# NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

GO TO PAGE 4 FOR NEW DYNO - THIS TIME 393BHP AND 466NM OF TORGUE

My old dyno before APR intake manifold and aquamist W/M was added the car made 322bhp at 20psi(1,4bar), but after the new mods i maxed out the APR fuel pump that is rated at 360bhp at 364bhp at 20psi, same boost as before and a lot more power in the midrange as well - we wanted to try more boost but the pump couldnt flow more - so next up is bigger pump and see how far this setup will take me







- but im very happy with the result on a GT28rs








Setup now:
- APR s3+kit 
- APR Intake manifold with VR6 dbc - NEW mod
- APR R1 DV
 - 3" complete exhaust
- Aguamist w/m - NEW mod
- NGK copper plugs, heatrange 8 - NEW mod
- Southbend stage 3 clutch kit with fw - NEW mod
- Pauter rods
Everything listed as NEW mod is whats been added since the old dyno at 322 BHP
NEW dyno
















old dyno








excel dyno comparisons between new and old 
















Engine bay pics´








Car pic´s











_Modified by DK_GTI_racer at 11:53 AM 4/6/2010_


----------



## The*Fall*Guy (Aug 10, 2009)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

Great numbers for a 28rs..


----------



## RvGrnGTI (Apr 13, 2005)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (The*Fall*Guy)*

Damn... I need to add W/M to my gt28rs !! Too bad I'm too cheap to upgrade my rods!


----------



## turbo2205 (May 1, 2005)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (RvGrnGTI)*

cant wait til i upgrade my rods n finish the next 2 stages of my build... 2010 will be a great year (mods start again 12/09)


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (RvGrnGTI)*

actually im not really taking advantages of my w/m kit for anything more then safety, the w/m gave a little extra hp, but basicly the intake manifold and bigger piping+tb is what made the powers so far, but i have w/m coming on at 1,2bar and without w/m runing i made 353bhp at 0,5bar less boost, thats the other graph line, so the ad the intake mani instead


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

this car needs more boost, i see it hitting 400bhp with a bit more boost


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (mescaline)*

i hope you are right, but if it goes that way, i might stop at 390bhp just to safe my valves since my head is still completly oem..


----------



## zippy0860 (Mar 1, 2006)

are you running the 100 oct file with this??


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (zippy0860)*

nope i dont have APR sw since my car is AGU dbc, so i have a custom sw and this was at 93octane


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

congrats dk, just slap an inline on and crank up the boost.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_congrats dk, just slap an inline on and crank up the boost.

Thanks man im also very happy with my result, and im going to change the one in the tank instead, because i really dont like the inline setup, messy in bay and impossible to fit proper underneath, but i have one pump on my list...
I actully just come home from a 2 week vacation in italy, and we drove my car their (pics are from my car in italy) and we drove to the sw company on the way to have it rolled in with the changes, and the car drove amazingly all the way down their and back again, better then stock - so happy with how the feels and drive now


----------



## HSTuning (Jul 1, 2009)

*Re: (DK_GTI_racer)*

You should reconsider swapping out the intank pump unless you have a hit on something that will fit in the factory surge tank and has dual pickups (one for bottom of tank and one 360 degree for surge tank). If not, adding an inline is the easiest way to get your extra fueling. I'm working on a lil somethin somethin to put away your "fitment" concerns though. Gimme another couple weeks.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: ([email protected])*

actually i have, its been getting really popular in DK, the old solutions was m5 pumps, but not good enough but this one is - the text is in danish, so bare with that - but its an 255lph pump that fits directly in the surge tank with dual pick up etc...but sounds interesting.
http://www.turboparts.dk/catal...d=298


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: (DK_GTI_racer)*

that's awesome man! Did you port the head to match the larger runners? I'm still working on my manifold and am debating on whether or not to swap on the vr6 TB as well


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

*Re: (DK_GTI_racer)*

drop in 255lph pumps already exist








nice numbers http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## allan_84 (Apr 29, 2004)

*Re: (NOLA_VDubber)*

the AGU engine he has is an europeen OEM large port head.


----------



## Bug_racer (Oct 13, 2002)

*Re: (allan_84)*


_Quote, originally posted by *allan_84* »_the AGU engine he has is an europeen OEM large port head.

We get them here in Aus too


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (NOLA_VDubber)*

Thanks Nola







and well like said by Allan84, its oem bigport head like the AEB, but transverse engine code instead...i would definitely go bigger TB, after driving and experiencing how much more driveability you get


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: (DK_GTI_racer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DK_GTI_racer* »_actually i have, its been getting really popular in DK, the old solutions was m5 pumps, but not good enough but this one is - the text is in danish, so bare with that - but its an 255lph pump that fits directly in the surge tank with dual pick up etc...but sounds interesting.
http://www.turboparts.dk/catal...d=298



Just do the inline pump in the fuel filter location and relocate the fuel filter like APR does with there Stage 3 + Audi TT kit







Bob.G
http://www.goapr.com/products/about_tts3.html
Nice numbers BTW http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## yohimbe (Jun 13, 2005)

*Re: (rracerguy717)*

who made the software ? and do you use the same software like in the old dyno ?


_Modified by yohimbe at 6:49 AM 8-24-2009_


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

*Re: (rracerguy717)*


_Quote, originally posted by *rracerguy717* »_
Just do the inline pump in the fuel filter location and relocate the fuel filter like APR does with there Stage 3 + Audi TT kit







Bob.G
http://www.goapr.com/products/about_tts3.html
Nice numbers BTW http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


can you buy the push fit connections that are on that pump?
where?
thanks


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (yohimbe)*

RH motorsport in denmark made the sw, since im not able to run APR sw - and yes its the same sw as the old dyno, and same dyno - the sw was changed in regards of fuel and a bit timing as well.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (rracerguy717)*


_Quote, originally posted by *rracerguy717* »_
Just do the inline pump in the fuel filter location and relocate the fuel filter like APR does with there Stage 3 + Audi TT kit







Bob.G
http://www.goapr.com/products/about_tts3.html
Nice numbers BTW http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


Thanks bob and i have consideret that, but i dont like how the fuel filter sits in the bay that way, but i might do it - but the pumps i linked to above is 255lph that has direct fitment with surge tank etc..its been used by many tuners already in DK, and its also silent, not like the walbro!also their is warranty on the pump, not like the walbro either.


----------



## yohimbe (Jun 13, 2005)

when you changed fuel and timing it is not the same software, I was just curious if you made the gains only by "hardware" mods.I got my software from turbodoedel in hamburg, not that far from south danmark, so I thought you could have it from the same source


_Modified by yohimbe at 11:23 AM 8-24-2009_


----------



## GLI_jetta (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

im not really an APR fan... but nice numbers http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (yohimbe)*

its the same sw company, but we needed to adjust fuel since i was leaning with w/m plugged in and we added some timing as well, but basicly hw mods, before we hooked up w/m and changed sw at all, i dynoed the 353bhp also pictured their at 0,05 less bar. but we should really change the pump and crank boost up and se what the w/m really ads to the setup


----------



## enginerd (Dec 15, 2001)

*Re: (DK_GTI_racer)*

You can run larger injectors - 630cc/min and run lower fuel pressure (3 bar) the pump should have enough capacity running like that, and you are probably all out of injector anyways. I know I ran out on the STG III+ setup when i ported my head and put on a manifold
4 bar + 1.5 bar boost = way too much fuel pressure. 
Let's see some video with your monster at the track


----------



## boosted b5 (Nov 1, 2004)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_I'm working on a lil somethin somethin to put away your "fitment" concerns though. Gimme another couple weeks.









you make a Bosch 044 fit in the tank correctly, and let me know. ok? ok. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## rogerius (Jun 14, 2004)

*Re: (boosted b5)*

it is not difficult to do that


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (enginerd)*


_Quote, originally posted by *enginerd* »_You can run larger injectors - 630cc/min and run lower fuel pressure (3 bar) the pump should have enough capacity running like that, and you are probably all out of injector anyways. I know I ran out on the STG III+ setup when i ported my head and put on a manifold
4 bar + 1.5 bar boost = way too much fuel pressure. 
Let's see some video with your monster at the track


Thanks man, but im not running APR s3+ injectors, i use 530cc at 4bar so they should support up to 430bhp roughly and i plan on trying to break 380-390bhp if possible, i will have to test and see







.
We dont have to many tracks in DK, actually only a few races being held 6 times a year, but their is on in september i hope to test my baby at


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: (DK_GTI_racer)*

He is stating that if you use lower base fuel pressure with higher cc injectors, its easier on the pump and it will flow more. The 225 pump that APR uses has made more whp than the bhp you are making


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_He is stating that if you use lower base fuel pressure with higher cc injectors, its easier on the pump and it will flow more. The 225 pump that APR uses has made more whp than the bhp you are making 

Let me just clarify, because I do get that I can run lower fuel pressure, but that would mean i needed my sw company to write me new sw, and that would cost a hole new sw map, and pump is much easier to change and cheaper, so thats why - also i dont have to change my injectors since they are capable of delivering more fuel then what my aims are, i already passed the first aim i had which was to max out the effect a disco potato is rated at from Garrett, next will be new pump and more boost and see if I can hit 390bhp at 24-25psi.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Awesome Results!


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Awesome Results!

Thanks Arin


----------



## IzVW (Jul 24, 2003)

*FV-QR*

Nice numbers for 4BAR.
Now you know why I dropped to 3 BAR software though!


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

*Re: FV-QR (IzVW)*

All this excitement for 320whp?


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

yes, 320whp on GT28RS @ 20 psi is pretty exciting I think.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (18T_BT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *18T_BT* »_All this excitement for 320whp?
















He's probably excited he doesn't have to wait for his turbo to spool at redline before he makes any power. Something about that whole 'area under the curve/enjoy driving the car everywhere and not just the drag strip' feel most people want.


----------



## AudiTToR (Nov 27, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
He's probably excited he doesn't have to wait for his turbo to spool at redline before he makes any power. Something about that whole 'area under the curve/enjoy driving the car everywhere and not just the drag strip' feel most people want.









yea.....and then there are us absolutely crazy people that would have nothing less than 550whp in two cars that they alternate daily driving due to maintenance issues.


----------



## water&air (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: FV-QR (18T_BT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *18T_BT* »_All this excitement for 320whp?
















don't forget, thats 320whp for the cost of 800whp. lol


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

*Re: FV-QR (AudiTToR)*


_Quote, originally posted by *AudiTToR* »_
yea.....and then there are us absolutely crazy people that would have nothing less than 550whp in two cars that they alternate daily driving due to maintenance issues.

















You better bring one to the BBQ!


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

*Re: FV-QR (water&air)*


_Quote, originally posted by *water&air* »_
don't forget, thats 320whp for the cost of 800whp. lol

like you know what an 800whp car would cost or look like.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
He's probably excited he doesn't have to wait for his turbo to spool at redline before he makes any power. Something about that whole 'area under the curve/enjoy driving the car everywhere and not just the drag strip' feel most people want.









Exactly







, most people in this forum just want to make high whp on a dyno, i rather have a car that feels, drives and is very fast and still be able to take it on a family trip to Italy 1600km from denmark and enjoy that it drives better then when the car was stock and still smoke Ferrari 360modenas for lunch.,......if what i wanted was a dragster or a dynoqueen then i would just have slammed a huge turbo on my car.
My goal is and was not that - Garrett rates this turbo at 360bhp, I wanted to beat that and so far even do I can run more boost when i have changed my fuel pump i have already beat that goal, and I will go for 350whp next with new pump - but take in to consideration how small the turbo is and how early my powers and spool starts...this car is a fun and really fast and is build to be daily driven car and be raced around road racing tracks for fun, not a dragstrip....

_Quote, originally posted by *mescaline* »_yes, 320whp on GT28RS @ 20 psi is pretty exciting I think. 

Thanks man and i think so to - this might have been done more then once on this forum in the past, but no one has done it ever in DK on a GT28rs, so yeah im excited and have turned a few heads in the danish tuning world, so yeah im very excited...
Infact how many can say they have beaten the rated power on the turbo?i could easy slam a GT3071r or GT2871r on my car, and make 450-500whp, the setup is their to be take advantages of, but would the car feel better for daily driving and faster?i doubt it....
And to the hole price pr whp debate mentioned, well i think Arin´s sig says it best http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## water&air (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: FV-QR (mescaline)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mescaline* »_
like you know what an 800whp car would cost or look like.

oh, you're right, i live under a rock and have never seen a high hp vw.








pipe down fanboy.


----------



## 20aeman (Jun 8, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (DK_GTI_racer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DK_GTI_racer* »_
Infact how many can say they have beaten the rated power on the turbo?i could easy slam a GT3071r or GT2871r on my car, and make 450-500whp, the setup is their to be take advantages of, but would the car feel better for daily driving and faster?i doubt it....
And to the hole price pr whp debate mentioned, well i think Arin´s sig says it best http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif









I get where your coming from DK. You have to figure though that turbo choice is also cultural/national. Most of the forum posters are from the US, land of muscle cars, long expansive highways etc...
I was driving my buddies 450whp terminator, and some guy decided to race me with an srt4. I ended up beating him..but only by a couple of car lengths. 
Over here, you need BIG power, or else everyone and their mom will destroy you. I'm sure in the land of diesels and 1.6 liter cars, you are in the 99th percentile...but here, you'd just be easy prey.
Hence why people are so adamant about having large turbos. But I can also understand your position. You guys need to keep in mind that it's all relative.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_
I get where your coming from DK. You have to figure though that turbo choice is also cultural/national. Most of the forum posters are from the US, land of muscle cars, long expansive highways etc...
I was driving my buddies 450whp terminator, and some guy decided to race me with an srt4. I ended up beating him..but only by a couple of car lengths. 
Over here, you need BIG power, or else everyone and their mom will destroy you. I'm sure in the land of diesels and 1.6 liter cars, you are in the 99th percentile...but here, you'd just be easy prey.
Hence why people are so adamant about having large turbos. But I can also understand your position. You guys need to keep in mind that it's all relative. 

I can easily understand that, it makes sence without doubt, and also taking in to consideration that you guys love dragstrips etc...but to me if you want 500 or 800whp you better also make it rev past 9000rpm, making higher power in 2000rpm revband makes 0 sence to me. i have tried 530whp car in DK thats insanely, infact the fastest i have tried, but that car also revs to 9500rpm and has 110km an hour 1. gear, this makes sense to me, but not as daily driver do. Must of dynos i see poster in this forum with 400+´whp stop reving at 7200rpm, and only from 5500rpm they have my number on the revband, thats not a lot more fun, not to mention torgue curves is not as long either, its no doubt faster on the highway - but at the moment my transmission is what holds back a higher top speed, not engine i have it reved past 260km/h and the limit of 02j tranny and for that matter also whats fun in a golf.....
But i consider my car as fast when i can beat a Ferrari 360modena, sorry but thats enough for me








But all is relative as you say and i agree on that







...


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (DK_GTI_racer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DK_GTI_racer* »_
Infact how many can say they have beaten the rated power on the turbo?

Just about everyone with a chip and turboback on a stock turbo







rated 195bhp and 210bhp (non and s)


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_
Just about everyone with a chip and turboback on a stock turbo







rated 195bhp and 210bhp (non and s)

Funny







but no, the TFSI makes more power on the k03 then that


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: FV-QR (DK_GTI_racer)*

those are not the same turbos. But you get the point. Many people run whp for what garrett claims as their bhp rating


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_those are not the same turbos. But you get the point. Many people run whp for what garrett claims as their bhp rating

_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_those are not the same turbos. But you get the point. Many people run whp for what garrett claims as their bhp rating

You are right its not the same turbo, goes its integrated to the manifold, but wheel diameter etc. is the same, but that engine is just more efficient then 1.8T hence the higher bhp availble - i have seen a few 1.8T with same powers as possible with the TFSI - but i get your point


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

*Re: FV-QR (20aeman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *20aeman* »_
I get where your coming from DK. You have to figure though that turbo choice is also cultural/national. Most of the forum posters are from the US, land of muscle cars, long expansive highways etc...
I was driving my buddies 450whp terminator, and some guy decided to race me with an srt4. I ended up beating him..but only by a couple of car lengths. 
Over here, you need BIG power, or else everyone and their mom will destroy you. I'm sure in the land of diesels and 1.6 liter cars, you are in the 99th percentile...but here, you'd just be easy prey.
Hence why people are so adamant about having large turbos. But I can also understand your position. You guys need to keep in mind that it's all relative. 

