind am supposed to be slowest TT-RS driver around so go figure...!

*2) Brake fluid* – change to something very good thus Prospeed; RBF; ENDLESS; SRF. are all worth the spend. I went ENDLESS and not even a bleed in the past 12-mths. We track twice a month and our main tester is a Pro Racer. He does hammer the car for sure...in a nice way.

*3) Pads* - very personal really as it depends what you want. I tried a few and settled on what works well for me because of how I use the brakes. In short, any aftermarket from leading brands will work better than OEM street pads though there is always a compromise in noise; dust; wear rate of rotors.

*4) Tyres* - Leave OEM for now. You will know when your skills require improved tyres. By the time you make that judgement you can probably tell how much tyre depth is left from just sat in the driver’s seat...!!!

*5) Instructor* - MUST. You will soon find out that even a stock car is very capable and also often helps get the right mods for you and no one else. My Nick (_our tame racing driver_) or our [email protected] are often next to me on track as there is still lots to learn.

*6) All other mods*, of which there are plenty including my own product range...: Determine a need; read 1[SUP]st[/SUP] hand reviews from those who actually use their cars similar to how you wish to use yours and that is a good start as to whether the mod will meet your requirements.

All above is from 4-years of owning the TT-RS and having been through a fair bit of wholesale changes. Some mods I purchased simply failed and others work for a bit and failed. 

Some however work very well, for example I have the original prototype IC by Pro-alloy and it solved the noticeable power lose we used to experience with the OEM IC. I have not found a need to upgrade since despite all the latest IC and their claims of improvements. 

I do really want the Wagner EVO v2 though, it just looks very nice however my greatest fear is that it performs worse than the Pro-Alloy prototype I have so am not changing even though my desire is very strong. I may just buy the Wagner and keep it in my study to look at...just looks very well made.

FWIW, I am now reverting a number of aftermarket purchase back to OEM as the aftermarket items have failed too many times for my liking and the OEM seem to work best for me. 

By the time we are done, we will just have aftermarket pads; Pro-alloy IC; REVO S2 map and offcourse my own designed MSS Spring Kit. Everything else on the car will be OEM.

The other aftermarket items left in situ (VibraTEch lower engine mount; Haldex Competition Controller) are simply because over the 4-years of use they simply perform and have not failed. When they do, am going back to OEM also.

Car is on 54k miles - great proportion of that mileage is track/testing miles by me and various testers.

Hope above is useful and I promise you, this is one of my shorter responses...


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> We track a great deal and what I know today has changed my views considerably and here goes some 1st hand experience.
> 
> *1) Aftermarket Bushes* – did not work for us. We destroyed two sets and the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] set is collecting dust in the workshop. We went OEM over 8-mths ago and the car felt nice and tight as before and these OEM are still holding up and not torn up.
> 
> ...



Can you share what aftermarket parts you have removed and why? It would be a great help to newer TT-RS owners to know what works and what doesn't. Your list of what does work is great, but we are all tempted by the shining parts which the aftermarket turns out for these cars


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

hightechrdn said:


> Can you share what aftermarket parts you have removed and why? It would be a great help to newer TT-RS owners to know what works and what doesn't. Your list of what does work is great, but we are all tempted by the shining parts which the aftermarket turns out for these cars


*

NOTE*: The account below is 1st hand experience in the main. Wherever possible I will supply exact account of the net effect from these 1st hand experiences. This does not mean that your 1st hand experience will mirror mine. I accept they may be different simply because our cars may be entirely different. 

My car is a TT-RS Roadster weighing 1,566kg and with my ‘lighter’ Goddess-like physic (_you there at the back, stop giggling...!_) of 100kg added we have 1,666kg of weight that needs to be managed on streets and track. Where I carry passengers as we often do on track then we have probably 1,766kg of weight.


OK, about time I did one of my '_War & Peace_'...here goes... 

*1) Bushes - SuperPro* front kit with anti-lift fitted in 2011. I was not convinced of the benefit of the rear kit hence I omitted doing that and that was a wise decision for me. 

The main reason why we went this way was to gain more front end Camber. Sure, the car felt great when these went on at first however over time understeer was still an issue. A routine inspection in 2012 found these to have torn badly and probably had been like that for a while. We replaced these and in August 2012 the 2nd set were also torn though not as bad. We went back to OEM and all has been well since with regular inspection after each track session. No tear and car feels tight as it did when I initially fitted the SuperPro. 

Ohh, with the SuperPro bushes there was a squeak from the front that was always there when the car was cold and only went away when the car warmed up...it just really annoyed me for a while and when we went back to OEM bushes guess what?...yep, no noise...BLISS...!

*2) ARBs *(H&R): These are only off because of the work done with MSS. Simple maths calculations tells me that the OEM bar was more than sufficient and that has been verified by a number of people who have purchased the MSS kit with OEM bars. Again, you can actually live with the aftermarket ARBs though it is just not necessary. If you have it and MSS then set it to soft all round. 

