# Proof That Rev D DV Holds Boost Less Effectively on 06 GTI



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Alright, so here are graphical results of Vag Com logs I took from using Rev C and Rev D Diverter Valves on my 06 GTI

The Pressures are in mbar, the graphs are intended to be compared to one another.

Notice how Rev D Lags behind rev C in both peak boost, and rpm to achieve peak boost


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

FamousAmos7 said:


> Alright, so here are graphical results of Vag Com logs I took from using Rev C and Rev D Diverter Valves on my 06 GTI
> 
> The Pressures are in mbar, the graphs are intended to be compared to one another.
> 
> Notice how Rev D Lags behind rev C in both peak boost, and rpm to achieve peak boost


Oh...I would never have guessed !!!

Does that mean everything APR says is BS then ?? 

Where is this world going to !!!???? :facepalm:


----------



## bacillus (Apr 21, 2011)

Were all the variables constant when doing those logs ie. ambient temp, barometric pressure etc?


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

The tests were run one after the other, Same Day, Same Ambient Temp, pressure, humidity.


The results may not be true for ALL GTI's, but this GTI, This rev D Valve.

I just want to give insight into why people may feel that their performance had decreased once the rev D valve went in. (people like myself)

And this is not to say that maybe all the rev D valve needs is to be used longer, give it 5000 miles or so, perhaps the plastic may end up sealing better after some wear.


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

GolfRS said:


> Oh...I would never have guessed !!!
> 
> Does that mean everything APR says is BS then ??
> 
> Where is this world going to !!!???? :facepalm:



I don't expect your average daily driver to notice the difference in acceleration when it is as small as 200 rpm or 100-200mbar of boost.

Hell, you may even be happy that the car's boost doesn't peak as high, making the HP Curve feel more smooth up to steady boost pressure.


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

FamousAmos7 said:


> I don't expect your average daily driver to notice the difference in acceleration when it is as small as 200 rpm or 100-200mbar of boost.
> 
> Hell, you may even be happy that the car's boost doesn't peak as high, making the HP Curve feel more smooth up to steady boost pressure.


There are much better ways controlling boost than losing it through the diverter valve...

I don't consider that a "plus"...


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Obviously my sarcasm isn't transported through forum text...


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

FamousAmos7 said:


> Obviously my sarcasm isn't transported through forum text...


As you will find out when APR reads your thread, it is a sensitive issue and
sarcasm might (will) not be read as such.

Do a search about Rev.D and Forge DV and you'll see what i mean....


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Trust me, I've read plenty about it. That's why I chose to go with the cheaper, OEM Solution.

It just doesn't seem to be working out for me as well as it has for others.


----------



## bacillus (Apr 21, 2011)

FamousAmos7 said:


> Trust me, I've read plenty about it. That's why I chose to go with the cheaper, OEM Solution.
> 
> It just doesn't seem to be working out for me as well as it has for others.


Looks like "in Forge we trust"...


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

well, I wonder where the problem lies... Would it be possible to lay some high temperature resistant rubber inside the DV housing for the plastic piston to butt up against (it currently seals against metal)... This should help make a better seal, I would think

Mcmaster carr sells it for 5 bucks a foot, and as long as you can custom cut it to fit correctly......

OR is the small leak part of the Rev.D valve itself.


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Use high heat adhesive backed rubber, then cement it in with high temp silicate adhesive...
That shouldn't be going anywhere.

How hot do you think that DV Valve housing gets... 300 degrees tops?


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

not to highjack it to much.... but AWE's DV does seem to hold boost better, mainly because you removing the ECU's ability to control the DV and relying on the old fashioned boost/vac.


----------



## crew219 (Oct 18, 2000)

So.... I don't see how you can consider this "proof" to be accurate.










The main problem is that your RPM start points are not the same. 

The requested boost isn't even the same. 

The last log which you posted "this should have the most weight in the discussion", the RPM points are 250rpms apart between C & D. Higher RPM start point = quicker spool. 

Frankly when I first looked at the pictures, I thought they were all "C" DV logs since you never labeled the "D" graphs. Perhaps the difference in scaling on the X axis is creating an illusion of disparity.

Dave


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Under the same load, and starting from "no boost" whether it was at 1300 or 1400rpm, the boost should pick up at the same rpms?

Moreover, maybe I should mention that while driving with the Rev.D valve, there would be a consistent Hissss sound that lasted all the way up until 3500rpm.... That sound goes away at 2600rpm with the Rev.C Valve.

Please, go take vag com logs of your own, with both Rev.C and Rev.D valves... Share with us what happened.


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

Even the Cold Rev.C Runs Peaked higher and earlier Than the Rev.D Runs. There is a trend, and this data shows it.


----------



## SleepinGLI (Jan 20, 2008)

I'm not arguing for or against anyone here...

However, when conducting an experiment involving graphs, it is best to always keep your constants, constant. If your graph is completely different to start with, then it gives the illusion that you are trying to tip the scales.


----------



## crew219 (Oct 18, 2000)

SleepinGLI said:


> I'm not arguing for or against anyone here...
> 
> *However, when conducting an experiment involving graphs, it is best to always keep your constants, constant. If your graph is completely different to start with, then it gives the illusion that you are trying to tip the scales.*


Bingo


----------



## Jayj (Jul 1, 2011)

You might also want to consider an external leak at the new valve as a possible variable. The hissing sound might be evidence of that or internal turbulence from the valve. Had a car in the shop a few weeks ago where the valve was lifting off the mating surface of the turbo simply because the bolt heads were too small and would only contact the metal sleeves on the valves flange so the flange would pull up while the bolts and sleeves were secure. 

Also want to note that the above mentioned car was BT and had a relocation kit to the front of the engine with new (problematic) hardware.


----------



## FamousAmos7 (Apr 9, 2011)

SleepinGLI said:


> I'm not arguing for or against anyone here...
> 
> However, when conducting an experiment involving graphs, it is best to always keep your constants, constant. If your graph is completely different to start with, then it gives the illusion that you are trying to tip the scales.


It's going to be completely impossible to make EVERYTHING Completely equal. I don't have access to a dyno... 

The data I have provided should be telling. I mean, Look at the peak boost of the rev.D valve.

if your car peaked at about 1900mbar, you would think something was wrong.


----------



## Porpoise Hork (Jul 7, 2006)

FamousAmos7 said:


> *It's going to be completely impossible to make EVERYTHING Completely equal. I don't have access to a dyno... *
> 
> The data I have provided should be telling. I mean, Look at the peak boost of the rev.D valve.
> 
> if your car peaked at about 1900mbar, you would think something was wrong.


 you dont need a dyno to do identical rpm data logs. 


looking at the graphs and the fact that NONE of the rpm points are the same these tests are invalid. they cannot accurately compared to one another due to the fact that the test conditions are not the same.


----------



## bostonaudi1 (May 14, 2006)

You'd have to be a fool to keep running an older diaphram DV. They suck, they tear. Rev D all the way. The Rev D is FAR more reliable then anything else they've released. I've run a boat load of HPDE's with both, who gives a piss if its .00001 slower to do something, it doesn't fail!!!!


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

GolfRS said:


> Oh...I would never have guessed !!!
> 
> Does that mean everything APR says is BS then ??
> 
> Where is this world going to !!!???? :facepalm:


 You're a complete lunatic. :screwy:


----------