The best message i read on this forum so far.
For me personally it makes no sense to make a 500whp car out of Golf GTI, mainly because of FWD...but I get tempted sometimes to put bigger turbo on when I am at 80mph and I need just a bit more to beat that other car but then I remember spinning first 3 gears and ...nah, it's just not worth it.
Now I wanna buy an A4 quattro really bad... DK GTI racer knows it, its all I talk about but then I think....A4 is a lot heavier...plus it has huge drivetrain loss...I would need 100whp more to make it as fast as GTI I have now, which means I need to do some major work to engine...which means tons of $$. But even I do all this, I am gonna need a lot larger turbo...which means more lag...and then I think I would be better off with some V6 engine, but again V6 engine is heavier and I would need to take turbo off every time I wanna pass emissions here in Europe







)
There is just no easy way...the easiest way would be to buy an EVO IX and get over with it 
But I don't regret my APR Stage 3+ purchase for a second, i am now in the place where most of people with BT are and I spent less than 5k while others claim that it costed them less...99% of them upgraded rods or blew their motors and other stuff which is pricey and would probably put you way over 5k.


_Modified by mescaline at 7:51 AM 9-3-2009_


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

*Re: FV-QR (mescaline)*

If you use a boost controller (even a simple hi vs lo) you can limit boost in the 1st and 2nd gear and let 3rd gear rip! You don't need 500whp in those gears. It's a matter of set up and if done incorrectly it is useless, but that is the end users fault, right?
I've run and owned an APR STG3+, let me tell you my car is just as reliable and faster with my 30r. My lag isn't an issue, unlike how you guys believe...


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

it may not be an issue for you, but it may be an issue for me? Don't be so close minded








Anyway I never saw limiting boost in lower gears as an solution... i am going 70mph in 2nd gear...so up to 70mph am allowed to have 200hp only? Even with that power you can break tires loss, FWD sucks.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

*Re: (mescaline)*

I am not close minded, I am giving you an option of how to combat high HP FWD. It is a solution, and you can have more than 200hp, you must use some crappy tires!


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

*Re: (18T_BT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *18T_BT* »_I am not close minded, I am giving you an option of how to combat high HP FWD. It is a solution, and you can have more than 200hp, you must use some crappy tires!

When you give me a solution how to hook up 300whp in 1st gear on FWD car, let me know...
I already know i can hook up 150hp.


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

Anyways I will probably go GT3076R, screw traction...at least i can race some motorcycles on highway


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (18T_BT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *18T_BT* »_
If you use a boost controller (even a simple hi vs lo) you can limit boost in the 1st and 2nd gear and let 3rd gear rip! You don't need 500whp in those gears. It's a matter of set up and if done incorrectly it is useless, but that is the end users fault, right?
I've run and owned an APR STG3+, let me tell you my car is just as reliable and faster with my 30r. My lag isn't an issue, unlike how you guys believe...

This is exactly how i avoid spin in 1st and 2nd gear - remote on steering wheel that controls high and low boost








Anyways in all this talk about a GT30r i have made a little comparison between my dyno and a build GT30r car with the following specs - this is btw same dyno as mine.
This car has:
Cast manifold 
GT3071rWG 
Same IC core as me
Aquamist 1s
Same sw company as me
AGU bigport head - stock intake manifold
Open filter with 3"inlet pipe to turbo and maf house
SCAT rods
VES kit on exhaust and 3" exhaust
Thís is a dyno comparison and notice that the GT3071r runs more boost then i do, the difference between 20psi and 22psi and if you notice we need to get pass 5500rpm in both BHP, nm and boost before the GT3071r go above my power level, but its not that much even do the GT30 has more boost, before 5500rpm i have it beat big time and thats why i see the GT28rs as a real nice selection for a 1.8T, but thats my feel and openion on this. of course the GT30r would show hughe gains with a APR IM like i have, but still im only limited by my fuel pump and plan on getting the same 400bhp with my setup on more boost. anyways the comparison for what its worth.
























Actual dyno of that other car im comparing with..


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

*Re: (mescaline)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mescaline* »_
When you give me a solution how to hook up 300whp in 1st gear on FWD car, let me know...
I already know i can hook up 150hp.

your tranny won't hold 300whp in 1st you chooch


_Quote, originally posted by *DK_GTI_racer* »_
This is exactly how i avoid spin in 1st and 2nd gear - remote on steering wheel that controls high and low boost








Anyways in all this talk about a GT30r i have made a little comparison between my dyno and a build GT30r car with the following specs - this is btw same dyno as mine.


that intake mani would make a decent difference


----------



## allan_84 (Apr 29, 2004)

*Re: FV-QR (DK_GTI_racer)*

nice, really good comparison you made there between your gt2860RS setup and another setup with gt3071r. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

*Re: (18T_BT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *18T_BT* »_
your tranny won't hold 300whp in 1st you chooch


What does anything have to do here with my transmission? I will make it hold if you can hook up 1st gear @ 300whp.
Lowering boost in 1st and 2nd gear is cheating and dumb (not that there is any other way), why have 300whp anyway? And 2nd gear is 70mph ...so up to 70mph you have..what...250hp? That's waste and you gonna get walked by many cars


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (allan_84)*


_Quote, originally posted by *allan_84* »_nice, really good comparison you made there between your gt2860RS setup and another setup with gt3071r. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Thanks Allan, and yeah that comparison is actually pretty good because the setup is almost identical except for:
Turbo
Exhaust manifold (APR mani vs. cast log style)
Airbox/open filter (i run stock airbox)
Pancake pipe(no pancake pipe) - (i run pancake)
Intake manifold and TB, Stock vs APR+bigger tb
End tank on IC(core is the same)
Everything else is the same more or less, their is obvius a different design and layout of the APR kit and this tuner kit i comparing to, but basicly everything else is the same including dyno and sw company, and shows how good the APR kit really is in taken advantages of the GT28RS turbo


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (DK_GTI_racer)*

Well my new fuel pump has arrived, 255LPH TRE fuel pump for intank fitment - this pump is not an walbro nor does it have the same irritating sound like the walbro has...
Tomorrow i will have it fittet, along with my new 72-80celcius degree thermostat, new plugs, coolant and oil - and saturday im attending a Trackday with also dyno and stuff, this should be fun to test and see if more power can be made with more boost - i will you guys posted, hoping to break 380-390bhp on this setup, so im ancius to see the results..anyways cheers and wish me luck at the track








I will hopefully also have vids of the race and stuff...


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

Looking good! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (INA)*


_Quote, originally posted by *INA* »_Looking good! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Thanks sammy, your words means a lot...
Well just to keep an update on the track stuff, wich in someway was a bit of dissapointment, mainly because i got their a bit to late and only had 30 minutes worth of racing and the dyno guy had closed down so no testing with more boost and stuff....but i did try 2 dragraces, one race was against a mk5 R32 DSG with Rothe motorsport bi-turbo kit and 500+bhp, well i messed up my start and it got a lead of 3 cars, but after that i kept the distance and was gaining a bit in the end, so a better start and who knows, maybe...anyways it was fun to race around the track (it was bit of the circuit track that was used as drag strip), but no timing was available...
Anyways the new pump works great and i will later on post a pic of the installation


----------



## velocity196 (Feb 19, 2006)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

Nice work apr http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif, that's some good power for that lil turbo.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (velocity196)*


_Quote, originally posted by *velocity196* »_Nice work apr http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif, that's some good power for that lil turbo. 

Thanks and a beer to you







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
Anyways some updates, tomorrow nights i should be hitting the dyno and testing 22psi to see if gains are to be made, hopefully this appointment wont be cancelled....


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

bad start is all you can have with 360hp and FWD lol, if you limit power (read boost)...there is no wheelspin but you go too slow...if you turn power up...you just spin...again no go


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (mescaline)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mescaline* »_bad start is all you can have with 360hp and FWD lol, if you limit power (read boost)...there is no wheelspin but you go too slow...if you turn power up...you just spin...again no go









lol - well that was not the case, i just messed up not watching when it was green, because the lamp was way out to the right of me(pass the r32), and i messed up with throttle giving a really bad start, but I hung in and was gaining on the bastard..but 2nd race was a perfect start at low boost and just a bit of spin..had i raced the r32 turbo in that race, hole different ball game, im pretty sure the race would have been tight..maybe next time i will have chance at him


----------



## AudiTToR (Nov 27, 2008)

*Re: (mescaline)*

Hm...it all starts to make sense.


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

*Re: (DK_GTI_racer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DK_GTI_racer* »_
lol - well that was not the case, i just messed up not watching when it was green, because the lamp was way out to the right of me(pass the r32), and i messed up with throttle giving a really bad start, but I hung in and was gaining on the bastard..but 2nd race was a perfect start at low boost and just a bit of spin..had i raced the r32 turbo in that race, hole different ball game, im pretty sure the race would have been tight..maybe next time i will have chance at him









Dude, that R32 can launch full throttle ..use whole 500hp, it will instantly jump 3 cars length on you no matter what you do... I know it, tried it ...been there..many times








You can't race him from a dig..maybe at high speeds but then he has toooons of torque, probably almost as double as you do so no go there either








You would end up like this -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifxD20qv5tc


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (mescaline)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mescaline* »_
Dude, that R32 can launch full throttle ..use whole 500hp, it will instantly jump 3 cars length on you no matter what you do... I know it, tried it ...been there..many times








You can't race him from a dig..maybe at high speeds but then he has toooons of torque, probably almost as double as you do so no go there either








You would end up like this -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifxD20qv5tc[/url






Yeah yeah the R32 has DSG and can just plant the right food down, i know - but try listening a bit will you- that r32 has like 400kg ekstra weight compared to me, no matter the HP or torgue i was still gaining on him, it was my first race ever in this car, and just ****ed up launch and im telling you had i raced him like i did on 2nd attempt he would not have been 3cars ahead, but since you still haven´t been visiting me to see how effective this hi-low boost is, im sure you are still not convinced, but you will be


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

*Re: (mescaline)*

If only there was an affordable gear kit for these cars....would make me do a Golf in a heartbeat.


----------



## EVIL VW (Dec 23, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

Maxed out fuel pump? or you MEAN Injectors?








The APR intank pump/ TT225 pump has put down 400whp dyno's on that pump alone, just not on there kit. But on there pump


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (EVIL VW)*


_Quote, originally posted by *EVIL VW* »_Maxed out fuel pump? or you MEAN Injectors?








The APR intank pump/ TT225 pump has put down 400whp dyno's on that pump alone, just not on there kit. But on there pump


Not injectors, pump - i know what the TT225 has put down, but APR s3+kit uses a 4bar FPR not to mention i run w/m which demands more fuel as well, all in all maxed out pump.


----------



## EVIL VW (Dec 23, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

1.8t, gt30r, running dual injection w/m, in the summer heat, no fan on a mobile dyno at H2O 2 yrs ago
APr Intank or TT225 only no other pumps, thats why im confused as why yours maxed out as it did, not trying to argue just relate, in sense.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (EVIL VW)*


_Quote, originally posted by *EVIL VW* »_1.8t, gt30r, running dual injection w/m, in the summer heat, no fan on a mobile dyno at H2O 2 yrs ago
APr Intank or TT225 only no other pumps, thats why im confused as why yours maxed out as it did, not trying to argue just relate, in sense.


i dont doubt this guy made that power on TT225 pump, and i get where you are coming from - APR rates this fuel pump at 360bhp and sw company told me it was maxed out when we hit 364bhp - you have to take in to consideration a 4bar FPR limits the flow of the pump, for instance a walbro 255lph flows this at 3bar, at 5bar it flows 180lph..


----------



## EVIL VW (Dec 23, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DK_GTI_racer* »_
i dont doubt this guy made that power on TT225 pump, and i get where you are coming from - APR rates this fuel pump at 360bhp and sw company told me it was maxed out when we hit 364bhp - you have to take in to consideration a 4bar FPR limits the flow of the pump, for instance a walbro 255lph flows this at 3bar, at 5bar it flows 180lph..

he was the guy the got me to go with a 30r, and when we were talking he was actually upset about the dyno #, cos he made changes and the car was adapting or something on the dyno beyond the overheat trying to get through the crowd or something he said. i asked him about his setup, tyrolsport did the install, and i remember him say in only had the tt225 intank pump and was waiting on get a bosch 044.
if he is down at H2O this year ill know his car, had some custom NY plate. ill double check, but i remember asking alot of questions as i was building my setup at the time


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (EVIL VW)*


_Quote, originally posted by *EVIL VW* »_
he was the guy the got me to go with a 30r, and when we were talking he was actually upset about the dyno #, cos he made changes and the car was adapting or something on the dyno beyond the overheat trying to get through the crowd or something he said. i asked him about his setup, tyrolsport did the install, and i remember him say in only had the tt225 intank pump and was waiting on get a bosch 044.
if he is down at H2O this year ill know his car, had some custom NY plate. ill double check, but i remember asking alot of questions as i was building my setup at the time

As i said i do believe he made those numbers on a TT225 pump, but not with a 4bar FPR. The TT225 pump can at 3bar FPR deliver above 400bhp no doubt







.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (EVIL VW)*


_Quote, originally posted by *EVIL VW* »_
he was the guy the got me to go with a 30r, and when we were talking he was actually upset about the dyno #, cos he made changes and the car was adapting or something on the dyno beyond the overheat trying to get through the crowd or something he said. i asked him about his setup, tyrolsport did the install, and i remember him say in only had the tt225 intank pump and was waiting on get a bosch 044.
if he is down at H2O this year ill know his car, had some custom NY plate. ill double check, but i remember asking alot of questions as i was building my setup at the time

Btw yeah you can see that his car retracts timing on the dyno, meaning it was either getting to hot or to much was added or to much boost..


----------



## EVIL VW (Dec 23, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DK_GTI_racer* »_
As i said i do believe he made those numbers on a TT225 pump, but not with a 4bar FPR. The TT225 pump can at 3bar FPR deliver above 400bhp no doubt







.

i got that, i saw you said you dont doubt that.....
i think im learning what you mean though. since he was at 3bar fpr the pump didnt need to work as hard???? but at 4bar it takes more juice?
i though ppeople would through in 4bar on dyno's when they were really pushing it and what the safety of extra fuel uptop, thats why im alil confused just trying to learn and know more


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (EVIL VW)*


_Quote, originally posted by *EVIL VW* »_
i got that, i saw you said you dont doubt that.....
i think im learning what you mean though. since he was at 3bar fpr the pump didnt need to work as hard???? but at 4bar it takes more juice?
i though ppeople would through in 4bar on dyno's when they were really pushing it and what the safety of extra fuel uptop, thats why im alil confused just trying to learn and know more

Well you are almost correct







, first off the APR s3+kit comes with 4FPR because thats what they designed sw with combined with their injectors, im on custom tune but using same 4bar fpr because the 470cc injectors i have at 3 bar, puts out 545cc at 4bar meaning i wont have to worry about injectors in the long run...
At 3bar you spare the fuel pump unless its bosch, most bosch pumps only changes fuel output when you run more then 5bar fpr, but thats a different story - anyways a 4bar fpr puts greater strains on the pump but your injectors will be increased by 16% in terms of fuel delivery.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

A new dyno to back up numbers before with a little bit more boost, up top boost is 1,45 and at torgue peak 1,55bar - so an increase of 0,05bar overall. we put down a lot more torgue and a few extra pony´s, but it might seems my stock airbox is being a limited factor, might try and swizz it or take of the snorkle or something...anyways fan on the dyno was nothing more then a hand blower.