When you do speak to knowledgeable tuners with multi-platform experience, ARBs tends to be one of the very last things they promote and with good reason...as a fine tuning tool coming after suspension upgrades in the way of springs; Coilovers; etc. It really should not be the first thing to put on a car. Its effect is 'ON/OFF' (_if you want less roll it is OK by toggling between the various stiffness assuming there are multiple holes to allow that 'fine tuning'...however once set that is it...it is not progressive in the way springs can be...IF too stiff rear/front you oversteer/understeer...if not stiff enough it simply has little or no effect_ - as I say, it is a great fine tuning tool to get things right assuming you do not want a perm solution by selecting the correct spring rates for your car. The reason you may opt not to increase spring rate may be down to the dampers MAXing out on compression or rebound...MagneRide is remarkably very capable of some very high spring rates...I know this hence MSS) hence it is great for fine tuning and simply not *THE* solution. 

I made the mistake of upgrading the ARBs first like most people only to now come to the painful conclusion that the OEM works just fine. The handling issues is fixed with other more effective upgrades which also improves on ride comfort for streets and composure for track or daily driving in the dry and especially on wet tarmac. 

You really do not want a potent powerhouse such as our S2 cars with wayward handling pummelling our poor surfaced streets in the wet.

If you do not have an upgraded ARB and want MSS or any suspension upgrade for that matter then I would advice negating an ARBs/RSB upgrade for now, you just do not need its effect until you need to do further '_fine tuning_' armed with real-life experience. If you do then you simply do not have enough spring rate and springs upgrade may be a better choice than stiffer bars, imho and especially on the fronts.

A product I really like is the Koenigsegg Triple Suspension which they developed with Ohlins...brilliant concept. Triplex is on par, imo, to the engine mounts implemented by Porsche on the 997.2 3.8 GTRS which uses the MagneRide technology...clever stuff..!

Another thing I hated was the squeak from the front end bushes when we first fitted the H&R ARBs. To get rid of that squeak required rubbing the protective paint off the ARB where the bushes sit...which in time means rust '_could_' form on that section of the bar.

*3) Pagid Pads*: For me Pagid pads (RS4-2; RS-19) did not work so well for me when we went to track though note that pads are very personal. These pads faded quickly and that was in the early days of me going on track when I was even slower than am reputed to be now...haha. Apologise, I keep saying that because of one particular poster here and he pokes fun at my driving and I simply oblige in joining him...it is all harmless fun though and Jason (user _Poverty_) knows that.

*4) PFC01 Pads*: PFC01, too strong for track and these also generated too much dust and too much heat. They also make noise up to 3k from new then nothing till they die. The one great trait about PFC pads that I have had 1[SUP]st[/SUP] hand experience of is that they perform right down to the backing plate. The PFC01 were strong from new to 2mm pad material left when I replaced them. 

I went to PFC08 and these were just right in use. Their release post application are just as great as PFC01 and the stopping power is also great. Heat is not as bad as PFC01 and they do cool down seemingly quicker – one cool down lap at 60mph does the job. They are also better street pads compared to PFC01 which were just too strong and if you slammed on them the following car would simply ram you as the car simply STOPS with PFC01...no dramas...I called it ‘_Hand of God_’ pads and indeed they were. You will need to replace calliper dust seals at each pad replacement because of the heat killing the dust seals. 

*5) Brake fluid*: ATE Super Blue did not work for us. They were great with OEM pads however step up to race pads and they quickly overheat. Repeated bleed did not work. Once they overheat they are no use. I did tons of research and narrowed my options down to Prospeed and ENDLESS. These were much respected. 

My 1[SUP]st[/SUP] choice was Prospeed however I could not get these in the UK. I settled for ENDLESS RF650 because most reports indicated that they survive some of the more aggressive pads out there; last longer in between bleeds; came in 0.5ltr bottles and not one report of fade or needing a bleed because of overheating. They also worked well progressively whereas most fluids were digressive. This last point sold me on them and they have just been magical. They lasted over 15k with PFC01 and when I replaced those pads for PFC08 I just did not even bleed...I left the fluid in and we are still going strong...the fluid just works after repeated use. 

Another trait is after a long session on track when they simply maintain that strong pedal feel, back in to the pits, have a rest as we do then back on track and it just requires one dab on the pedal to seemingly wake the fluid up and the pedal is back to OEM firmness again. The ATE Blue required repeated pumping of the pedal for the first two laps to get the firmness back. ENDLESS RF650 works well for me.

*6) Aftermarket rear discs (rotors):* I did go for a change on the rear mainly to match the front drilled holes and though the discs did not fail me and I was impressed, I opted for OEM in the way of RS6 C5 335mm discs and they work very well. On the fronts, I opted for RS6 C6 V10 390mm discs and they just simply perform no issues. 

First set lasted 22k and 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] set is on 17k and looks good for another 10k easily. There is so much said about OEM not being that good however they work well for me. I note many people having brake issues with aftermarket discs (_rotors_) however since I removed the TT-RS 370mm and went for the 390mm we have had no brake issues – thus no fade; no warp; no premature disc wear. 

It simply works time and again...after much repeated track use and I have done nothing special in way of cooling...yet... 

*7) Tyres*: I have not played much with tyres - I went from Pirelli PZero to PS2 and now have PSS...each change has been a progress. I am happy with PSS and just getting to learn how to run them at their MAX capability using the Vbox tool. In short, I am not running these tyres to their capability in terms of the G-force they can manage before slipping. IMHO, you need to be at that point before moving on to an improved set of tyres. No point going to slick tyres when you are just not working the street tyres hard enough...you will not be quicker because you have the best of everything...trust me, I speak from experience. 

