Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey all... i was curious as to who would know about the race that i am currently dreading. i have an R33 in a compliance workshop and should be able to drive it in about 3-4 weeks. it has zorst, pod filter, hks suspension. My mate has an Audi A3 turbo that he is in the process of getting it "APR Enhanced" which is basically the new age chip.

whos gonna win???? his car goes ****en well. and apparently this chip makes heaps of difference with the boost settings and torque curve ect.

im scared. :)

u mean a S3? I don't know my Audi's, but i thought that was the turbo hatch one... Doing some research on S3's a little while back and they're good for 0 - 100km in about 6.5, 6.7secs. But full boost comes on ridiculously low, like, 1500 or 2000rpm's. So with a chip, maybe low, flat 6 seconds. R33 bout the same, should be a close race!

i think they are 1.6l turbo's... not sure... 1.8 prob sounds more right.

cheers

It all depends what model your dragging. If it's the A3 1.8ltr turbo (110kw - 0-100 8.2sec) which i think your talking about I wouldn't be worried at all especially if the drag is to 100+ however if its the S3 (99 Model - 154kw 0-100 6.8sec/ 2002 Model - 165kw - 0-100 6.6sec) I would probably be quite worried especially with the APR ECU which is claimed to increase power to 195kw and torque to 362nm.

Formal specs for the APR ECU for standard A3 1.8ltr for your reference is as follows - 112kw to 146kw/154kw(VVT) and 325nm torque. so as long as your skyline pulls low 6secs or under you should be sweet

BE WARNED! if he has APR stage III or Stage III+ kit don't drag him unless you want to lose, 210hp and 310hp respectively in a car that weighs 1100kg, would be pretty potent. Anyway hope this helps.

just to clear a few things up, the apr software gives you 2 choices of program on top of the original program.

98 octane prog is 154kw and 104 octane is 169kw

you could probably beat him quite easily if you were running higher than standard boost on your 'line.

Just remember he'll be pulling about 150 kw easy with a car that weighs about 1200kg which is a pretty good power to weight ratio.

My work mate has an A3 turbo with the full oettinger works on it and pulls really well, it was doing runs at eastern creek about 2 months ago if anyone saw it.

Aint the turbos in the euro cars extremly small and designed for low rpm torque not peak?? They would be way out of their efficiency range running at 14psi. My friend has a new Golf GTI 1.8 turbo, u cant even tell that it has a turbo, its so smooth compared to a japanese turbo car. Also its preety farking slow even tho it is a light car 0-100 in 7.6 or sumthing.

My work mate has an A3 turbo with the full oettinger works on it and pulls really well, it was doing runs at eastern creek about 2 months ago if anyone saw it. [/b]

is that white A3T with 18's deep dish? ran about a 15 flat, by memory.

bloody nice cars.

From the other side (the Audi forum perspective)

Audi Forum Audi A3 1.8T vs R33 GTS-T debate

Yeah the euro turbos are small.... thats why we need to upgrade to garetts to make serious power. But the stock full torque at 2k rpm is nice.

The redline in my A4 (1.8t) Quattro. Is ~6300 indicated. But the limiter on a chipped car doesn't kick in till about 7200 i think.

That said because the turbo is so small (the kkkO3) it can not push anymore air (hold 14 psi boost) once you get past about 5500. So there is not point reving it any higher, as you get more power by changing gears.

If he had a K04 this would give him about 185 kw and the power band would be about 1krpm higher.

I'd say it'll be close, but I'm only guessing cos I dunno how much the Audi puts out and how heavy it is. Sounds like it's pretty decent though. The new GTA type Alfas look pretty nice too, got some go in that thing. Turbo european cars, guess that's the Japanese influence :(

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...