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

Now that looks good! most people wont believe this is an APR kit in there http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## yohimbe (Jun 13, 2005)

what injectors do you use ? 470 sonds to me like the Z20LET.


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

370 crank hp? thats like 325-330whp? This car can do a lot more for sure...especially because you got w/m...you can basically run race gas map....if i was you i would definitely convert it to wideband and run APR Stage 3+ software or eurodyne.
You got R32 airbox, it shouldn't be restriction at all...


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (yohimbe)*


_Quote, originally posted by *yohimbe* »_what injectors do you use ? 470 sonds to me like the Z20LET.

Nope...Bosch 0 280 156 280

_Quote, originally posted by *INA* »_Now that looks good! most people wont believe this is an APR kit in there http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Thanks sammy, most people in denmark is having trouble im running a GT28rs with these numbers








Anyways next month im going to try out my 3rd dyno just to confirm and also try a dyno with a bigger fan, this one was really tiny and remove snorkle- the airbox is no restriction, but the snorkle might be - who knows, it felt like it needed air up top...


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

*FV-QR*

Wow great numbers and look at that spool!


----------



## yohimbe (Jun 13, 2005)

I am using the same ones , I thought they were from a Opel OPC


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (yohimbe)*


_Quote, originally posted by *yohimbe* »_I am using the same ones , I thought they were from a Opel OPC

Sorry Opel is not my thing, but had you said OPC i would have said yes -but you are right they are from OPC....

_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_Wow great numbers and look at that spool!

Thanks Arin - yeah the spool is insane and tire killing, and the car feels like a rocket








Also did some logs on 50-75mph times with racelogic - 2,2secs with a passenger in the car (third gear)


_Modified by DK_GTI_racer at 9:34 AM 9-16-2009_


----------



## PimpMyRide (Apr 30, 2004)

*Re: (yohimbe)*


_Quote, originally posted by *yohimbe* »_when you changed fuel and timing it is not the same software, I was just curious if you made the gains only by "hardware" mods.I got my software from turbodoedel in hamburg, not that far from south danmark, so I thought you could have it from the same source

_Modified by yohimbe at 11:23 AM 8-24-2009_

Stupid post of the day. Without tuning your ECU for added hardware, you will not take advantage of it.


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

*Re: (PimpMyRide)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PimpMyRide* »_
Stupid post of the day. Without tuning your ECU for added hardware, you will not take advantage of it. 

Yes you will, intake manifold for example...APR says 40-50 chp without touching software..which has been confirmed many times. It's things like w/m that won't help without software because it allows you to run more timing...


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (DK_GTI_racer)*

damn dude, looks awesome http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif I need a big port head and intake mani bad


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (NOLA_VDubber)*


_Quote, originally posted by *NOLA_VDubber* »_damn dude, looks awesome http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif I need a big port head and intake mani bad
















Thanks Nola, and yeah you really do - it makes out all the difference in power curve - how is that intake mani going you where designing?


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (DK_GTI_racer)*

^I ran out of time and money! It may be not until after christmas before I can get to it


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (NOLA_VDubber)*


_Quote, originally posted by *NOLA_VDubber* »_^I ran out of time and money! It may be not until after christmas before I can get to it

that sucks - it looked really good the last design you posted
Anyways if you decide not to built your own, get your self an APR im, these things rocks


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: FV-QR (DK_GTI_racer)*

New dyno and more POWAAR- this is 3rd dyno place - after adjusting sensitivty on eboost2 and gatepressure i was able to keep boost from tapping to much down, might need more adjustment - but this is done at 1,5bar (21,8psi) at redline.
Dyno is in 5th gear (02j tranny) and 3rd dyno in a row.
Fan speed on dyno was 19mph











_Modified by DK_GTI_racer at 11:54 AM 10/6/2009_


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

why 5th?


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: (cincyTT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cincyTT* »_why 5th? 

I have no idea, the dyno operator told me that it should be dynoed in 5th, all the other dynos was in 4th gear, but the cool thing was that at my low boost setting at 1bar, that i have never touched etc. it dynoed 323bhp just like the 2 other dynos, and with only touching sensitivity on my eboost and gatepressurer(when wg should start to open) i hit 372bhp, because the boost did not tap as much down as the dyno with 369bhp.


----------



## mcmahonbj (Jun 2, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

keeping an eye on this! i just picked up a stage 3 kit today!


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mcmahonbj* »_keeping an eye on this! i just picked up a stage 3 kit today!

good for you http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif - stage 3 or 3+?btw...


----------



## mcmahonbj (Jun 2, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

stage 3 kit but i picked up a custom dual-pass fmic, i got a maxpsi 3" tbe already along with the 3" apr downpipe the kit came with, ill be running siemens "flow matched" 630cc injectors, unitronic 630cc software (sai and n240 delete), velocity stacked intake, boostvalve dual-stage deluxe kit from [email protected], apr in-tank pump


----------



## mcmahonbj (Jun 2, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*

any update?


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mcmahonbj* »_any update?

Not really - i wanna make sure AFR is where it should be before i crank up the boost more, so this will either call for a AFR gauge or me hitting the sw companys dyno again - either way it will still take some time before i get this done.


----------



## mcmahonbj (Jun 2, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

badass man! what do you have done for internal wise? Because im going to be installing my kit soon but running unitronic 630cc software, lsd, stage 3 clutch w/ lw flywheel, ie rods than the other given stuff..... You have some damn good numbers!


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mcmahonbj* »_badass man! what do you have done for internal wise? Because im going to be installing my kit soon but running unitronic 630cc software, lsd, stage 3 clutch w/ lw flywheel, ie rods than the other given stuff..... You have some damn good numbers! 

Thanks alot







-well internally i just have pauter EDM rods, and of course the oem AGU pistons with 20mm wristpin, and well an overhaul of the engine doing the install - it was even after 160.000km in mint condition my block and head etc.. so just gaskets, new rings and rods was installed including rod bearings - but other then that - nothing...
Get your self an early xmas present and buy the APR mani - it rocks http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## mcmahonbj (Jun 2, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

i dont want driver side tb though cause i just installed a custom dual-pass fmic... i would love to pick one of those up though!


----------



## mcmahonbj (Jun 2, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*

yeah im only at 77k but im gonna do seals and pins and rings too just to make it fresh. if i can get ahold of a aeb head ill do that too but well see


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mcmahonbj* »_i dont want driver side tb though cause i just installed a custom dual-pass fmic... i would love to pick one of those up though!

Well if you search my posts, you will see how many times i have posted and cried for a PS side intake mani, but in the end i sold my APR c-style FMIC and had a custom IC build to fit the driver side TB - all that said i would have wished i had done so earlier.


----------



## mcmahonbj (Jun 2, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

hmm... yeah possibly...


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DK_GTI_racer* »_
Well if you search my posts, you will see how many times i have posted and cried for a PS side intake mani, but in the end i sold my APR c-style FMIC and had a custom IC build to fit the driver side TB - all that said i would have wished i had done so earlier.

could of always cut and flip the inlet and cap of your apr manifold like someone else did


----------



## BoostinBejan (Apr 13, 2009)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (cincyTT)*

Hmmmm, not too bad of an idea, plenty of work though for an APR manifold.


----------



## mcmahonbj (Jun 2, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (BoostinBejan)*











_Modified by mcmahonbj at 5:36 PM 10-28-2009_


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*

Well its been a while since made a mod - but now was the time and also a new dyno - i changed my 3" exhaust system for 2,5" milltek with a JVK tuning VES Kit, and well as it turned out also my car was running insanely rich because the new pump was flowing so much more juice - so when we dynoed first time with the new VES kit, lambda value was as low as 0,6 from 3500rpm to redline, insanely rich - so this was corrected in sw and then i put down 393bhp and 466nm







- still just a tiny little GT2860rs turbo








pics of everything - and bare in mind its BHP and not whp, WHP is 350








The VES is controlled by the remote i control my boostsettings, so when i hit high boost it opens and thunder has arrived, but when closed its like driving a stock 1.8T, now thats cool and nice....
Anyways enjoy.











































_Modified by DK_GTI_racer at 7:39 PM 4/6/2010_


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

Hell yeah, that exhaust looks mean!!!!!


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (NOLA_VDubber)*

That's a fat power band. Very quick spool. Bet it feels awesome. Good work my friend.







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (NOLA_VDubber)*

Thanks a lot nola, yeah that exhaust is mean when it opens - but when you are just cruising and when im not in high boost program, it sounds like a stock 1.8T, nice and quite - but beware when the VES opens - now thats a roarr..

Thanks to you as well Arin, it feels pretty impressive - such a nice long powerband, yummy







- im just irritated i still havent been able to get the last 6 ponys, i so wanna hit 400, stupid right, its just a number i know - but....


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*

Love it!
How many container lengths are you giving the competition?


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (INA)*


_Quote, originally posted by *INA* »_Love it!
How many container lengths are you giving the competition?









Thanks sammy







and well the competition in DK has already been left at the container dock







- both the dyno/sw people and JVK tuning over here in DK claimed it was the most powerfull 1.8T with baby GT28rs turbo, and i believe they are right, havent really seen anyone come close to this, nor had RH motorsport, they where stunned







and they needed to sit down when i told them airbox is not swiss cheased, and also still using pancake pipe..


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (DK_GTI_racer)*

A fun little dyno comparison, now who says that 1.8T and APR is not a perfect marriage







- this rocks, i never tought i would be able to beat the stage 3 TFSI results....altough the TFSI stage 3 kit for the 265HP version of TFSI engines would kick my balls, they must have good cams or something..



















_Modified by DK_GTI_racer at 11:46 AM 4/6/2010_


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (mcmahonbj)*

VERY impressive


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (dubinsincuwereindiapers)*

Good job
Where's your boy Adam when you need him? LOL


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

*Re: NEW DYNO - APR 3+ with APR im - FUEL PUMP MAXED OUT (schwartzmagic)*

Thanks...
yeah their is actually a few times you miss him


----------



## PauloLaux(PC) (Aug 26, 2008)

Man, 

I'm very impressed! 
Congratulations about your car and results...is amazing! 

I'm living in Brazil and i have the same car as you: 

GOLF GTI 1.8T 2001 2doors with AGU engine (AGU = AWD = AEB = Large port with cable gas). 
I bought many parts, but now all yet... 

My project is: 

- APR Stage3+ (GT28RS or GT2871, i haven't decided yet); 
- APR Intake manifold; 
- Scat rods; 
- APR 3" Exhaust; 
- FMIC CXRacing with 2,5" piping; 
- Fuel pump Bosch 044; 
- 550cc fuel injectors (3bar); 
- SPEC 2+ Clutch kit; 
- Peloquin Diff; 

I'm thinking about use a APEXI AVC-R boost control... 

It's almost YOUR setup! And i didn't know your project... 
 

I participate the TrackDays here in Brazil too... 

Thanks for this thread, i'm very happy with your results and I'm learning a lot! 
:beer::thumbup:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Hey Paulolux, 

Thank you very much, and you got your self a very good setup  

yes they are very simular, have you gotten your self a adapter plate for the tb and an vr6 tb? INA can hook you up  

are you going stand alone or getting custom sw for the oem box like me? 

if you havent gotten an EBC yet, then think about the eboost2 it really is the bomb and extremely accurate... 

This summer i also got an new gearbox 02j, the old one never failed, but a friend of mine just totaled his car with a brand new 02j with quaife lsd in it and quaife final drive - so naturally i got me that gearbox instead, man that LSD should be first mod for everyone  

anyways go GT28rs instead of the gt2871r, the spool is better and well its possible to make really good powers on it  - infact im gonna upgrade valvetrain+get NA cams later and im sure it can make a bit more power, hoping for 410bhp, and that will be the end for me. 

i first i maxed out the fuel pump and now injectors, so those injectors you got your self make sure you run 4bar fpr with those.


----------



## PauloLaux(PC) (Aug 26, 2008)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Hey Paulolux,
> 
> Thank you very much, and you got your self a very good setup


 Yeah man, now i'm sure about this! 
:laugh: 



DK_GTI_racer said:


> yes they are very simular, have you gotten your self a adapter plate for the tb and an vr6 tb? INA can hook you up


 I bought this adapter and TB with Issam, it's a very nice guy! 



DK_GTI_racer said:


> are you going stand alone or getting custom sw for the oem box like me?
> 
> if you havent gotten an EBC yet, then think about the eboost2 it really is the bomb and extremely accurate...


 I'm getting custom software like you! 
I have a friend with 1.8T + GT2871 and a MegaSquirt stand alone (works very fine) but i'll try a sw first... 

I don't know the EBC/eboost2 yet...there is any website? 



DK_GTI_racer said:


> This summer i also got an new gearbox 02j, the old one never failed, but a friend of mine just totaled his car with a brand new 02j with quaife lsd in it and quaife final drive - so naturally i got me that gearbox instead, man that LSD should be first mod for everyone


 Great! 
Quaife and Peloquin are the best LSD! 

You'll like this upgrade... 



DK_GTI_racer said:


> anyways go GT28rs instead of the gt2871r, the spool is better and well its possible to make really good powers on it  - infact im gonna upgrade valvetrain+get NA cams later and im sure it can make a bit more power, hoping for 410bhp, and that will be the end for me.


 410bhp, interesting... 

I like the cars with fast spool, so a HATE LAG! 
 

Your GT28RS is a .64AR? 



DK_GTI_racer said:


> i first i maxed out the fuel pump and now injectors, so those injectors you got your self make sure you run 4bar fpr with those.


 I have a OEM 3bar and a OEM 4bar Bosch regulators...the correct for my fuel injectors is running with 4bar. BUT i can change to 630cc and run with 3bar. I'm crazy or correct?  
I'm just bought the regulator, not the injectors yet.


----------



## tedgram (Jul 2, 2005)

Great thread planing on a bigger turbo than the K04 in my car, after I see what the max of the K04 is. 
Was thinking 2871 but have picked up a TD05H 20G. Have also picked up an AEM W/M kit to install.


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

PauloLaux(PC) said:


> Man,
> 
> I'm very impressed!
> Congratulations about your car and results...is amazing!
> ...


 If you didnt get your rods yet let me know 

I have a brand new 20mm x 144 set Scat rods I can sell you at a great price . 
I went with drop in rods for our stock pistons .pm me if interested  Bob.G


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

PauloLaux(PC) said:


> Yeah man, now i'm sure about this!
> :laugh:
> 
> 
> ...


 My replys are in bold :beer:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

how does a 0.6x gt28rs with 30-35lb comp wheel manage to pump beyond 350bhp?
A 2871 and its 35-38lb compressor only just manages 370-380bhp from 1.8bar boost on the ones I've touched.

how?


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Badger bear in mind that the sw company i use doubted me from the start about my end goals, also same place i dyno - and this dyno has one of the most conservative dynos - stock 1.8t dyno just barely 140bhp - but RH motorsport was not the only doubter, my friend and owner of JVK tuning would not believe his eyes when he saw the result, nor would he ever estimated me getting more then 340bhp, he him self never made more then 320bhp on a GT28rs on any of his setup, infact the highest he got was 310 and 340 with GT2871r, same dyno and sw company again.... but with that being said i also only made 322bhp when i was only 3+, mescaline dynoed 339bhp with his car on the same dyno when he was 3+ only....the big change came when i changed to APR intake manifold and VR6tb, that put me alone up to 356bhp without retune, with w/m i made 364bhp and the fuel pump was maxed out - this was at same power levels APR claims the pump can handle, later i changed the pump and my last dyno with a new retune for this pump put me up to 394bhp....now you ask me how its possible - my guess is the increase in VE made the engine with intake manifold and w/m+timing...back in the day sam 18bora made on APR´s facility with 75mm tb 390whp on same setup as me with racegas....i think in my mind to many are focused on changing turbo rather then increasing VE when it comes to making power.