*8) Racelogic Video Vbox Lite: *We now have this great tool and using the data it provides we can determine a number of things that we need to look at. In fact, the Video Vbox will be fitted to all my sports cars by default. You really learn more as a driver being able to watch _YOU _driving and I mean in-car footage and also offcourse front & rear view of how you are performing on streets and track. 

I wish I had bought the Vbox before starting modding and also going on track as I suspect it would have changed my route of what to change on the car...for example, I pay less attention to power now because we really have plenty with S2 map - prior I was power hungary though I just do not need it post S2; the handling changes we have made is in the right direction as the G-meter from the Vbox indicates the limit of the tyres (_PSS are easily 1G tyres_) are not being reached at all so here I can learn to push more at various points on track; brakes are more than adequate and in fact with Vbox we now know we can go more aggressive pads on rears and drop down a touch on fronts if we wanted to shift a little more brake bias to rears. The net effect is that we can carry more speeds in the corners. 

All these things became apparent when we had the right tool in Vbox – great piece of kit and IMHO a great investment especially as it is transportable so when you sell the car, take it out and use it in the next car. Another great thing about Vbox is watching our ‘_tame_’ racing driver laps against mine. Where he makes up time is in braking and cornering...exactly where I lose time. On the straights I get up to similar speeds as he does...proof that the S2 map is good enough. 

*9) MagneRide dampers:* My favourite OEM item and like many people I was very close to changing these to KW Clubsport ultimately and am pleased I did not. Taking in isolation as dampers and looking at their maths, they are exceedingly good. The technology itself is very capable and cleverer than BWI Group or Audi have marketed to us to date (_I speak from being privy to some key data and I wish BWI Group would share these info but they just wouldn’t, which I fail to understand and it is a shame..._). 

Anyway, the dampers work very well and Ferrari have implemented it well on their platforms and so has Audi on the R8 however on the TT platform it was not implemented well...hopefully the MK3 with Gen3 of the dampers will be different (Olivier...!, am counting on your promise here after what I proved on Gen2...). 

My own product gives the TT platform what the R8; Porsche (_engine mounts only on 3.8 997.2 GT3RS_); Corvette Z1; Ferrari 458 & California (_now that they have sorted the electronics issues_); Land Rover Evoque all enjoy. 

Yep, there is a reason why these major players have kept their faith in the MagneRide dampers and if you have it on the TT you are very fortunate IMO...we help you realise what you have with a very simple change with MSS...or you can spend twice as much on alternative options...your choice... 


*10) Clutch:* Am on 54.7k miles of what has been hard use and the car is driven by many people, it is a development car and my own personal car. The car is over 4-years old and still on original clutch. It works fine on a S2 map for me. Cannot comment on a S3 car though I suspect it will be 'OK'. 

On unsprung weight...well, show me the maths and I will be convinced otherwise am not sold on its effect on our already heavy cars. If the cars weighed less than 1,000kg then the effects will be more pronounced and the maths I did supports that. Cars weighing 1,500kg+ as in my case (I did try to get mine to 2,000kg however I failed miserably...!!!), the maths tells me that you really have to go to extreme unsprung weight loss for the dampers to feel the effects and that means go straight for Ceramics discs...and lightweight wheels (8kg per corner like the OZ Racing _superforgiata_)...in essence, anything short of 10kg per corner savings is placebo at play and not effective as per the maths... 

On the same race circuit on the same day under similar conditions our Nick does 1:20 time and again in my 1,566kg Roadster S2 running 400BHP with street tyres and dustbin sized rotors and yet he struggles to breach 1:22 time per lap with a Sedan which _weighs 200kg less_ with Toyo 888 tyres; lightweight wheels though, granted, running '_only_' 360BHP. 

Am not sure 40BHP extra though weighing 200kg more as mine does gets you 2-secs a lap quicker...Ohh, the sedan has KW v3 fitted so not a shabby chassis either.... 

So am not sold on weight lose unless you go extreme. The maths does not support it for the street cars I have looked at...You only just have to look at something like the GT-R and you can clearly see that you can be heavy and still perform using other assets like power; transmission; chassis etc.

On the whole, this car is by a long way the most reliable car we have had and there was a garage full when this turned up...it has saved us a little fortune in repair bills as OEM items simply work and the brief excursion in to aftermarket found some products to be not so good however others have been very good - measurable improvement over OEM. 

Anyway, and unsurprisingly, I digress...my apologise though I hope some of the above is useful to others.

William


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

Thanks William!

I for one enjoy your 'War and Peace' posts. Others may give you a hard time, but they should be ignored


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

TTRS race car is fwd instead of 4wd as the added weight of the haldex system makes the car slower whilst running 380ps. On that basis alone I cannot agree with your analysis that weight reduction doesn't help.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

I thought it ran fwd because that was the class rules for VLN


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

JohnLZ7W said:


> I thought it ran fwd because that was the class rules for VLN


The Audi TTRS Race Car is a production based touring car, built around a factory Audi TTRS 2.5 TFSI. The powerplant is a factory Audi 2.5 TFSI engine, with a slight bump in power, and an overhauled cooling and breather system. 372 horsepower might not sound fast, but the race car tips the scales at just 2,464 pounds, or over 820 pounds lighter than a production car.

As you may have noticed, the TTRS Race Car is a bit wider than stock... Sporting a mixture of aluminum, carbon, aramid, and glass fiber bodywork, it is roughly 5.5" wider than the production TTRS. Audi Sport engineers spent countless hours in the wind tunnel to perfect the aerodynamics of the car. The splitter, dive planes, huge wing, and remainder of the aerodynamics are capable of providing up to 1,500 pounds of downforce, depending on speed.

The front brakes, massive 11" wide magnesium wheels, racing ABS, traction control, and a handful of suspension components were borrowed from the Audi R8 LMS Ultra. Oh, and that pesky Haldex all wheel drive system from the production Audi TTRS was tossed in favor of a race engineered front wheel drive system.

That's right, folks. This Audi TTRS Race Car is FWD. Not for class regulations, or homologization requirements, either. It's front wheel drive because it's faster.

While this shocking news may upset some of you, we hope you can move past it. The car is really, really fast. It is the only front wheel drive car to qualify on pole and finish at the top of the podium in VLN series races.


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

hightechrdn said:


> Thanks William!
> 
> I for one enjoy your 'War and Peace' posts. Others may give you a hard time, but they should be ignored


 Thanks hightechrdn. 
I use to do these '_War & Peace'_ on VGAOC based on 1st hand experience NOT what I read about and was slammed by a great deal of people who based all their facts from two sources whom we have now come to discredit because they ultimately did not know everything.

In fact, MSS was as a results of ignoring many (_including my own tuner, [email protected]_) who claimed that I could not make a heavy active damped Roadster perform just as well as a well sorted passive Coilover (KW v3 and KW Clubsport) equipped light weight road (_NOT RACE_ CAR) car and I have proven them wrong ten folds...on track..! 

Knowledge is not in the hands of just two people...it can be gained from 1st hand experience and that is a fact...!


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

Poverty said:


> *TTRS race car* is fwd instead of 4wd as the added weight of the haldex system makes the car slower whilst running 380ps. On that basis alone I cannot agree with your analysis that weight reduction doesn't help.


 See item in bold and I hope you read your response before replying...

My 1st hand experience and the notes above regarding weight clearly states ROAD CARS. 

Jason, it is easy to make a RACE CAR go very fast, in fact quicker than its equivalent road car... 

Reducing weight on a road car that is not built with that in mind will always be a challenge hence the gains one seeks can be achieved using other methods and weight lose is not always one...the maths proves that.

You really do not have to go on theory. Just get the calculator out, work out the possible gains one can achieve reducing weight on a road car and you will come to an obvious conclusion...when these things leave the factory as ROAD CARS, they really are built for that purpose...disregarding safety for a moment.

Your response based on a comparison with a RACE CAR is clearly flawed...keep it simple, the OP asked a question relating to a ROAD CAR. My ‘_War & Peace_’ response is based on 1st hand experience of a ROAD CAR. 

Try and keep your next response to 1st hand experience of a ROAD CAR and we will all be on the same page else one of us will be on the wrong page... 

Thanks


----------



## mageus (Sep 1, 2004)

I primarily track, not AutoX. In order of most important/cost efficient:

= necessary =

- tires - Stock Toyos suxorz. STFA for recommendations. If you can afford it, get separate track wheels (18") for the best performance. I run Hankook RS-3 and swear by them. I hear the Nittos are also great track tires.

- brake fluid - ATE Super Blue/200 should be fine for AutoX. For the track, use better stuff (Brembo, Motul, etc)

- pads - Stock pads have fair bite but can't stand the heat, and will glaze with hard use. I'm a fan of Carbotech. XP12 up front, XP 8 in the back (don't use any more in the back; they won't get hot enough).

- rotors - Unlike most on this board. I find the stock rotors fine. Not sure if it's my braking style; I brake late and super hard, trail brake, then get off the pedal, which gives less fade. In any case, the aftermarket alternatives are $$$.

- alignment - Max the camber out as much as they can bang on it. Slight toe-out. STFA for numbers.

= cheap =

- ARB - Helps greatly with the understeer issue. Cheap and easy to install. I have H&R, works fine. Whatever William says, they are a major upgrade from the stock bar. However, if changing springs, see below.

- data logger - IOS / android software paired with an external Bluetooth GPS receiver. I use TrackMaster for android. $10 for the app and $65 for the GPS. I don't use half the functions, but it has helped me greatly with my driving.

= $$$ =

- shocks - William's progressive springs are getting rave reviews. If you have the money, get them. Don't bother with adjustable coilovers since Mag-Ride is awesome. With these springs you may not need an ARB, but since I don't have the springs I can't comment.

- ECU tune - the car has so much power, I'm not sure how much more you need for AutoX. For the track there is definite benefit.

- Haldex tune - People who have it say it transforms the car and eliminates understeer. Others are skeptical and feels it's placebo. For the same money I would do William's shocks first and try the car out. If you still need performance and have the $$$ to burn . . .

= others =

- 42DD shifter bushings - really tighten up the shifter. They don't increase performance, but help you to not miss shifts. Again, cheap and easy to install.