Btw my trapspeed on a street tarmac track with street tires is 186km/h (115mph).


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

he is also using water/methanol, it's like running gt28rs with race gas, he is also running just about every performance mod there is to run. Nevertheless he still puts down some very respectable numbers and he is probably enjoying his car more than any driver in here :beer:


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

I think its time for that 2868R


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

mescaline said:


> he is also using water/methanol, it's like running gt28rs with race gas, he is also running just about every performance mod there is to run. Nevertheless he still puts down some very respectable numbers and he is probably enjoying his car more than any driver in here :beer:


Thanks a lot bro - and i think you are right - but still got some more mod left to put it in it  




INA said:


> I think its time for that 2868R


Uhh sammy you know how much want that upgrade  - but its gonna be my last, but I will do it once the potato takes a dump...but until then i will push the envolope of everything else, so I know that I can squeze out the entire potential of the GT2868r  but I want it and you know....but maybe you can prepare me for a price on this?? - if I wanted this done, i would want a complete new turbo from APR with that GT2868 built in by you  

Just mail me a price for this when you have the time and it might be a summer/spring job for me :laugh:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

my old vf34 ibiza trapped 112mph from 320bhp/280lbft. 1200kg car, road tyres in 2003

what octane do you run fueling wise?


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Thats a very light car  - last time i weighed mine with my self in and full tank etc it was 1526kg 

Well i run vpower99 but with 50/50 mix and sometime 40/60.

Also something for comparison - 18bora sam made 356whp on the same setup as me with racegas, he trapped 115mph same as me with slicks and 100kg lighter car+driver 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...100-93-octane-Dyno)-and-(100-octane-1-4-Times)

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?1917825-APR-Motorsport-pics-and-dynos.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Thats a very light car  - last time i weighed mine with my self in and full tank etc it was 1526kg
> 
> Well i run vpower99 but with 50/50 mix and sometime 40/60.
> 
> ...



your car must be a mutant 

2871 here on 2ltr bottom end, as well as stock bore, make no more than 380bhp on 1.8bar, RMR mani, 80mm tbody, 50/50 wmi.... before maxing their flows out.

shame your not a local car. would love to see it on the dyno.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

lol - well i have been thinking about if their was a place we could meet and dyno or race for that matter  would love to try and race my car on a proper track, but i do have some more parts from H2sport i want first.

But im also a bit eager to get to the summer and try out dynolicius on my iphone, it should be pretty accourate from what i can gather on youtube, but would be fun to test it out...

i know my numbers are completly reliable so i dont mind testing this, back before i upgraded fuel pump etc and was 364bhp, i was asked by many locally who couldnt believe it either, well i jumped out to 2 different dynos and well i got the same numbers - those dynos are also in this thread....and i dont mind doing that again - their is a dynapack i have been eager to test, hopefully i can this spring ....APR uses dynapack to, so would be good comparison.

Anyways i do understand your questions Bill, a couple of big tuners in Denmark wouldnt believe it either, nor would i propably my self, unless i had done it my self, but i must say Sam was the inspiriation that kept me going for my goal, or else i would have believed earlier what tuners in denmark said about its not possible....

This is not just because i really like APR products, but i truly believe the difference lies in this manifold, no matter what application i have seen it on, it has outbeated everything when it comes to numbers...

JVK has made a GT3071r with w/m, RMR intakemanifold, r32tb. standalone ecu with RH sw, and that car never came above 380bhp on same dyno as i use...so well, i can only think the manifold is the "mutant" lol.


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> i truly believe the difference lies in this manifold, no matter what application i have seen it on, it has outbeated everything when it comes to numbers...


Are you talking about the APR intake manifold???


----------



## vgasbrkdrms1 (Jun 23, 2009)

this is absolutely amazing! good work!


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

schwartzmagic said:


> Are you talking about the APR intake manifold???


yes



vgasbrkdrms1 said:


> this is absolutely amazing! good work!


Thanks a lot :beer:


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> yes


Well its funny you say that because I have a little story for you that I know you will enjoy...

A little shop down here in South Florida by the name of USP Motorsports dyno tested the APR intake manifold versus the SEM intake manifold back to back on one of their AWP 1.8T (really a 1.9L) GLIs and guess what??? Your favorite company's intake manifold outperformed the SEM one. The ended up putting the APR one back on the car LOL.... So yeah, after knowing this I will probably end up getting an APR one too.... The only bad thing is that they have supposedly ceased producing them anymore so by the time I'm ready to purchase one it will be pretty hard to find one new.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

schwartzmagic said:


> Well its funny you say that because I have a little story for you that I know you will enjoy...
> 
> A little shop down here in South Florida by the name of USP Motorsports dyno tested the APR intake manifold versus the SEM intake manifold back to back on one of their AWP 1.8T (really a 1.9L) GLIs and guess what??? Your favorite company's intake manifold outperformed the SEM one. The ended up putting the APR one back on the car LOL.... So yeah, after knowing this I will probably end up getting an APR one too.... The only bad thing is that they have supposedly ceased producing them anymore so by the time I'm ready to purchase one it will be pretty hard to find one new.



that is funny, but it does not come as suprise to me - when i saw the initial PR post for that SEM intake manifold it was obvius that the powergains are mid area only, top gains was not their.....The engineer from APR who designed the APR intake manifold said back when the first flow test was done that the flow test wouldnt prove which manifold gives best performance and they would bet that their manifold outperformed any of the others in the test, given the fact that this was done so long ago its funny noone did this - but i have seen it on many cars here that has either installed the SEM believing the flow test, but never getting close to the APR manifold - JVK got 60bhp alone when swapping out oem AGU intake manifold with the APR and this was on GT35r turbo, no sw change - i got exactly what APR claimed in regards of hp and torgue...

But you are right APR stopped the production and unless the demands for it was big enough they wouldnt go in to production again - so either a thread or enough demands is the answer, not to mention sourcing out in the yellow pages etc.


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

Maybe one day a China clone of the APR intake mani will come out 

I have an RMR intake mani that is yet to be installed. We'll see how that does on my disco potato + 70mm TB + W/M + Small Port + 830 inj + APR stg3 hardware on Unitronic 830 file


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> JVK got 60bhp alone when swapping out oem AGU intake manifold with the APR and this was on GT35r turbo, no sw change - i got exactly what APR claimed in regards of hp and torgue...


 
with all due respect ...

60bhp power swing with no sw change... c'mon.... fueling and ignition just happened to still be spot on despite a 60bhp swing??

sure!


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

schwartzmagic said:


> Well its funny you say that because I have a little story for you that I know you will enjoy...
> 
> A little shop down here in South Florida by the name of USP Motorsports dyno tested the APR intake manifold versus the SEM intake manifold back to back on one of their AWP 1.8T (really a 1.9L) GLIs and guess what??? Your favorite company's intake manifold outperformed the SEM one. The ended up putting the APR one back on the car LOL.... So yeah, after knowing this I will probably end up getting an APR one too.... The only bad thing is that they have supposedly ceased producing them anymore so by the time I'm ready to purchase one it will be pretty hard to find one new.


Correct, SEM commissioned the test and after learning of the results and analyzing the tests I conducted a test myself on my very own car stock vs APR (by INA Engineering) vs SEM all within 15 min swap. This was on my last setup of 3076R-WG @ 22 psi total timing of 10-12° same file, same variables - the best of three pulls. The SEM showed more up top.









This is the data submitted from USP and this is not to discredit them, just for the sake of argument. The power curve is nothing like mine where the APR and SEM have the same spool characteristics. The curve up top is also different where the APR meets with the SEM - some food for thought.









Take it for what it's worth. Other independent tests were conducted in the UK and Denmark confirming my results not with the APR but with some other intakes out there.

Brett from APR designed the APR intake and even after the flow tests were conducted with the 007 Monster intake, showing the best results we maintained a neutral relationship and to this day I still respect APR & their products. It was from my experience prior to the 007 and even before the inception of the APR Intake I conceptualized the basic design as a result from having worked on different platforms.

Here is an analysis of one of my initial designs from back in 2002/2003 when I started with the log type plenum and uniform oblong shape runners. During this time Arnold from Pagparts was really the only one who knew of this as I shared my results with him.
Log type plenum









This is of the tapered plenum.









There are a few well known vortexer’s some of which are still present today that were aware of my work even during the very early days of my research – they know who they are 

I thought I would share some history and take a trip down memory lane to clear up some of the misguided information.

Regards,

Don®


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

So the thing is that APR intake manifold is very good one and it was a hell of a task to make any improvements in which DonR apparently succeeded. I had a choice between pretty much proven APR manifold and SEM. I knew that both were pretty similar and that I would hardly see any difference on GT28RS if i picked one over another.

I pretty much picked SEM manifold because I wanted to support another company, to bring some competition into all this. I am glad DonR is keeping professional relationships with other companies.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

I've never heard of this DonR character! opcorn::laugh::screwy:


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

mescaline said:


> So the thing is that APR intake manifold is very good one and it was a hell of a task to make any improvements in which DonR apparently succeeded. I had a choice between pretty much proven APR manifold and SEM. I knew that both were pretty similar and that I would hardly see any difference on GT28RS if i picked one over another.
> 
> I pretty much picked SEM manifold because I wanted to support another company, to bring some competition into all this. I am glad DonR is keeping professional relationships with other companies.


If I were to do it all again, I'd pick the SEM. They really worked hard to put out a good product...and they did! It's a fantastic intake.

The reason I'm running the RMR was because I already had the APR C style FMIC + piping. It would have cost a lot of money to switch all my piping to fit a driver's side TB mount.

APR doesn't really care too much about the 1.8t platform these days. All new work and care goes into the 2.0t (and fancier) engines.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

badger5 said:


> with all due respect ...
> 
> 60bhp power swing with no sw change... c'mon.... fueling and ignition just happened to still be spot on despite a 60bhp swing??
> 
> sure!


I really dont know if the fueling and ignition was spot on, but i do now that he changed after that also to fullrace exhaust manifold, bigger injectors, fuel pump, mechanical lifters and catcams and ended at 570bhp - when he changed from oem intake manifold to APR he went from 406bhp to 469bhp on a GT35r. the stock intake manifold is crap, as simple as that....

I my self went as i stated earlier and can be seen in the thread i made about my road to 400bhp cough cough 394bhp - went from 322 to 356bhp without any other change, we squezzed out a bit more with w/m before fuel pump was maxed out, which later on let to much more.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Don R said:


> Correct, SEM commissioned the test and after learning of the results and analyzing the tests I conducted a test myself on my very own car stock vs APR (by INA Engineering) vs SEM all within 15 min swap. This was on my last setup of 3076R-WG @ 22 psi total timing of 10-12° same file, same variables - the best of three pulls. The SEM showed more up top.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don thanks for your insightfull post :thumbup:

According to the USP test the APR gives more powaer up top - on yours it was opposite - could the reason be that the USP had their car tuned for APR, yours was for SEM so when both you guys swapped between them on either yours or USP´s test one would fail?....

All i know is from the test we have seen on a few applications here that the APR outperforms anyother competitor, i have my self not seen a build in Denmark yet with the SEM, but in regards of RMR and other manifolds the APR bash them out....

The only company in denmark i could think of carring the SEM is not worth mentioning the test findings from, i wont mention their name - but I do know they dont have the option to source out an APR and nor would they have any other comparison but against their chinese RMR knockoffs which they call by their own name altough its 100% identical...

That beeing said the entire post you made was very informational, and i would love to see the INA tech 2 thread about Tb and intake manifolds....

All i know is this manifold rocks on my setup


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

Damn... I opened up a can of worms it seems LOL....

Thanks for clearing all that up Don... 

I heard what I posted from someone who will remain namesless LOL.... and this was mentioned when I told them I was going to eventually get the SEM mani. When they told me of their results I was like SEM :screwy: but given the hard data you've presented and the results of their testing it's hard to say either one is that much better. What I mean is in his case the APR intake mani was better and in yours the SEM one is. Given the new information I would probably lean towards getting an SEM with a discount :laugh:

:thumbup:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

schwartzmagic said:


> Damn... I opened up a can of worms it seems LOL....
> 
> Thanks for clearing all that up Don...
> 
> ...


Still the APR made more power at less boost then the SEM in USP´s test - don designed the SEM, USP has been using SEM products for years and well all in all they dont have a different agenda altough they are working close with APR these days - but still the USP test shows what i have seen on other application altough my comparison is to the RMR - but as you also said both would prove them self better then anything else out their - but i still would like to see INA´s tech 2 thread, that should show the real truth....

Don this is not for saying your results are tamperede with - NOT AT ALL, but i think their is a need for a test where both manifolds are on same application with retune for both to see comparison.


----------



## 3071R-GLI (Aug 26, 2006)

Don R said:


> I thought I would share some history and take a trip down memory lane to clear up some of the misguided information.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Don®


Don, the APR and SEM manis were tested on my car, on USP's dyno. I could care less about which intake manifold is on my car, as long as it helps me make the most power. I had the APR mani and was perfectly happy with the APR mani, but was offered an SEM to test.

When the test was completed, you and I spoke on the phone, and you were surprised by the results. You offered to send me another SEM mani which you said would be slightly modified inside, and result in more power. While the second SEM mani we received did make a little more power then the first one,(as you can see on the dyno you posted) it still did not make as much as APR's. Aside from peak power, the difference in the mid range was even more noticeable. We also ran logs (which were sent to UNI to verify), and see if anything should be modified. A/F ect.. was fine, and I was told no modifications to software would help make up the difference. You then specifically told us that the SEM mani was designed for cars running larger turbos (3076R and up) and that on a smaller turbo like my T25 3071R it would not work as well. It is also mentioned in this post by another member. I then went back to my original ...d posting the positive results on here :beer:


----------



## 3071R-GLI (Aug 26, 2006)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Don thanks for your insightfull post :thumbup:
> 
> According to the USP test the APR gives more powaer up top - on yours it was opposite - could the reason be that the USP had their car tuned for APR, yours was for SEM so when both you guys swapped between them on either yours or USP´s test one would fail?....


Our test wasn't tuned specifically for either mani, it was using an off the shelf UNI 830cc file. 

Nice results on your setup by the way


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

Don send your SEM manifold my way for testing. I have a 5857 with a vband manifold and will run the uni 630 tune from a friends ECU for your dyno test... :laugh:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

3071R-GLI said:


> Our test wasn't tuned specifically for either mani, it was using an off the shelf UNI 830cc file.
> 
> Nice results on your setup by the way


Thanks alot - and thanks for clearing that up btw - i would say i believe more in the test you guys did having seeing what the APR does on other applications - not to mention SEM only claims 35hp increase, APR has said all a long that the APR would give you 40bhp and 50nm of torgue - given that i recieved that easy (both) and with w/m got even more - well i believe [email protected] statement back then :laugh:

Anyways thumbs up for your levels as well, great results :thumbup::beer:


----------



## INA (Nov 16, 2005)

No more independent testing on manifolds...period.

APR manifold is no longer available to the general public and as it stands other than the billet manifolds being offered , only ABD & SEM have a cast manifold on the market. If we could get some dyno time with Unitronic then I would happily like to get these manifolds tested.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

INA said:


> No more independent testing on manifolds...period.
> 
> APR manifold is no longer available to the general public and as it stands other than the billet manifolds being offered , only ABD & SEM have a cast manifold on the market. If we could get some dyno time with Unitronic then I would happily like to get these manifolds tested.


You party p... :laugh:

But APR has been saying for a long time now that if the demands for their manifold was big enough they would produce another batch - i dont care, i got my self one - but the increase in demand could very well start and the pressure should be on them - they build the best one, so why not....


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> You party p... :laugh:
> 
> But APR has been saying for a long time now that if the demands for their manifold was big enough they would produce another batch - i dont care, i got my self one - but the increase in demand could very well start and the pressure should be on them - they build the best one, so why not....