- dogbone mount insert - tightens up the drivetrain and makes shifts feel crisper. May be a placebo effect. Again, cheap, easy to install, and reversible if you don't like it. Not a priority, but if you're throwing $$$ at mods, why not?

- exhaust - No practical performance benefit, purely for sound. Stock exhaust is decent. Borla seems to be the favorite aftermarket part.

- stereo - +20Hp when playing "Danger Zone". If you want decent sound, duly remove and sell the OEM POS and install a HU and amp. Stock speakers are decent, but the sub needs upgrading.


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

Poverty said:


> ...
> That's right, folks. This Audi TTRS Race Car is FWD. Not for class regulations, or homologization requirements, either. It's front wheel drive because it's faster.
> 
> ....


 Jason, I think you are mistaken... - see download. This downloads the 2012 VLN regulations and on page 34 under article 13.2.2 you will note a weight classification which is tied to engine size. 

The TT-RS Race car with its 2.5L engine *has to* meet a minimum weight requirement of 1,111kg to compete. There may be other regulations which forced Audi to remove the 4-WD system however the PDF is 53 pages long and I have not gone through it properly yet...just a quick scan about regulations gave me facts.

Unlike your focus on "_It's front wheel drive because it's faster_", which I doubt was the driver for Audi not using the 4-WD system, I see the use of FWD as a cost saving move as racing can be expensive and I suspect the factory built race cars had cost in mind and not "_It's front wheel drive because it's faster_"... 

Audi built its racing reputation on 4-WD...let us keep that in mind.

I always prefer to seek out the facts and nothing else, brings more credibility to the table when facts are presented.


William


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

mageus said:


> ...
> = others =
> 
> - 42DD shifter bushings - really tighten up the shifter. They don't increase performance, but help you to not miss shifts. Again, cheap and easy to install.


 Agree with your views and how I forgot this item Lord only knows but then again we have done lots to the car.

Got to say, your views on this item is spot-on...no, it will not get you more BHP however it will reduce the missed gears especially from 3>2 which on stock I kept messing up. 

The feel for me post changes is that of a hydraulic-type gear selector...nice and solid feel requiring a firm throw to get in to gears.

This cost effective mod I picked up from JC on VAGOC forum and best of all, John at 42DD is a true gentleman to deal with...a simple looking product; yet effective; well made and John is a great guy to deal with.

He and I worked on identifying the correct parts for him to pull together a TTRS kit as the one JC used were from the Golf MK5/MK6 and needed some modifications to make it fit the TT-RS. John sent me a bunch of parts and I managed to get the different parts fitted then feedback to him. 

John in-turn pulled a TT-SR kit together based on my feedback. Mind you, he is a busy man and I had to pursue him a few times to make time to get the kit & codes on his web site.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> *
> 
> NOTE*: The account below is 1st hand experience in the main. Wherever possible I will supply exact account of the net effect from these 1st hand experiences. This does not mean that your 1st hand experience will mirror mine. I accept they may be different simply because our cars may be entirely different.
> 
> ...


Hi William.
regarding your weight comments.
The F type S was just tested at the Hockenheimring with a lap time of 1:14.7 secs
That's quicker than a TT RS roadster,SLK 55 AMG, and it weighed in at 1758kg with 380 ps and 460 nm
Obviously it still manages to handle very well,even though it's carrying all that weight and is a very impressive sports car.
Has to be one of the most desirable roadsters on the market in it's price range.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN5qCZ-hY6s
Lotus much faster in the bends than a GTR (and you see the GTR is pushed to the limits).

Lotus exige s (~240 bhp) vs GTR (100+ % more power and 70% more weight)
Lotus is based on a very old platform while the GTR have all the electronics in the world and an automatic gearbox.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

On the same ideea, the Nissan GTR is one extremely light car and lots of money were invested to make it that way: big engine, big power, 4 seats, enough space for 4, AWD, AC, Stereo, leather, huge brakes, active dumpers, good weight distribution ...

It's very hard to remove weight from the GTR because the engineers already did that with lightweight parts. So we say "weight is not everything" while the Audi engineers and Nissan did their best to remove it and come with powerfull AWD very light (and cheap considering the development process).

When you try to remove weight from the TT RS you will discover that AUDI already did that!


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Jason, I think you are mistaken... - see download. This downloads the 2012 VLN regulations and on page 34 under article 13.2.2 you will note a weight classification which is tied to engine size.
> 
> The TT-RS Race car with its 2.5L engine *has to* meet a minimum weight requirement of 1,111kg to compete. There may be other regulations which forced Audi to remove the 4-WD system however the PDF is 53 pages long and I have not gone through it properly yet...just a quick scan about regulations gave me facts.
> 
> ...



Errrrrrrr Audi cant make the car lighter than 1,111kg, so how exactly would that stop them from making the car 4wd??????? With haldex it would be roughly 70-100kg heavier!!!!!! So therefore you are incorrect and have misinterpreted what you have read.

Cost saving...haldex isnt a expensive system. Also haldex makes the car slower in the straights, if fwd provides enough grip for the power there is no need to carry around the extra dead weight or transmission losses

Anyway, everyone know lighter = faster unless the car has horrible weight distribution and you are removing all the weight from the wrong end.

HOWEVER, proper race engineers when questioned in regards to the ttrs, still say that removing weight albeit even from un-ideal places in the ttrs is still better than not removing the weight at all.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

jaybyme said:


> Hi William.
> regarding your weight comments.
> The F type S was just tested at the Hockenheimring with a lap time of 1:14.7 secs
> That's quicker than a TT RS roadster,SLK 55 AMG, and it weighed in at 1758kg with 380 ps and 460 nm
> ...


The jag does look nice, but would be faster with less weight.....

991 carrera S 400ps 1400kg does the same track in 1min 10.4 sec 

I cant believe we are actually entertaining the idea that lighter isnt faster.....:screwy:


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Jason, it's the first time in 2 years when we both agree on the same subject 

William is saying that you can make a heavy car fast and you don't even need too many hp --> this is also correct and I agree with but all the records on any track in the world are hold by light and powerful cars.
I think it's best to work on everything: power, suspension, tires, weight, weight distribution, engine response ...
William --> This year I plan to go to Hungaroring ... maybe you will have a trip to add another "track" on your list. I'm dying to see your suspension in action (as I told you, I think I will go this route after seeing how the car performs on a real racetrack).


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Lighter certainly is faster but getting enough weight out of a road car, that will continue to be used as a road car is very difficult. As you said, the 911 was 300kg lighter than the Jag, I'm not sure how you'd even get just 100kg out of the TT RS


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

JohnLZ7W said:


> Lighter certainly is faster but getting enough weight out of a road car, that will continue to be used as a road car is very difficult. As you said, the 911 was 300kg lighter than the Jag, I'm not sure how you'd even get just 100kg out of the TT RS


100kg out the TT is easy. 250kg now that's more challenging and would mean getting rid of creature comforts


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

I think 220lbs would be a stretch for a road car while keeping it comfortable.
40lbs for wheels
20lbs for brakes
30lbs for ti exhaust?
40lbs for seats, not fixed back its a daily driver

That's just 130lbs, anything I'm missing?


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

Poverty said:


> The jag does look nice, but would be faster with less weight.....
> 
> 991 carrera S 400ps 1400kg does the same track in 1min 10.4 sec
> 
> I cant believe we are actually entertaining the idea that lighter isnt faster.....:screwy:


,

not saying that at all.Just posting that some heavy cars can still be faster than some lighter more powerful cars.
As F type against SLK


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

JohnLZ7W said:


> I think 220lbs would be a stretch for a road car while keeping it comfortable.
> 40lbs for wheels
> 20lbs for brakes
> 30lbs for ti exhaust?
> ...


I worked out I can remove approx 100kg via:

Lightweight battery 
Daveb 2 piece discs
Ti exhaust
Recaro pole positions
Rear seat removal


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

jaybyme said:


> ,
> 
> not saying that at all.Just posting that some heavy cars can still be faster than some lighter more powerful cars.
> As F type against SLK


Well yeah you will always find some examples that go against the trend


----------



## NamJa (Jul 31, 2012)

cipsony said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN5qCZ-hY6s
> Lotus much faster in the bends than a GTR (and you see the GTR is pushed to the limits).
> 
> Lotus exige s (~240 bhp) vs GTR (100+ % more power and 70% more weight)
> Lotus is based on a very old platform while the GTR have all the electronics in the world and an automatic gearbox.


I will point out that the GTR was more than 10 seconds per lap faster than the Exige S (a more apples to apples comparison since both cars were stock) at VIR in the Car and Driver Lightning Lap comparison
http://www.caranddriver.com/feature...lete-lightning-lap-times-2006-to-2013-page-10


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

It is much easier to quote figures off the NET than actually be a witness on the ground.

We see so many cars turn up on track and with all the weight taken out evident by an empty cabin bar the drivers lightweight carbon seats; huge BHP numbers quoted in passing conversations; passive Coilover kits yet in our overweight Roadster we compete well and have FUN and in some cases we have the air con keeping us cool when the roof is not down; stereo playing...heck, my gym bag is often in the boot... 

Still have not seen at 1st hand nor heard/read any credible views on our travels to support the notion that losing weight on a road car by default is *THE* only option should you want to have fun as, I suspect, the OP intends to do on his track trip...!

Anyway, we digress as the OP wanted a 1st hand view and that I have given him along with Mageus and others...notably US/Canada based. 

Would be great if the EU guys commenting can give same account to help the OP...this is a VMG forum after all and not the FB Vagtuning/VAGOC TT forum which was a little too focused on lesser relevant points hence those who want to learn a little more spend less time there and more over here and QW...to name but two very engaging and knowledgeable forums for VAG...there is a reason why Eibach backed MSS KITS sponsors VMG and a few others to come... 

William


----------



## MSS Automotive (Mar 20, 2013)

jaybyme said:


> Hi William.
> regarding your weight comments.
> The F type S was just tested at the Hockenheimring with a lap time of 1:14.7 secs
> That's quicker than a TT RS roadster,SLK 55 AMG, and it weighed in at 1758kg with 380 ps and 460 nm
> ...


 Yep, I read that too and it did make me smile.

Increasingly, car designers are getting smarter in using weight to retain the need to corner at higher speed as a lighter car may be able to...there are some clever stuff built in to these newer cars and I suspect that will continue for a while to come...balancing the need for speed and keeping those focussed on safety happy.