I fail to see how APR is better than SEM based on all the results Ive seen. Some say APR flows better, some say they are even while others say SEM way outflows APR and all others. Sweet....

:beer:


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

3071R-GLI said:


> Don, the APR and SEM manis were tested on my car, on USP's dyno. I could care less about which intake manifold is on my car, as long as it helps me make the most power. I had the APR mani and was perfectly happy with the APR mani, but was offered an SEM to test.
> 
> When the test was completed, you and I spoke on the phone, and you were surprised by the results. You offered to send me another SEM mani which you said would be slightly modified inside, and result in more power. While the second SEM mani we received did make a little more power then the first one,(as you can see on the dyno you posted) it still did not make as much as APR's. Aside from peak power, the difference in the mid range was even more noticeable. We also ran logs (which were sent to UNI to verify), and see if anything should be modified. A/F ect.. was fine, and I was told no modifications to software would help make up the difference. You then specifically told us that the SEM mani was designed for cars running larger turbos (3076R and up) and that on a smaller turbo like my T25 3071R it would not work as well. It is also mentioned in this post by another member. I then went back to my original ...ou kept this a secret because why? No good :D


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

just to clarify, the SEM and APR were both largeport ones ? what size throttle body and what orientation?
APR being largeport and R32 75mm throttle body if the "std"

and as for no other manifolds being about for 1.8t's I would'nt go that far as to say that.

teaser: flowbench tests done on one, which will be available in both handed throttle positions in 2011
flows more than any other tested manifold.

watch this space next year


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

mescaline said:


> It's a bit unfair to this forum community that you would hold information like this. While people like [email protected] and a few others were absolutely certain and wouldn't let anyone touch SEM manifold with any other comments, you knew that APR made more power, even SEM flowed more (according to some test in here) and you kept this a secret because why? No good


 
USP and their crew is very secretive about eveything... Its the CIA of VW tuners LOL


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

3071R-GLI said:


> If you feel your theory about a larger turbo being required to really take advantage of this mani, I have no problem testing it again, with 3rd party supervision. If it can make more power boost for boost, I will have no problem buying it, and posting the positive results on here :beer:


Nick, you should have an INDEPENDENT third party supervise so we can all be sure there is no tom foolery going on :laugh:

Then share your results with the forum community.


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

badger5 said:


> and as for no other manifolds being about for 1.8t's I would'nt go that far as to say that.
> 
> teaser: flowbench tests done on one, which will be available in both handed throttle positions in 2011
> flows more than any other tested manifold.
> ...


You can't post that and make us sit around and wait for information on this manifold you speak of and the results.... That's a whole year (2.3 months) away!!!


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

schwartzmagic said:


> You can't post that and make us sit around and wait for information on this manifold you speak of and the results.... That's a whole year (2.3 months) away!!!


Once you start only testing manifolds for flow bench in the design fase you will fail like many others has done, by that i mean APR never flowtested theirs - they designed and engineered that thing for the 1.8T and for where ever they wanted their power and torgue area - flow bench is show off bench


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

schwartzmagic said:


> You can't post that and make us sit around and wait for information on this manifold you speak of and the results.... That's a whole year (2.3 months) away!!!


yea I can.. 

We will have to wait a wee while longer until the results and development proceed further.
vortex will know about it soon enough, if it works as it has to. 
Cambelt side throttle orientation is included in its spec. (golf style position)


----------



## 3071R-GLI (Aug 26, 2006)

mescaline said:


> It's a bit unfair to this forum community that you would hold information like this. While people like [email protected] and a few others were absolutely certain and wouldn't let anyone touch SEM manifold with any other comments, you knew that APR made more power, even SEM flowed more (according to some test in here) and you kept this a secret because why? No good


There was an agreement between us and SEM/DON that these #'s should not be posted on the site. Out of respect for them the sheets were not posted. I have never had a problem sharing my dyno sheets/my results for any of my setups, with the forum members, but this was a different situation.


----------



## ncsumecheng (Nov 1, 2005)

It's really tough. You have 10 different groups, all in the tuning VW/Audi scene to make money. Of course, unless NASA flowbenches your manifold in a comparison, if your company produces a manifold you will never agree to results. Unless you win.

What I don't understand though is why so many companies without a stake in who buys which brand part with-holds information.

Things I've heard discussed or whispered that are known but intentionally not disseminated:

-back to back or flowbenches of manifolds
-shorter valves, hybrid valvetrains to enhance RPM/lift/etc...
-which parts can cross models/years/motors
-optimal settings for very common setups

This is why the Honda guy's average-joe build often trumps us, information is shared, not horded. On here, the shop cars and the guys with deep pockets and ties to shops make the power they should on setups.

If I had the cash I'd sell my big turbo 1.8t today and get a ragged out S2000.

Prime example of hording.....a certain shop shaving off part #'s from a known OEM VW part before selling it. So that the buyer or others are left guessing. C'mon....you didn't innovate anything except go measure some bolt patterns from a friend that let you into the parts bin at a dealership.

It pissed me off so bad to have bought said part to have the p/n, s/n etched out, on a brand new part.


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

ncsumecheng said:


> It's really tough. You have 10 different groups, all in the tuning VW/Audi scene to make money. Of course, unless NASA flowbenches your manifold in a comparison, if your company produces a manifold you will never agree to results. Unless you win.
> 
> What I don't understand though is why so many companies without a stake in who buys which brand part with-holds information.
> 
> ...


Yeah dude... Its REALLY ghey... A lot of us down here laugh about all that secretive sh!t. Those same clowns that do that kind of stuff think that people are so dumb and no one will figure it out. It insults ones intelligence. And you are right... Its one of the reasons why the dub scene is so far behind others such as honduhs and evos. You have a few cars/shops making big numbers, everything is a secret, and others charging up the wazoo for some exclusive part which is basically just an OEM part. You see it here all the time. Its sad really.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

looking at that graph up on the page, looks like where the blue line jumps up at 65mph is linked to its AFR ? Stays at 14 then drops to 12.5 while the other two are constant at 12.5...Maybe thats a good idea?


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

Reason why these tests weren't published was to prevent any upheaval or bashing at the time between companies b/c really it's not required. SEM commissioned and paid for the USP test as I said, and I performed my own tests to compare showing different results. In the public eye these results are inconclusive b/c of biased parties. I wasn't prepared to come out with the data to begin a war b/c unfortunately this is what happens around here. The information was not intended for the public as there was no point - this was all based on my discretion.

My apologies if you disagree.

Regards,


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Once you start only testing manifolds for flow bench in the design fase you will fail like many others has done, by that i mean APR never flowtested theirs - they designed and engineered that thing for the 1.8T and for where ever they wanted their power and torgue area - flow bench is show off bench


You must be a fluid dynamics engineer.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

badger5 said:


> and as for no other manifolds being about for 1.8t's I would'nt go that far as to say that.


 ???


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

Issam Abed said:


> ???


Sounds like he has something in the works..but will only tease us.


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

groggory said:


> Sounds like he has something in the works..but will only tease us.


I gathered that but I am not sure why he would state it considering he is running the SEM unit?

If its a cast unit Don should be very upset.


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

Issam Abed said:


> I gathered that but I am not sure why he would state it considering he is running the SEM unit?
> 
> If its a cast unit Don should be very upset.


opcorn:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

Issam Abed said:


> I gathered that but I am not sure why he would state it considering he is running the SEM unit?
> 
> If its a cast unit Don should be very upset.


Why should he be? Not eveyone is like you Sam

The "potential new one" caters for the other side throttle placement SEM does'nt, and is nothing like the SEM in design, a SEM which I run myself, just like the 007 before that, and the dual plenum thing I before that, and the std smallport before that... you getting my drift? I try products out, as I continue development and evolution of my own racecar.

SEM is an excellent product and most certainly works extremely well. Thats why I sell them and will continue to. Great product.

we will see how this new development goes, and it may yet die on its arse as some products do during their prototyping moves into productionising, and tests, on power not just flowbench, will make or break the product.

In true vortex style, the haters will look for an angle on this, and look for reasons for this to be a conspiracy and the like.. Utter shyte as I come to expect from many on here. Its *maybe* a new product which *might* come to the vag market during 2011.

When and if this product makes power to go with its initial flowbench results will it become a real product, to serve the other throttle position users, who want such things.

this can only be a good thing for 1.8t guys chasing power. my involvement is from being approached to assist in its development and testing, and for my own benefit I had it flowbenched to compare it to the SEM I also got flowbenched, as if it were anything less than the superb SEM I would not be wastign my time with it. The results were +ve and its got my support now to evolve it to something suitable for 1.8T fitment particularly the other throttle position. 

regards
bill


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

badger5 said:


> In true vortex style, the haters will look for an angle on this, and look for reasons for this to be a conspiracy and the like.. Utter shyte as I come to expect from many on here. Its *maybe* a new product which *might* come to the vag market during 2011.


Bill you are right about that part, and i always cheer new products initiativ to the 1.8T scene and great with option for some to go PS....

But you talk about haters looking for an angle - well instead of doubting results because you dont make the same results and what you think is a simular setup ( i say this to tuners in denmark as well that dont get US numbers), i have seen them as possible and proven it, but it had nothing to do with sw, it was all in the hardware for me, i pieced exactly together what i had seen 18bora using except he ran 75tb and im on 65tb and racegas vs w/m...but we both used stock airbox, stock pancake pipe etc...

What i am trying to say is that if you dont "learn" from builds or setup made elsewhere in regards of getting peak numbers that are well above what you have seen on own setup, how are you going to be succesfull at designing and building and intake manifold with that approach? - you never tried out the APR intake manifold and take the same approach as everyone else that their wont be much difference between the APR, SEM and RMR etc...but just look at the USP test, if this was true how can the APR intake manifold make so much more power at almost 2psi less???how much could it have made at the 24psi the SEM are running? and they are not making lower numbers because of the higher boost/knocking - because then it wouldnt make more power at the highest psi....

Again im getting back to the "show off bench".....a flow bench is not an engine,its a good guide for showing fluids flow etc, but its not alfa-omega nor is it the proven factor for getting powers - the lenght of runners are determination of where the powers is going to be on the powercurve - you wont see that from a flowbench...

The worst thing about getting your build to where you want it and getting amazing results are all the "haters" disbelievers that dont understand it, im sorry - but im not one of those who just did a build, dynoed and got amazing results, quite the opposite infact, i have listed my entire road and change in the build with proven dynos every step of the way...

And well if you look at my thread here :

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...bhp-on-a-GT2860rs-0-64-especially-APR-s3-kits

When does my power levels become unrealistic to you? they are all from the same dyno, i have described every change i made in hw and the effects are listed their....


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Bill you are right about that part, and i always cheer new products initiativ to the 1.8T scene and great with option for some to go PS....
> 
> But you talk about haters looking for an angle - well instead of doubting results because you dont make the same results and what you think is a simular setup ( i say this to tuners in denmark as well that dont get US numbers), i have seen them as possible and proven it, but it had nothing to do with sw, it was all in the hardware for me, i pieced exactly together what i had seen 18bora using except he ran 75tb and im on 65tb and racegas vs w/m...but we both used stock airbox, stock pancake pipe etc...
> 
> ...



the haters i refer to on vortex are frequently posting..
re your post above, i'm sorry but i have no idea what you are trying to say.

SEM is a very good manifold... and the tests posted by "others" and rebuked by other peoples tests is of no interest to me, and not relevant to the new mani i mentioned (and regret having done so!)

Flow bench is a tool.. its an indicator of performance, and yes I know very well that does not guarantee power, which is why I posted power gains will be the definitive test, confirming hopefully the indicated flow results compared to the SEM which is my only bench mark, having had it flow tested when I got it, to validate some numbers, Myself.
regards
bill


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

DK, I can appreciate your enthusiasm with the products you use and support. You always keep referring back to the USP test as the be-all and end-all between the APR and SEM. My very own test showed absolutely different results from USP's. What do you gather from that or is it not even considered? If this is the case, I'm beginning to see why this completely supports my decision in not publicly posting the results.

Consider the details, at the time I performed my test I was using a stock small port head with 3651 cams, 1.8L with Pauter rods and Wiseco Drop-in's on a 830 Unitronic file. I used a transition spacer (by INA) to test both intakes. I can admit that my car was low on power as it was pulling timing yielding an overall 10°-12° up top. This was a result of a noisy bottom end from having undersized Wrist pins causing small-end rattle - is it an excuse...no, but consequence.

Nick's car, used in the USP test IIRC had 1mm oversized Intake valves, with a ported small port head and his car on the Uni tune always performed extremely well - so you really can't compare power figures between the tests. Their tests were conducted months apart, my test, one evening 15 min apart. And again I'm not discrediting them but understand I'm not comparing apples to apples; however, you can assess the characteristics and differences where mine as I explained before show a very different result.

I regret participating in your post as I feel it was sort of hijacked - even though it has been providing this forum with some much needed entertainment opcorn:.

Regards,

Don®


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Don R said:


> DK, I can appreciate your enthusiasm with the products you use and support. You always keep referring back to the USP test as the be-all and end-all between the APR and SEM. My very own test showed absolutely different results from USP's. What do you gather from that or is it not even considered? If this is the case, I'm beginning to see why this completely supports my decision in not publicly posting the results.
> 
> Consider the details, at the time I performed my test I was using a stock small port head with 3651 cams, 1.8L with Pauter rods and Wiseco Drop-in's on a 830 Unitronic file. I used a transition spacer (by INA) to test both intakes. I can admit that my car was low on power as it was pulling timing yielding an overall 10°-12° up top. This was a result of a noisy bottom end from having undersized Wrist pins causing small-end rattle - is it an excuse...no, but consequence.
> 
> ...


Don the reason i refer to the USP test is several, 1) they are 3rd party 2) sw was uni (again 3rd party) 3) it supports my own findings, 4) the way the test was described seems all fair....

Now to your test - i completly support your test and believe your findings, but as you also mentioned your head was small port - APR allways stated you need minimum a portmatch to take full use of the intake manifold, a transations just dont cut it - the SEM was designed around small and big port offering something for both small and big port heads - which i actually think is very cool, so all in all the SEM should perform better on a small port head in my books, but thats not was inteded for the APR, and on big port heads well the manifold just shows what has also been seen in the USP test...

This is why i salute a new 3rd party test from INA and unitronic in the Tech thread, that would be good proven grounds....

in the USP test i dont really see how the partys involved would gain from a different result then what was or vice versa, but i hate to say it Don allthough you have my respect you are not exactly what i would say 3rd party - anyways get that test going  

BTW i think you brought very good and usefull information to this thread - debate is open and if this could bring and final result of what intake manifold is best for the 1.8T - dont we owe the community to leave a pressure on APR to produce them again? i mean the long waiting SEM manifolds and the expections of that manifold is pretty much what ended the APR manifold..i do care for products made by APR, i dont deny that - love their products, but i also support everything that brings the vw community forward....


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> SEM manifolds and the expections of that manifold is pretty much what ended the APR manifold..i do care for products made by APR, i dont deny that - love their products, but i also support everything that brings the vw community forward....


seems that APR dont care for sustaining products for "old" engines tho


----------



## RonN (Feb 15, 2001)

IMO APR does not do much to support old models because that is not where quick hit big money is. The tools that APR has for R&D makes them capable of being the first in market segments and that allows them to control pricing.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

bad strategy from APR then. This thread alone got almost 10 000hits. Obviously there more than enough interest to make big cash for 1.8T mods. 

:screwy:


----------



## 3071R-GLI (Aug 26, 2006)

Don R said:


> DK, I can appreciate your enthusiasm with the products you use and support. You always keep referring back to the USP test as the be-all and end-all between the APR and SEM. My very own test showed absolutely different results from USP's. What do you gather from that or is it not even considered? If this is the case, I'm beginning to see why this completely supports my decision in not publicly posting the results.
> 
> Consider the details, at the time I performed my test I was using a stock small port head with 3651 cams, 1.8L with Pauter rods and Wiseco Drop-in's on a 830 Unitronic file. I used a transition spacer (by INA) to test both intakes. I can admit that my car was low on power as it was pulling timing yielding an overall 10°-12° up top. This was a result of a noisy bottom end from having undersized Wrist pins causing small-end rattle - is it an excuse...no, but consequence.
> 
> ...