Sure, we all want lighter; powerful engine; perfect weight distribution cars however from a design point of view that is often expensive to achieve even with clever packaging and not many people are prepared to pay for Quality engineering...

What we now have is that designers having the mindset that weight just needs to be managed by the use of clever engineering...most car manufacturers bring new models out which weigh more than previous models and counter that with more power; better setup chassis; improved transmission; better tyre contact patch etc...

All of these make to improve performance though you will note weight gain. I see weight as just another manageable product on a car just as tyres; brakes etc...and will simply not compromise the rigidity of a road car by unnecessarily removing weight in the pursuit of 0.001% in speed gain or cornering G.

We just got to keep things in to perspective, we are driving around in ROAD CARS and not RACE CARS. 



The argument often put up by those clearly not thinking is often pitting road cars against race cars and just not realising the flaws in their point of view.


The basic principles applied to Race cars are entirely different to a Road car...to even attempt to correlate the two is nothing short of misunderstanding those basic principles...IMHO, their uses are as follows...;




 RACE = built to go very quick over a short period of use...thus up to 24hrs in single use then it is all change...used parts are replaced before next use...assuming the car makes it in one piece...!





 Road car = built to withstand repeated use (_abuse, if you have kids as I do_...) for a longer period of use...thus over years of use with nothing more than oil change once a year etc...!


...S I M P L E S, what am I missing here?

Great debate though as often is the case, rarely does it throw up anything new...I, however, would like to apologise to the OP for the inevitable route taken of ‘_lighter is faster by default_’...which, offcourse, is simply not true for modern cars.

Am sure the OP just wants his track event to be FUN more than him coming backing later quoting _extraordinary lap times_ that may please but a very few if any...!

To that end, this post ends my comment as I really have typed more than enough information...all based on 1st hand experience.

William


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> It is much easier to quote figures off the NET than actually be a witness on the ground.
> 
> We see so many cars turn up on track and with all the weight taken out evident by an empty cabin bar the drivers lightweight carbon seats; huge BHP numbers quoted in passing conversations; passive Coilover kits yet in our overweight Roadster we compete well and have FUN and in some cases we have the air con keeping us cool when the roof is not down; stereo playing...heck, my gym bag is often in the boot...
> 
> ...


LOL.

Figures off the net, as in done by the same driver at the same track, are more conclusive than what you will find on your average track day. Alot of people out there cant drive their highly tuned cars properly or are not willing to push too hard as they stand to lose too much.

I recall your brands hatch laptime. You are still lapping slower than stripped out renault clio 172 hatchbacks. Thats a 170hp car weighing 1000-1100kg or so, seems weight is definetly making a difference.

Lighter cars are typically more fun out on track that heavier ones too, this again shouldnt be disputed, there are some exclusions to this fact, but generally its true. Dead weight is a killer out on track and numbs the experience.

The facebook group vagtuning is the place to be if you require technical help, more indepth knowledge about products from the actual designers/sellers, and if you require set up assistance. Having several calibrators, engineers, race engine builders, pro/semi pro race drivers, race engineers and race team principle. Having said all that we are selective with who we let in as its not the place to post stuff you will generally find the answer to on the usual forums. We aim to remain very technical above of whats on the open forum.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Yep, I read that too and it did make me smile.
> 
> Increasingly, car designers are getting smarter in using weight to retain the need to corner at higher speed as a lighter car may be able to...there are some clever stuff built in to these newer cars and I suspect that will continue for a while to come...balancing the need for speed and keeping those focussed on safety happy.
> 
> ...


Actually, all manufacturers number 1 aim is now to make their newer generation of cars lighter.

New VW polo lighter than previous gen, golf/a3 lighter than before, cayman/911 lighter than before. A6, lighter than before, next gen TT, etc etc all looking to shed weight. Why? To improve dynamics, cut fuel consumption, and cut engine emissions.

There are some cars that buck then trend, 991 GT3, thats 30kg heavier than previous due to the addition of dual clutch gearbox and 4 wheel steering. Porsche said the extra technology made up for the lap time loss of the extra weight so they allowed it. Everywhere else in the car though they have been deploying lightweight technologies.

Racecar vs Roadcar. You are very wrong on alot of points. Changing every mechanical component on a racecar between race meets is a LUXURY of only a few very rich teams, and generally reserved to manufactured backed efforts, and race series of the very highest tier. Most race teams will only change the bare minium, its just too expensive to do otherwise.

Anyway, you really need to quit this notion that lighter isnt faster, have you actually looked to whats happening around you??? 250bhp cars weighing 750kg costing 70k are hands down beating your 550hp GTR's and 700hp Lambos without needing all the fancy electronics and diffs. But lightweight isnt fast right :screwy:


----------



## pal (Aug 16, 2000)

TT-RS Racecar - built specifically for just the VLN race at the ring

2425lbs
380hp/390lb-ft
Suspension bits from R8 LMS ultra race car
305 width slicks on 11x18" magnesium wheels
1500lb rear down force from wing at speed
Proper aero setup

And I am sure the suspension is stiff as bones and configured to negate a lot of FWD issues. Plus the car is setup with those massive pirelli slicks so grip is not an issue.

I don't think anyone is arguing that lighter is faster. But if you take 2 stock TT-RSes and remove haldex from one and race them against each other, chances are the AWD car will fare better in almost all cases as it will more effectively put power down and exit corners faster.

Now if you put slicks on your stock FWD TT-RS and leave street tires on the AWD one, things start to get interesting ... 

Now if you take your FWD TT-RS and dump $200K into it to make it a purpose built race car with the intention of leaving it FWD, then its a whole different animal.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

pal said:


> TT-RS Racecar - built specifically for just the VLN race at the ring
> 
> 2425lbs
> 380hp/390lb-ft
> ...


In a road car is quattro faster, yes, on a semi slick downforce monster it becomes a hinderane.

Anyway, Audi TT ultra, they cut weight out the car and it was massively faster around the track. /thread


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Poverty said:


> Anyway, Audi TT ultra, they cut weight out the car and it was massively faster around the track. /thread


And if it was possible for us to get our TTs down to the, was 2700lbs, of the Ultra then it would make a difference. But for most of us it'd be a struggle to get even 5-7% out and keep the car livable as a daily driver.

Is lighter faster? Absolutely. Is it possible to get sufficient weight out of a TTRS that's primarily driven on the street to make an appreciable difference? Not really IMO.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

JohnLZ7W said:


> And if it was possible for us to get our TTs down to the, was 2700lbs, of the Ultra then it would make a difference. But for most of us it'd be a struggle to get even 5-7% out and keep the car livable as a daily driver.
> 
> Is lighter faster? Absolutely. Is it possible to get sufficient weight out of a TTRS that's primarily driven on the street to make an appreciable difference? Not really IMO.


puckos has got his 500hp TT down to 1200kg with half a tank.

Mine weighed 1460kg with quarter tank.

I cant remember how much weight cipsony has removed from his TT but it certainly seems to work as his times obliterates that of other LOBA TTRS drivers.

Obviously if bucket seats arent your thing and you dont want to lose the rear seats then it will be a struggle to remove substantial weight. It means you would look elsewhere ie wheels, brakes, exhaust and that would be a mega expensive exercise to lose 50kg which I agree wouldnt really be noticeable. 100kg is noticeable for sure though.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Puckos is 2.0 tfsi so this is why he could get that light --> Impressive though
Mine is not the lightest (it's very close to RobJ car weight as I still kept the full bose audio + AC + satnav + ...) and much heavier than those UK racing cars that have no interior / audio / sat nav ...
Stock + full tank of fuel but no driver, my car weighted 1525 Kg on 3 different scale --> not that light as some expected.


----------



## smack_ttrs (Mar 24, 2013)

Poverty said:


> to lose 50kg which I agree wouldnt really be noticeable. 100kg is noticeable for sure though.


i know in the evo 100lbs is worth a full second at t-hil(track in norcal). back to back sessions with a 200lb passenger added almost exactly two seconds to a 2 minute lap track. also made a kink that is no problem taking flat to an actual corner with the car pushing out up on the curbing.

the only test i never had a chance to try was to add hp to see how much extra it took to get the 2 seconds back. that would have been interesting. 

it's unfortunate that there are so many different variables when throwing out all these magazine lap times of different cars. what kind of tires is the f-type on for instance? just going from a "normal" street tire to something like an rs-3 or ad08 will pick up almost 2 seconds on a 2-minute track. and that's not getting into ringer tires like sport cups or a048's that come on some cars from the factory. there's another second or two.

sure power will get you easy time under acceleration but weight still works against you on tires and brakes. 
one issue is that power is easier to see a benefit over weight as the driver's level drops. meaning anyone can mash the throttle and pick up time with more power. with weight it takes a whole different level of commitment to extract time from increased grip or shorter braking distances. getting more corner speed over what you're used to without throwing the car at the scenery or braking a few feet later while you're driving straight at a tire wall is not something everyone is completely comfortable with. pressing the go pedal after you are through that corner is much easier/safer/more comfortable.

you can't cheat physics.


----------



## pal (Aug 16, 2000)

What was OP's thread about? I forget :beer:

Ah yes, for occasional track use he needs to strip interior, put race seats, dump the haldex system, put super wide wheels with fender flares, a huge rear wing and a stiff suspension for starters


----------



## CarbonRS (Jul 15, 2013)

pal said:


> What was OP's thread about? I forget :beer:
> 
> Ah yes, for occasional track use he needs to strip interior, put race seats, dump the haldex system, put super wide wheels with fender flares, a huge rear wing and a stiff suspension for starters


 It just got silly after the first page, but a fun read.

Thanks for sharing your experience guys, those who have run the car a lot and tried different mods... that is valuable info and to admit you bought a pile mods that suck vs OEM, that might be a first for a car forum 

It is good to hear there essentially isn't any glaring problems tracking this car stock. (Besides regular prep tires/brakes/fluids) One of the selling points of the car was I can fit in the stock seats without my helmet hitting the roof and the platform looked easy to work on. I'm seriously thinking about cutting my break in period short and doing my first oil change at 4000KM. 8000KM on break in oil is ridiculous anyway.


----------



## IPSA (Dec 25, 2011)

I have run a VoltPhreaks battery for 2 years on the street as a DD. No problems over 30 lbs of savings.


----------