I would not say months apart. The APR mani test was completed on 12/26/2008. ~ a week later we dyno tested the first SEM manifold that we received. This test showed the biggest power difference between the two manis. 

We then received a second SEM mani to test (which had been modified to flow more/perform better then the production SEM mani) With the initial SEM mani still on my car, we hit the dyno again on 01/26/2009 (as shown on the graph posted). ~ an hour later we then tested the second SEM mani on my car. While this back to back test did show that the second SEM mani definitely made more power then the first, it was still 30 whp short of the APR mani in some parts of the powerband, and ~ 10 whp less peak whp. This was a fair test, with at least 3 runs completed for each mani, and with plenty of cool down time in between. Also the APR mani test showed 22.75 PSI, while the SEM tests showed 23.5 PSI or higher. Logs of the tests were sent to UNI (Mike Z) so that he could see if anything needed to be changed on my software to help the SEM test. He said all was fine. 

In this test, I really wanted the SEM to make more power. I was always happy with the power my car made with the APR mani, but if I could pick up some whp, and potentially run quicker 1/4 mile times with a new mani, then why not right? Unfortunately, this was not the case (on my car) and I had no choice but to go back to my original mani. This test was in no way completed to take anything away from Don or his individual results. After speaking with him, he strikes me as a straightforward guy, and an enthuthiast who is committed to helping the VW/Audi community. Furthermore as already mentioned, the APR mani is no longer an option, so I dont think these results would have any relevance to any potential buyer. I am sure the SEM provides very nice gains over a stock mani, is a nice quality piece, and is offered at a very reasonable price :beer:


----------



## 3071R-GLI (Aug 26, 2006)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> in the USP test i dont really see how the partys involved would gain from a different result then what was or vice versa, but i hate to say it Don allthough you have my respect you are not exactly what i would say 3rd party - anyways get that test going
> ....


You are correct, there was nothing to gain or lose by USP with this test. This was strictly done to see If my individual car could benefit from a different item. There was never a "brand preference" in this test.


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

I kinda/sort of think it's funny that my little post in this thread made it blow the hell up.... 

You can thank me for that DK as I know you love all these discussions taking place :thumbup:

Badger and Don.... I really don't think either one of you should regret posting anything on this thread. 

Badger, I really think it's really good you mentioned something about a possible new manifold because we really need more new products that can give us more options. Unfortunately I have the driver side throttle body set-up so I won't be able to take advantage of using it if and when it comes to production.

Don, the information you've provided has been very informative and gives a lot of insight into what really went down and how results can be different because an unlimited amount of variables i.e., small port head, larger valves, t25 vs t3, etc etc etc...

Nick, you've been very quiet and I can only assume you're up to no good :laugh:

That is all....


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

badger5 said:


> seems that APR dont care for sustaining products for "old" engines tho


 Well this is the problem i have been rambling on and on about, once you get insane results from just a manifold and i was far from the first to achieve huge gains on the APR intake manifold on even an GT28rs little turbo, then people 2. guess it - but if someone shows flowbench numbers that knocks the socks of everything, then everyone wants it - because flow test = best HP gains :screwy: yeah right... 

Anyways the SEM was announced like 3 years ago in devolpment and has since then been hyped to the new GOD of manifolds, just wait and see - it will blow out everything else - yada yada...but sadly it never did, but in all that time - how many manifolds do you think APR sold??? the SEM costed exactly the same as the APR unit, but how many was sold of the SEM in the first year??- you can bet many waited for that long hyped manifold, its just a shame it never delivered to the crowds as it was PR´ed.... 

If test like the one USP did was done a long time ago against those other manifolds in the flow bench test vs the APR unit, then the cumminty would have learned to those results with a grain of salt... 

The sad thing is the GOD manifold was designed 4 years ago from APR with claims on the s3+kit of 40-50hp and same in torgue, and nothing has come close to claims and backed up prove like 18bora did back in the days and now me, but SEM kept them out of business with getting results like the USP one not published etc...


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Well this is the problem i have been rambling on and on about, once you get insane results from just a manifold and i was far from the first to achieve huge gains on the APR intake manifold on even an GT28rs little turbo, then people 2. guess it - but if someone shows flowbench numbers that knocks the socks of everything, then everyone wants it - because flow test = best HP gains :screwy: yeah right...
> 
> Anyways the SEM was announced like 3 years ago in devolpment and has since then been hyped to the new GOD of manifolds, just wait and see - it will blow out everything else - yada yada...but sadly it never did, but in all that time - how many manifolds do you think APR sold??? the SEM costed exactly the same as the APR unit, but how many was sold of the SEM in the first year??- you can bet many waited for that long hyped manifold, its just a shame it never delivered to the crowds as it was PR´ed....
> 
> ...


 Okay, I like you (no ****) but I'm over the whole APR intake mani uber alles thing lol....


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

badger5 said:


> seems that APR dont care for sustaining products for "old" engines tho


 This is not exactly true. Please consider the following: 

When we cast items such as the 1.8T Intake manifold we must do so in large quantities. Let's assume we must cast 50 at a time. These things are not cheap! They do cost money to make. Take what you feel it costs for just 1 raw casting and multiply that by 50. That's how much we must invest to have 50 units simply sitting on our shelfs. Oh, and they are not light weight in large quantities so think about shipping too! From there each unit must be power coated. Multiply 50 x the cost you feel it takes to power coat them and ship back and forth. Next, we must shut down use of the CNC machines and devote time to machine 50 units. Again, what do you feel that time costs? Multiply it by 50. We must then make each of the injector fittings. Again, what do you feel the raw material cost is for 50 units x 4 for the injector seats. Then we must shut down the other CNC machine and devote time to make 200 injector seats. What do you feel that costs? Finally we must gather all of the injector seats and vacuum lines and install them on each unit. How much money and time do you feel is spent on these units? All said and done, just getting them on the shelfs requires quite a large investment of money, man hours, and resources. 

That would be fine and dandy, and we would have no problem doing it, but we are not seeing these fly off the shelfs either. They just sit there, collecting dust. Sure, there are some hardcore guys out there that say they want the manifolds but how many are actually buying them? I see interest on here, but are you actually willing to buy a manifold or is it just a want item? 

If the demand is there, we can continue to make these, but we saw the demand drop off as the 1.8T engine aged even further. Logically we chose not to invest tens of thousands of dollars and countless man and machine hours just to allow a product sit on the shelf. 

------ 

Right now, to the best of my knowledge, we have several units left and they are in these conditions: 

6 x Raw Castings 
3 x Machined Castings, Powder Coated Black, no Injector Seats, No Vacuum Lines Installed. 
1 x Flat Black Unit, Semi Complete 
1 x Gloss Black Unit, Complete 

If one unit is needed for testing, I may be able to work a way to get that unit out for the dyno shootout test. If the results are favorable, and the demand is there, I may be able to work in man and machine time to finish the 3 semi complete units and if the demand is higher than 3 I may be able to work even more man and machine time to complete the other 6 raw castings. 

Does anyone honestly expect a demand higher than 9 units in the near future? I want to support the scene and create these for everyone if it's preforming top notch and is what you all want, just please understand there's more to it than us simply discontinuing it for no reason. 

:thumbup:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

schwartzmagic said:


> Okay, I like you (no ****) but I'm over the whole APR intake mani uber alles thing lol....


 :laugh::laugh::beer: we do drive german cars, so we have to have parts that uber alles.... :laugh: 

Well im not - basicly i couldnt really care less, i got my self an APR manifold and happy with it - but the next time someone builds a setup that is almost like mine, but just with an SEM instead and they dont get the same numbers as me, they wont understand it - because they have an even better manifold (they think)....and then it just really pisses me off that SEM kept the APR manifold from reproduction. 

Its kinda of like if their was 2 car brands in the world, one beeing Honda, the other Ferrari. HP, Speed etc. Claims from the Honda beated the ferrari and the Ferrari stopped their production, because everyone bought the Honda because of the bigger/better claims, so everyone ended up driving honda´s.... 

Very simplified, but you get my point...that would be a sad sad day....


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> This is not exactly true. Please consider the following:
> 
> When we cast items such as the 1.8T Intake manifold we must do so in large quantities. Let's assume we must cast 50 at a time. These things are not cheap! They do cost money to make. Take what you feel it costs for just 1 raw casting and multiply that by 50. That's how much we must invest to have 50 units simply sitting on our shelfs. Oh, and they are not light weight in large quantities so think about shipping too! From there each unit must be power coated. Multiply 50 x the cost you feel it takes to power coat them and ship back and forth. Next, we must shut down use of the CNC machines and devote time to machine 50 units. Again, what do you feel that time costs? Multiply it by 50. We must then make each of the injector fittings. Again, what do you feel the raw material cost is for 50 units x 4 for the injector seats. Then we must shut down the other CNC machine and devote time to make 200 injector seats. What do you feel that costs? Finally we must gather all of the injector seats and vacuum lines and install them on each unit. How much money and time do you feel is spent on these units? All said and done, just getting them on the shelfs requires quite a large investment of money, man hours, and resources.
> 
> ...


 LOL, working in manufacturing, I know very well how things work, what they cost and how they can be efficiently made... and your description above just shows me you need to adopt some lean manufacturing in your process. 

Earlier in this thread APR said they were withdrawing from their manifold for 1.8t, and you have explained why APR see this as they dom in the terms of the process you have described and in those terms the ecconomics does not support it, that seems clear. 

Not everyone employs such a process as yours however, and lesser qtys on demand increase the viability so there is still a place for these if they flow well, increase horsepower meaningfully, and are affordable.


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> :laugh::laugh::beer: we do drive german cars, so we have to have parts that uber alles.... :laugh:
> 
> Well im not - basicly i couldnt really care less, i got my self an APR manifold and happy with it - but the next time someone builds a setup that is almost like mine, but just with an SEM instead and they dont get the same numbers as me, they wont understand it - because they have an even better manifold (they think)....and then it just really pisses me off that SEM kept the APR manifold from reproduction.
> 
> ...


 You blame a SEM manifold for APR choosing to pull away from the 1.8t manifold?? FFS, thats laughable in the extreme.. And you car example just makes no sense at all...  
Thats not what APR even say, simple ecconomics is why. 

No one gets the same numbers as you......... and I wonder why? 
Freak of nature that cannot be replicated anywhere else but it has to be true? 
This can be the only reason no? 
(maybe inside the 28 lives a gt30 in compact housing)  

You are happy with your APR setup, good for you. 
SEM works for plenty of others, and will continue to whilst they wish to keep getting them made.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

badger5 said:


> You blame a SEM manifold for APR choosing to pull away from the 1.8t manifold?? FFS, thats laughable in the extreme.. And you car example just makes no sense at all...
> Thats not what APR even say, simple ecconomics is why.
> 
> No one gets the same numbers as you......... and I wonder why?
> ...


 Ahemm their is more to ecconomics then cost Bill, if the APR units sold easy, they would produce them - but the fact of the matter is for a long time they havent sold because the SEM unit was what peopled waited for, it was PR´ed as the GOD of manifolds for years, so yes in a way the SEM unit is to blame for this...take it how ever you like it...and also results was apparently kept from the public.. 

Ahemm no one gets the numbers i get???well i dont know why you just wont search in to 18bora´s previus posted threads and numbers, he made even more on this turbo - 390whp - thats what i made in BHP...i cant really be blamed for you not being able to make those numbers can I??? does a GT30 spool that fast??? do you want pics of the turbo and in intake, i would be happy to provide you that, also im sure Arin can confirm that they use a GT28rs in the s3+kit.. 

Man this is what im talking about, people wont be able to make those numbers if such a vital piece for doing so is the APR manifold and that is ended in production -  

Btw Enginerd made same powers, he is on here as well... 

I have carefully documented my gains every step of the way, I even dynoed on 3 different dynos to show consitency, and i would be happy to dyno on what ever dyno you would like - no problem, nor would i have any issues showing pics of the turbo if thats what you want....but again, how can i spool like GT28rs but be a GT30????..... 

And i think INA would known if i had done so btw.... 

Again Bill if you dont replicate a build exactly, how can you even discredit peoples results? could it be that your builds just dont deliver in the same way...


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

DK, I believe you are taking this a little too far now with the reason APR stopped production b/c of the SEM intake. APR is a large company and I'm sure they are aware of their market and what they need to do to keep revenues going. Tying up resources and money for product to sit on the shelves is not really profitable when there are other segments of the market and product line yeilding greater margins. 

Before we even put the SEM intake in production I was looking to get an APR intake mani...but then the opportunity came up and we took it upon our selves to engineer one according to our specifications. Aside from the flow numbers we also focused on flow distribution between runners which resulted in 1.54% from highest to lowest - exceptional if you ask me, furthermore, lowering the BSFC/hp which was also achieved - another great feature. Taken from the INA TB Test below is a before and after. BSFC of 3.496 on the SEM @ 339.5hp and BSFC of 4.047 @ 312hp on stock. This plays a role in fuel efficiency and overall engine efficiency. 









There are a lot of little details we incorporated that I guess only I can appreciate - aside from a few others . 

Just to clarify enginerd's car is using a Pass Side 007 Intake.


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

This thread is so entertaining opcorn:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Don R said:


> There are a lot of little details we incorporated that I guess only I can appreciate - aside from a few others .
> 
> Just to clarify enginerd's car is using a Pass Side 007 Intake.


 you could be right Don about the reason APR stopped production etc, i dont wanna say i know the main reason, all i can say is -it happend soon after the release of the SEM. 

Anyways i know enginerds car is using pass side 07, but i was just stating that other has made the same power i do on an APR intake manifold...but i am however the only to do it with a 65mm dbc tb....others use bigger tb, i believe INA´s test showed the significant in between the size of 65-75mm tb, that is big a difference and i wish i could go larger on dbc  

Btw don i did use some of your previous information about twisting tb to get better flowdistribution :beer: 

Anyways i do really get pissed with post like Bill´s, i worked really hard to get where i am and used lots of money to do so, but then results get doubted and i get upset the APR manifold is not around for doubters to try cloning my build and they will see results are the same.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Bill this is a Ko3s with w/m - 222bhp - his dyno is overlayed mine and drawed on it...look at the spool on both of ours - now look at what power any setup with GT3071 or Gt3076 are making at low rpm like 2000-3000rpm, i will bet you wont see the same level of power, thats because i have tiny fast spooling turbo, this little potato spool the same as ko3s, like to see you prove this done on any Gt3071r.


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

I don't think anyone here runs big enough turbo to really take advantage of SEM intake manifold, that thing is just HUGE. Coupled with 80mm Hemi TB you can rest assured that intake side of engine won't choke you up to 1000hp lol


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

I can't believe I'm responding again to this thread but that doesn't make any sense... If it flows too much then why make it? I mean as it is most of the big turbos pushing past the 500 hp mark for our motors are turbos that aren't really meant for our small displacement engines. I'm not saying we can't use them because clearly we can and clearly they're making power but at what cost? Engines and turbos hitting full boost by 5K rpm which isn't what VW engineers had in mind when they designed our engines. Now, again, I didn't say it's not possible or that we're not doing it but again it wasn't designed for the levels we're taking it to... So back to the SEM manifold, it doesn't make sense for you to say the manifold was designed for too much flow so no one is really able to make full use of what it was intended for... 

Does any of that make sense??? I'm tired and can't think after the itis.....


----------



## mescaline (Jul 15, 2005)

It's not flowing too much it's just that if you slap this on k03 turbo you might not get any improvements, if you throw it on gt28rs you might remove restrictions but so will other intakes but if you couple it with gt35 or bigger then you might see its full potential. Intake manifold is obviously not a miracle maker, it can only help so much but biggee turbo u use, more help you need. Apr manifold was obviously made to compliment their stage 3+ turbokit, sem will definitely work better with bigger turbos, plenum is freakin HUGE, it will be able to feed anything 

Anyway this is only my opinion.


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

opcorn:


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

Gulfstream said:


> opcorn:


 Everyone is hungry for popcorn...


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

mescaline said:


> It's not flowing too much it's just that if you slap this on k03 turbo you might not get any improvements, if you throw it on gt28rs you might remove restrictions but so will other intakes but if you couple it with gt35 or bigger then you might see its full potential. Intake manifold is obviously not a miracle maker, it can only help so much but biggee turbo u use, more help you need. Apr manifold was obviously made to compliment their stage 3+ turbokit, sem will definitely work better with bigger turbos, plenum is freakin HUGE, it will be able to feed anything
> 
> Anyway this is only my opinion.


 the intake manifold is along with cams etc a part that increases VE of an engine, if you improve the VE, then it dont really matter what turbo you smack on it, the manifold that increases VE the most also is the winner, now if the SEM improves midrange power you could be partial right if this was not the case of the APR(It is) then the SEM would help spool on bigger turbos(it does), but then again so does the APR....now you talk about size of the plenum, how big is the size of the plenum at the end of the tappered design??? 

For what its worth, Audi went from dual plenum to tappered plenum, to log style plenum on their lemans racer....wonder why that its......even the Honda people makes most powers on their logstyle manifolds - not drawing a conclusion, but.... 

Anyways you have to consider that the SEM at almost 2psi more then the APR delivered 18hp short of the APR, this is a manifold PR as the bomb - this is not oem vs xyz manifold, but 2 manifolds claimed to be the best - 18hp is a really a lot in that comparison....


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Ahemm their is more to ecconomics then cost Bill, if the APR units sold easy, they would produce them - but the fact of the matter is for a long time they havent sold because the SEM unit was what peopled waited for, it was PR´ed as the GOD of manifolds for years, so yes in a way the SEM unit is to blame for this...take it how ever you like it...and also results was apparently kept from the public..
> 
> Ahemm no one gets the numbers i get???well i dont know why you just wont search in to 18bora´s previus posted threads and numbers, he made even more on this turbo - 390whp - thats what i made in BHP...i cant really be blamed for you not being able to make those numbers can I??? does a GT30 spool that fast??? do you want pics of the turbo and in intake, i would be happy to provide you that, also im sure Arin can confirm that they use a GT28rs in the s3+kit..
> 
> ...


 Your blaming another product for APRs "choice" to not continue is just difficult to understand.. whatever tho its what you think, so makes zero difference to me what you think. I think differently. 

GT28RS and 400bhp numbers is frankly unrealistic - period. No matter how much to say to the contrary, seeing is believing and until the day I see it with my own eye's I will remain sceptical. 

all the best 
bill


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Bill this is a Ko3s with w/m - 222bhp - his dyno is overlayed mine and drawed on it...look at the spool on both of ours - now look at what power any setup with GT3071 or Gt3076 are making at low rpm like 2000-3000rpm, i will bet you wont see the same level of power, thats because i have tiny fast spooling turbo, this little potato spool the same as ko3s, like to see you prove this done on any Gt3071r.


 shows that particular k03s being very slow to spool.. 
I dont get what point you are desperately trying to make.. 
best I have seen a GT30 on my dyno spool so far is 1bar boost at 3300rpm and 2bar by 4000rpm 

GT28Rs' not a turbo I spend time with.. too small for the £$ outlay on builds I do for people. 
nice road unit yes, IHIVF34 drives nicer however, but is fragile when pushed. 


but... this is well off topic and I dont have time to debate any further. so long as you are happy, I am happy for you. until I see a GT28Rs make your kind of power levels, I will remain thinking as I do.. until proven in front of my eye's on my dyno. 
all the best 
bill


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> the intake manifold is along with cams etc a part that increases VE of an engine, if you improve the VE, then it dont really matter what turbo you smack on it, the manifold that increases VE the most also is the winner, now if the SEM improves midrange power you could be partial right if this was not the case of the APR(It is) then the SEM would help spool on bigger turbos(it does), but then again so does the APR....now you talk about size of the plenum, how big is the size of the plenum at the end of the tappered design???
> 
> For what its worth, Audi went from dual plenum to tappered plenum, to log style plenum on their lemans racer....wonder why that its......even the Honda people makes most powers on their logstyle manifolds - not drawing a conclusion, but....
> 
> Anyways you have to consider that the SEM at almost 2psi more then the APR delivered 18hp short of the APR, this is a manifold PR as the bomb - this is not oem vs xyz manifold, but 2 manifolds claimed to be the best - 18hp is a really a lot in that comparison....


 comparing leman cars to our's is one hell of a leap!


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

badger5 said:


> shows that particular k03s being very slow to spool..
> I dont get what point you are desperately trying to make..
> best I have seen a GT30 on my dyno spool so far is 1bar boost at 3300rpm and 2bar by 4000rpm
> 
> ...


 nice statement, why dont you back that up - try and show a dyno of k03 making more power then the one i posted and what i am at between 1500-3000rpm, and if you compare ko3,ko4, and GT28 to bigger turbos, you can really notice how much more power the smaller turbos are making in this area...this is a comparison to wob-sh573, he has APR intake manifold and GT30 turbo - notice the difference in spool in the boost area and hp/torgue area - everything converted to wheel hp etc. 



















But i must say i do find it a bit funny that you dont spent so much time with a GT28rs turbo, but you know that the numbers i am making is not realistic - how does that make sense? then all you experience is in what, the ineffective GT2871r some piece of crap IHI34 turbo and GT30-35? If im hostile its because you are basicly calling me a liar...but hey, its easy to just say seeing is believing - living that many miles away, but i might just drive up to your dyno and prove it for you.... 

Anyways thats the powerband of a GT28rs - keeep thinking that my turbo is a GT30 if it will make you happier and not hurted by the fact that every builds you make is ineffective :beer:


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

:facepalm:


----------



## badger5 (Nov 17, 2003)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> nice statement, why dont you back that up - try and show a dyno of k03 making more power then the one i posted and what i am at between 1500-3000rpm, and if you compare ko3,ko4, and GT28 to bigger turbos, you can really notice how much more power the smaller turbos are making in this area...this is a comparison to wob-sh573, he has APR intake manifold and GT30 turbo - notice the difference in spool in the boost area and hp/torgue area - everything converted to wheel hp etc.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Rant as much as you like fella.. The point of the k03 comparison was it looks very slow to spool for a k03, fit its delivery to match a gt28rs. Inertia's so different, it cannot be a regular comparison. 

Yes, as I have already said, seeing is believing.. and until I see a car of your spec make the power that you say you get, I remain sceptical that the power you say you achieve is attainable from a gt28rs. No I dont think yours is a GT30 inside, that was a piss take from me.. obviously didnt translate too well. 

Please do drive up my way and prove me wrong. I will openly confirm results which I see. Free dyno and cup of coffee. :thumbup: 

I know my builds work, they win races, and power I achieve is realistic... and its less than many others claim but is real.. Not unsurprisingly other peoples "claims" rarely get realised on my dyno.. Go Figure! You have no idea what I do and build.. how can you.. you can only read the small snippets I have posted... and dont know me from the man in the moon. 

anyway.. Neither of us will persuade the other, so we should'nt argue about it. So long as you are happy and you have a car which is doing everything you wish from it, its nothing to do with me. 

Enjoy it.. It is clearly a very good mix of parts and tune and is on a sweet spot in performance terms.. You should be proud of it.


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> this is a comparison to wob-sh573, he has APR intake manifold and GT30 turbo - notice the difference in spool in the boost area and hp/torgue area - everything converted to wheel hp etc.


 I bet money that wob-sh573 car will rape yours if you tried to race it! That's all that matters to me, not how much under the curve you have or whatever point you like to argue. What dyno of wob-sh573 are you comparing? hopefully not the one done by APR, because he had to switch from that ****e SW and made more power on another...lawlz


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

18T_BT said:


> I bet money that wob-sh573 car will rape yours if you tried to race it! That's all that matters to me, not how much under the curve you have or whatever point you like to argue. What dyno of wob-sh573 are you comparing? hopefully not the one done by APR, because he had to switch from that ****e SW and made more power on another...lawlz


 I dont argue that wob-sh573 wouldnt beat my car on anything, it does without a doubt...i was arguing with Badger5 who said that i had a GT30 to make those powers, the only car i could think of with a GT30 and APR intake manifold was Wob-sh573 - i was not trying to prove any point other then i couldnt be running a GT30 to make those powers i do, to that i plotted both dynos in excel and the early spool and early powers contra wob-sh573 proved that easy...and of course it was his highest dyno with uni sw i used... 

Wob-sh573 is probably one of the few to really push the GT30 to where it should be :thumbup:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

badger5 said:


> Rant as much as you like fella.. The point of the k03 comparison was it looks very slow to spool for a k03, fit its delivery to match a gt28rs. Inertia's so different, it cannot be a regular comparison.
> 
> Yes, as I have already said, seeing is believing.. and until I see a car of your spec make the power that you say you get, I remain sceptical that the power you say you achieve is attainable from a gt28rs. No I dont think yours is a GT30 inside, that was a piss take from me.. obviously didnt translate too well.
> 
> ...


 The funny thing is i dont consider me be the one ranting, you are the one arguing all the time that i couldnt be making those numbers i do, but i guess you are right - i wont be able to prove to you with im saying is legit, you will keep on disbelieving until you see it for your self no matter what - but take this however you would like - the same thing you are saying is what RH who wrote my sw says - other peoples "claims" or dynos never get realised on their dyno - i did, JVK who uses RH for a lot of his cars wouldnt have believed it if he didnt see it with his eyes, nor would RH - they said i was crazy if i ever thought that i would get to where i am now - back when i first installed just the s3+kit i arranged with mescaline to drive up to RH and dyno as well so could see with APR made, i never got anywhere near that.. he dynoed straight out 339,8bhp - just like APR claims, no ****...i dynoed 289bhp with almost 1bar backpressure and 0,9bar boost, i later got 322bhp - etc etc....you now the rambling... anyhow, i know you wont believe, so i does not matter.... 

Im sorry for taking your statement about GT30 that seriusly, but when someone calls me liar or cheat, i kind of respond exactly like Marty Mcfly in back to the future, when he is called yellow...so you might understand why i respond like i do, but no harm done - i will surely if i get the chance to do so, drive up to you and prove you wrong and well if i do so and i prove you wrong, you can always give me a trip around one of the tracks you use  eace: 

BTW i would like to say that i love the look of all your builds, and yes they are proven on tracks etc.., but i would like for you to try an APR intake manifold out for your self and i bet you will see what i have seen, and many others umpkin:


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

It would be interesting to see your car run a track over there on video where we could see your times as well as a photo of the slip. That way people can better gauge how your car runs and that way this cam be settled... Also, you do have a point about for the street, day to day driving, your car probably does have the advantage, but on a highway run, 40 roll, you'll get eaten alive by a bigger turbo if of course the other person knows how to brake boost LOL... And especially at the track. fo-ged-bout-it

All things being equal of course (driver, tires, etc etc etc)


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> I dont argue that wob-sh573 wouldnt beat my car on anything, it does without a doubt...i was arguing with Badger5 who said that i had a GT30 to make those powers, the only car i could think of with a GT30 and APR intake manifold was Wob-sh573 - i was not trying to prove any point other then i couldnt be running a GT30 to make those powers i do, to that i plotted both dynos in excel and the early spool and early powers contra wob-sh573 proved that easy...and of course it was his highest dyno with uni sw i used...
> 
> Wob-sh573 is probably one of the few to really push the GT30 to where it should be :thumbup:


 
You obviously don't have a gt30 and Badger5 said that it was a joke that was taken out of context. wob-sh573 (john) is a cool dude and has a road race car who no matter how you lined up, from a dig, from a roll, from a standing mile, from a rolling hill, up over by granny's house it doesn't matter, you will get smoked! Regardless, he isn't one of few, not everyone posts everything on vortex and there are at least 5 cars I know that have put down very close to 500whp without using an APR intake manifold. You are driving this thread into an APR agenda thread showing their intake manifold to be the best, but you only have hearsay from a customer of USP who didn't do the dyno on the same day even. So, it's not 100% accurate to make the conclusions that you are leading to! 





> Don the reason i refer to the USP test is several, 1) they are 3rd party 2) sw was uni (again 3rd party) 3) it supports my own findings, 4) the way the test was described seems all fair....
> 
> *1) fair enough 2) fine 3) you haven't tested more than APR manifold, you have no findings beyond your own car and your disco potato, nothing more to say period! 4) that's your opinion and we all know what those are worth.
> *


* 

In conclusion, you have nothing to add, you are just talking on a public forum about your experience with your car...other people posting stuff isn't YOUR FACTS!*


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

schwartzmagic said:


> It would be interesting to see your car run a track over there on video where we could see your times as well as a photo of the slip. That way people can better gauge how your car runs and that way this cam be settled... Also, you do have a point about for the street, day to day driving, your car probably does have the advantage, but on a highway run, 40 roll, you'll get eaten alive by a bigger turbo if of course the other person knows how to brake boost LOL... And especially at the track. fo-ged-bout-it
> 
> All things being equal of course (driver, tires, etc etc etc)


 
Yes, it would be nice to see how his car would perform, but he'll give some excuse of why he doesn't go to the track or his car isn't meant for that reason, blah blah blah...He beats on non turbo porsches and calls it an awesome win when they aren't even the same thing. He doesn't have a point on the street. Let any gt28rs come and race me on the street, from a dig, from a roll from whatever, I'll video tape for everyone to see. BTW-no brake boosting is necessary, my gt30r is extremely responsive.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

18T_BT said:


> You obviously don't have a gt30 and Badger5 said that it was a joke that was taken out of context. wob-sh573 (john) is a cool dude and has a road race car who no matter how you lined up, from a dig, from a roll, from a standing mile, from a rolling hill, up over by granny's house it doesn't matter, you will get smoked! Regardless, he isn't one of few, not everyone posts everything on vortex and there are at least 5 cars I know that have put down very close to 500whp without using an APR intake manifold. You are driving this thread into an APR agenda thread showing their intake manifold to be the best, but you only have hearsay from a customer of USP who didn't do the dyno on the same day even. So, it's not 100% accurate to make the conclusions that you are leading to
> 
> 
> 
> In conclusion, you have nothing to add, you are just talking on a public forum about your experience with your car...other people posting stuff isn't YOUR FACTS!


 Are you reading my post like satan reads the bible or wtf is going on????.....i never said i could compare in anyway to wob-sh573 on any racematter, nor would i ever say so - it was the best comparo i could find to prove that i dont have any GT30, and if badger only meant it as joke, he should have said so the first time i told him that my power courve is not that of a GT30 - but instead he kept ad it..so i just proved my curves different... their is many cars around 500whp, and a lot higher -i was taking about GT30 uses ... 

i really dont get your hole APR sh... i have said that the APR intake manifold is the reason i made powers, people was saying that they couldnt with SEM etc etc, one thing led to another, if you dont like it - gtf out of my thread....


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

18T_BT said:


> Yes, it would be nice to see how his car would perform, but he'll give some excuse of why he doesn't go to the track or his car isn't meant for that reason, blah blah blah...He beats on non turbo porsches and calls it an awesome win when they aren't even the same thing. He doesn't have a point on the street. Let any gt28rs come and race me on the street, from a dig, from a roll from whatever, I'll video tape for everyone to see. BTW-no brake boosting is necessary, my gt30r is extremely responsive.


 
wtf are you still rambling on about??.....i really dont care to much about making vids of my car driving, dont see the point really, and i do race my car and i do have timeslips as well - but if it will prove anything to anyone i will make a vid when spring come, we have winther now.. ..i really dont get your hostile act, i havent said i could outrace you or beat your gt30 or any Gt30 for that matter, im just arguing with badger to prove to him i do make the numbers i posted....but yeah i find it funny and like it when im beating porsches and ferraris for that matter, they are supercars no matter what they are using for power, NA or turbos, dont really see your point on this??a ferrari is not fast because it dont use turbo or wtf is going on?....


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Are you reading my post like satan reads the bible or wtf is going on????.....i never said i could compare in anyway to wob-sh573 on any racematter, nor would i ever say so - it was the best comparo i could find to prove that i dont have any GT30, and if badger only meant it as joke, he should have said so the first time i told him that my power courve is not that of a GT30 - but instead he kept ad it..so i just proved my curves different... their is many cars around 500whp, and a lot higher -i was taking about GT30 uses ...
> 
> i really dont get your hole APR sh... i have said that the APR intake manifold is the reason i made powers, people was saying that they couldnt with SEM etc etc, one thing led to another, if you dont like it - gtf out of my thread....


 
You are making good power for a gt28rs, but again, it's just a dyno and not all dynos are the same. Not many people beside you and sam have claimed as much power on gt28rs and 1.8T...All you are saying is that the APR mani is the reason you are making this power, while that is one theory, having a larger TB and larger plennum will make a ton more power on any turbo application. I mean the ABD intake mani made power on a k03. I don't see your point of how you think that the APR mani will make more power than many other intake manifolds. I am willing to bet my homebrew IM will perform just as well as your APR. If we are talking about within 5whp, that's not very much. If you want to compare power under the curve, I doubt it'll be that much different. 

I don't know who said anything about not making power on non APR products, that's again your own conclusion and opinion. Unless you have back to back tests of 2 products, then there is no real comparison, especially when they are done a month or more apart, whatever the dates are! 

I am talking about cars with gt30r and 500whp, not just random cars... 

This is a public forum and I will discuss all matters that I feel relevant as do you on said forums.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

18T_BT said:


> You obviously don't have a gt30 and Badger5 said that it was a joke that was taken out of context. wob-sh573 (john) is a cool dude and has a road race car who no matter how you lined up, from a dig, from a roll, from a standing mile, from a rolling hill, up over by granny's house it doesn't matter, you will get smoked! Regardless, he isn't one of few, not everyone posts everything on vortex and there are at least 5 cars I know that have put down very close to 500whp without using an APR intake manifold. You are driving this thread into an APR agenda thread showing their intake manifold to be the best, but you only have hearsay from a customer of USP who didn't do the dyno on the same day even. So, it's not 100% accurate to make the conclusions that you are leading to!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Do you really read post that badly, you cant even watch numbers?????? if you could, you would see that in the USP test the dynos was done exactly the same day - SEM even sent a different manifold that should flow more, it didnt - psi was different so was the power curve, sure i can adress that and believe that test, why else do you think "some" didnt want it released or posted?? ITs the only straightforward test i have seen on this forum, so yes i adress it - and also i have my own proves compared to what i have seen others in my country getting in numbers with different setups and intake manifold and also how much they gained on getting APR over RMR, oem etc..


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> wtf are you still rambling on about??.....i really dont care to much about making vids of my car driving, dont see the point really, and i do race my car and i do have timeslips as well - but if it will prove anything to anyone i will make a vid when spring come, we have winther now.. ..i really dont get your hostile act, i havent said i could outrace you or beat your gt30 or any Gt30 for that matter, im just arguing with badger to prove to him i do make the numbers i posted....but yeah i find it funny and like it when im beating porsches and ferraris for that matter, they are supercars no matter what they are using for power, NA or turbos, dont really see your point on this??a ferrari is not fast because it dont use turbo or wtf is going on?....


 I never talked about a ferrari. I only saw your porsche video. Yes, they are 'super cars' but a boxter is not a super car, nor is a carerra non turbo. They are intended for different things, these 'supercars'. Doing a HWY pull doesn't prove much more than power to weight ratio. Take that same ferarri on a road course and you will be far behind with or without an APR intake manifold on your car.


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

18T_BT said:


> you only have hearsay from a customer of USP who didn't do the dyno on the same day even. So, it's not 100% accurate to make the conclusions that you are leading to!


 The funny thing about the hearsay is that when the customer told me about it he didn't disclose all the information which I think was really important, especially when saying he made more power with the APR one... 

It would have been nice to know the APR intake mani was designed for a T25 flanged turbo, hence why it performed so well with his car and performs well on DK's car, also knowing that it was tested all in the same day is kind of important. Call me crazy, but I really believe, even though it is his/SEM's/Uni's product, that they can perform a more controlled test than say USP... That's just me. I really do also think that if you were to make some kind of comparison like that you need to control a lot of variables to get the most honest/accurate results...

I'm not running a t25 turbo and will therefore not consider purchasing an APR manifold. Its either SEM or something custom for me. :vampire:


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Do you really read post that badly, you cant even watch numbers?????? if you could, you would see that in the USP test the dynos was done exactly the same day - SEM even sent a different manifold that should flow more, it didnt - psi was different so was the power curve, sure i can adress that and believe that test, why else do you think "some" didnt want it released or posted?? ITs the only straightforward test i have seen on this forum, so yes i adress it - and also i have my own proves compared to what i have seen others in my country getting in numbers with different setups and intake manifold and also how much they gained on getting APR over RMR, oem etc..


 
It's funny, because you have no experience with SEM manifolds, but you talk about this like it's fact. It was 1 company/person that performed a test and it didn't work out the same as another person's test. End of story! 


Do you read posts or do you just push your own opinions as fact? 




DONR said:


> DK, I can appreciate your enthusiasm with the products you use and support. You always keep referring back to the USP test as the be-all and end-all between the APR and SEM. My very own test showed absolutely different results from USP's. What do you gather from that or is it not even considered? If this is the case, I'm beginning to see why this completely supports my decision in not publicly posting the results.


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

18T_BT said:


> You are making good power for a gt28rs, but again, it's just a dyno and not all dynos are the same. Not many people beside you and sam have claimed as much power on gt28rs and 1.8T...All you are saying is that the APR mani is the reason you are making this power, while that is one theory, having a larger TB and larger plennum will make a ton more power on any turbo application. I mean the ABD intake mani made power on a k03. I don't see your point of how you think that the APR mani will make more power than many other intake manifolds. I am willing to bet my homebrew IM will perform just as well as your APR. If we are talking about within 5whp, that's not very much. If you want to compare power under the curve, I doubt it'll be that much different.
> 
> I don't know who said anything about not making power on non APR products, that's again your own conclusion and opinion. Unless you have back to back tests of 2 products, then there is no real comparison, especially when they are done a month or more apart, whatever the dates are!
> 
> ...


 im not claiming nearly as much as sam, i got in bhp what he did in whp...i do believe your homebrew will be just as close in powers, never said i didnt - my respond is to what i believe is an overhyped SEM manifold..and again the test was both done on same day, SEM sent a different manifold later - read the graphs and well the owners post, 1 hour between the dynos...the fun thing is gained much more in lower rpms as well, both torgue and hp... 

You are wrong, i never said anything about non apr products not making powers, i said my openion about one product and i was arguing with badger... 

Well sure dynos are different, thats why i took my car to 3 different and posted my findings, i am also the only one to max out the APR fuel pump at 360bhp as they claim it can deliver, no one else has -im maxing 550cc injectors at 95% duty with spot on AFR..do your own calc.. 

dont really care to much for this, i dont have to justify anything - i have documented everything posted here.... 

BTW sure the bigger TB is a powerfactor, but im only 65mm vs 60mm - sam was 75mm so is many others using SEM etc... 

and i dont think its APR alone, i wouldnt be able to run the boost and timing I does without w/m..so thats a factor to... 

The fun part is used the exact same dyno every step of the way, and many said i was underpowered before i got the APR manifold etc..but suddenly im overpowered - lol


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

18T_BT said:


> I never talked about a ferrari. I only saw your porsche video. Yes, they are 'super cars' but a boxter is not a super car, nor is a carerra non turbo. They are intended for different things, these 'supercars'. Doing a HWY pull doesn't prove much more than power to weight ratio. Take that same ferarri on a road course and you will be far behind with or without an APR intake manifold on your car.


 never posted a vid... 

nor was it a carrea or boxter, i ran down boxter when i was chipped and stock, im talking a porsche GT3 car, thats not a slow car in my mind and well a ferrari 360 modena, that one i raced from 60mph to 160mph beating it all the way, its an old story now, i did this last year... 

and yes both of those cars would drive in circles around me on the track, did i ever say or post different??


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

schwartzmagic said:


> The funny thing about the hearsay is that when the customer told me about it he didn't disclose all the information which I think was really important, especially when saying he made more power with the APR one...
> 
> It would have been nice to know the APR intake mani was designed for a T25 flanged turbo, hence why it performed so well with his car and performs well on DK's car, also knowing that it was tested all in the same day is kind of important. Call me crazy, but I really believe, even though it is his/SEM's/Uni's product, that they can perform a more controlled test than say USP... That's just me. I really do also think that if you were to make some kind of comparison like that you need to control a lot of variables to get the most honest/accurate results...
> 
> I'm not running a t25 turbo and will therefore not consider purchasing an APR manifold. Its either SEM or something custom for me. :vampire:


 VE is VE...dont matter the turbo, T25 or T30...etc...JVK in DK is making way more on his own setup with APR im then seen with RMR for instance on T30..... 

again the USP test was done at the same day...........


----------



## 18T_BT (Sep 15, 2005)

schwartzmagic said:


> I'm not running a t25 turbo and will therefore not consider purchasing an APR manifold. Its either SEM or something custom for me. :vampire:


 
That's funny: 




schwartzmagic said:


> So yeah, after knowing this I will probably end up getting an APR one too.... The only bad thing is that they have supposedly ceased producing them anymore so by the time I'm ready to purchase one it will be pretty hard to find one new.


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

18T_BT said:


> That's funny:


 LOL, whats funny is that you got the order of the quotes wrong... 

I first said I was considering getting the APR intake mani becuase of what I had been told by the USP customer. Then after learning all this :bs: I've concluded the APR intake mani is not in my best interest.

Reading > You umpkin:

:vampire:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> never posted a vid...
> 
> nor was it a carrea or boxter, i ran down boxter when i was chipped and stock, im talking a porsche GT3 car, thats not a slow car in my mind and well a ferrari 360 modena, that one i raced from 60mph to 160mph beating it all the way, its an old story now, i did this last year...
> 
> and yes both of those cars would drive in circles around me on the track, did i ever say or post different??


 Chasing down a GT3 when I still was on stock K04-23 turbo: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ectioYGUVIw 

Surely with a disco potato and the right driver a 1.8T can play with most things on the track :beer:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

schwartzmagic said:


> LOL, whats funny is that you got the order of the quotes wrong...
> 
> I first said I was considering getting the APR intake mani becuase of what I had been told by the USP customer. Then after learning all this :bs: I've concluded the APR intake mani is not in my best interest.
> 
> ...


 im sorry schwartzmagic i really dont get where you get your info from, their is no way a manifold could be better for one turbo and not so good for another - the VE (volumetric efficiency)= engine dynamics is what its all about ..... - you can pick any turbo T25, T30, twinscroll etc., and you will never see one manifold being better for 1 turbo and not so good for another compared to a different manifold. Basicly if the car was NA it would run better with the APR vs SEM given the results in this test as well, you just cant get around it in anyway...the SEM on the other hand is also designed for small port, which APR is not. 

And even more so i dont get you call it BS - you have the most reliable data right here from the USP test. Both the APR and SEM was testet the same day, SEM didnt like the result sent out a different manifold 1 month later, still didnt get where it should or beating the APR....You have a customer that dont care about products, where they came from etc. and wanted to try and get more power - he was even fair enough to not post the results requested by SEM - and you think that he is BS???...their is more then 1 thing leading me to think thats completly vice versa...i now that test done did has been floating around to vendors etc., without ever mentioning the USP test. go figure....


----------



## schwartzmagic (Apr 29, 2007)

Ummmmmmmmmmmm

I was responding to *18T_BT

:wave: *I hate to burst your bubble DK, the world doesn't revolve around ya


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

schwartzmagic said:


> Ummmmmmmmmmmm
> 
> I was responding to *18T_BT
> 
> :wave: *I hate to burst your bubble DK, the world doesn't revolve around ya


 i know, but your statements was wrong - thats why i responded :beer: 

BTW yes in my thread the world does revolve around me :laugh: umpkin: 
:wave:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Badger and any other doubters out their - this is for you.... 

Garrett has an very fine tech guide about turbos - ok here goes. 

BSFC = brake specific fuel consumption. the numbers are taken from bob´s fuel thread, he did not have 470cc injectors in his thread at 4bar fpr, meaning 550cc. 

Injector size: 440cc (42lb Hr) 

Fuel Pressure 4 Bar 
BSFC .45 

Duty Cyle Max HP @ Duty Cycle 
80% 345.6 HP 
85% 367.2 HP 
90% 388.8 HP 
95% 410.4 HP 
100% 432 HP 

Fuel Pressure 4 Bar 
BSFC .50 

Duty Cyle Max HP @ Duty Cycle 
80% 311.04 HP 
85% 330.48 HP 
90% 349.92 HP 
95% 369.36 HP 
100% 388.8 HP 

But lets play with the fact that i have a BSFC of somewhere in between 0.45 to 0.50- in the formular below i have used 0.50. 

Now lets say the target number is mine 394bhp. 

Wa = HP*A/F*BSFC/60 

395*12*0,5/60 = 35,55 lb/min. 

Can anyone tell me what turbo delivers 35lb/min??? i can, the GT28rs and as i stated earlier im already at 95% duty cycle of my injectors, matching up good.. 

Ok, now lets take this even further... 

Lets calculate required manifold pressure required to meet the horsepower, or flow target: 

Mapreq = 35,55*636,9*(460+110) / 0,92*6900/2*118 = 34,6 PSIA - deduct atmospheric level 14,7psia, you get =20 psi. 

Lets assume that in the example made by Garrett where they deduct 2psi as pressure loss is the same in my case - (i think thats an safe assumption) 

Now at what level boost pressure did i reach my peak powers? - oh oh i know, 22psi. 

Now this is reguires a few "assumptions".. 

BSFC between 0,45-0,5 
VE of 0,9 to 0,92. 

some might then say, hey how do you know that your injectors flow this - well i flowtested them a year ago... 










2 injectors flows more then they should at 4bar, 2 flows exactly what they should...


----------



## speeding_g60 (Jun 19, 2010)

*Big Fuqing Deal*

390bpb is about 340whp, just sayin :laugh:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

speeding_g60 said:


> 390bpb is about 340whp, just sayin :laugh:


 
Apparently 10.000 :laugh: - no i get your point, but for those of us running tiny turbos it is a big deal, and to my calc its 350whp - anyhow their is a bunch of haters not seeing this realistic, so it brings argument to the people and well it revealed as well the best intake manifold to be APR´s as well...now thats some info and a thing to care about right  

Anyways umpkin:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

DK_GTI_racer said:


> Bill this is a Ko3s with w/m - 222bhp - his dyno is overlayed mine and drawed on it...look at the spool on both of ours - now look at what power any setup with GT3071 or Gt3076 are making at low rpm like 2000-3000rpm, i will bet you wont see the same level of power, thats because i have tiny fast spooling turbo, this little potato spool the same as ko3s, like to see you prove this done on any Gt3071r.



Here you go:

GT3071R with SEM intake:


----------



## DK_GTI_racer (Oct 4, 2007)

Gulfstream said:


> Here you go:
> 
> GT3071R with SEM intake:


 Thanks Gulfstream for posting that - i believe it proves my point very well, i have 20psi at roughly 2500rpm, and in that graph the GT3071r has 20psi around 3200rpm, a bit sooner then Wobs GT3076r - thanks for posting.


----------

