Got the chip done

General FTO discussion only

Moderator: Moderators

Got the chip done

Postby rsg » Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:50 am

Hey guys,

I finally got my chip done, next I'm porting & polishing the head & thinking of a small T2 turbo eventually.

Ok, so here's what I got, haven't got a scanner so I'll explain. Overall or an average, in comparison between my before & after dyno, I gained 13Kw (17.3BHP) on the wheels. I also got an extra 15nm of torque between 1000 & 3500 rpm, and overall I got an increase of 11.3nm. I'm quite happy considering the mechanic was quite close to his estimate of 15Kw on average gain. Even though I have these gains, most of fto owners are down at sea level, which makes quite a big difference in power. I just wanna hope on another dyno and see what I get.

The chip was a Unichip made by Dastek (http://www.dastek.co.za). I'm not sure if you can get them there, but if anyone wants they must maybe have a look. The chip cost me R1800 with fitting & dyno, which is about 160GBP.

Just wanted to share that with you guys.

Raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Got the chip done

Postby Myfeckin FTO » Tue Oct 26, 2004 11:15 am

rsg wrote:The chip was a Unichip made by Dastek (http://www.dastek.co.za). I'm not sure if you can get them there, but if anyone wants they must maybe have a look. The chip cost me R1800 with fitting & dyno, which is about 160GBP.

Raf


I've mentioned the dastek chip on the site here before - its a good quality chip - usually much more expensive than what you paid rsq. Would probably make sense once the exhaust / induction / plugs / poss manifold had been sorted as it would help set the car up better for max performance. But wouldn't make much sense as a first mod. You obviously have already the exhaust, induction etc sorted.

Porting and polishing the head is a pretty expensive way of getting a couple of extra BHP. What is that gonna set you back?? Looks like the RSA is the place to be for modding an FTO at those prices.
Image
User avatar
Myfeckin FTO
Forever Ticking Over
Forever Ticking Over
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Clare/Limerick

Postby CJ » Tue Oct 26, 2004 11:32 am

Those gains are quite impressive rsg, what were your before and after figures out of interest? Assuming the chip had to be programmed on a dyno, what charactistics did your mechanic change, timing, fueling etc?

CJ
User avatar
CJ
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9083
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 4:44 pm
Location: Dublin 15

Postby rsg » Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:44 pm

The port & polishing is going to be R6900, about 600GBP, but he also replaces many parts to accomodate the mod, don't ask me what though. He estimate's a 1 to 1.5 second acceleration increase. We'll see what happens.

I've done an air filter and an exhaust with cat-bypass.

My before was 57.5 @ 6000rpm and after was 66 @ 6000rpm, he didn't take it up to 7000rpm, but I reckon it could be about 74kw or so. It's not as high as what you guys get here, but I wanna hop on another dyno when I get the chance because a lot of guys here have their dyno's incorrectly set up. He just set the fuel & timing at different rev stages. OH, and with this chip, my car is also no longer speed governed. Sweet!
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby CJ » Tue Oct 26, 2004 1:02 pm

rsg wrote:My before was 57.5 @ 6000rpm and after was 66 @ 6000rpm, he didn't take it up to 7000rpm, but I reckon it could be about 74kw or so. It's not as high as what you guys get here, but I wanna hop on another dyno when I get the chance because a lot of guys here have their dyno's incorrectly set up.


rsg, I still think theres something wrong there, 66kW is only 89bhp, you should be seeing at least double that (at the wheels) after what you've done (i.e 120kW/163bhp).

CJ
User avatar
CJ
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9083
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 4:44 pm
Location: Dublin 15

Postby Myfeckin FTO » Tue Oct 26, 2004 1:29 pm

CJ wrote:rsg, I still think theres something wrong there, 66kW is only 89bhp, you should be seeing at least double that (at the wheels) after what you've done (i.e 120kW/163bhp).

CJ



rsg - you really need to get your FTO to another rolling road - these figures can't be right for a GR - its barely even in 1.8 GS territory - In any case you would certainly realise if your car was only putting out this kind of power - what are your 0-60 figures like?

The guy also did not run the engine beyond 7000RPM to where you have peak power - so you were never gonna get an accurate max BHP figure.
You are talking about a 2.0 V6(non-mivec) engine in a GR - aren't you :?:
Image
User avatar
Myfeckin FTO
Forever Ticking Over
Forever Ticking Over
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Clare/Limerick

Postby rsg » Tue Oct 26, 2004 1:45 pm

Yes, it's a GR. I know it's not right according to that dyno, thats why I wanna try another. It must be pulling close to the right power as you put it, because I can give a Golf 4 gti a run, as well as a BMW 325i, once we are already moving because my pulloff is a bit slow being automatic and all. All i know for sure is that since I started doing mods, on his dyno I had 52.4 standard and now have about 70 after doing an exhaust and a chip. Also before the chip, @ 7000 rpm I had 60.4KW on the wheels but haven't tested it @ 7000 with the chip.

How do you convert from power on the wheels to power on the flywheel? Also, I've read that the FTO GR is about 125KW (160bhp) and the GPX is 147KW(180bhp) I think, but is that suppoed to be on the wheels or on the flywheel? what is the most accurate way to convert from kw to bhp anyway?

I still have my suspisions that the timing might be off, but it feels better since the service and the power was similar before the service. But could it have been off before and after. This guys studied the GTO in Japan, and says the fto & gto are similar, but claims that if the timing is off even 1 tooth, the car won't start???? It sounds absurd to me. Please advise on the subject!! No Idea on my 0-60 figures. Whats your guys power like?

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby Myfeckin FTO » Tue Oct 26, 2004 3:23 pm

rsg wrote:How do you convert from power on the wheels to power on the flywheel? Also, I've read that the FTO GR is about 125KW (160bhp) and the GPX is 147KW(180bhp) I think, but is that suppoed to be on the wheels or on the flywheel? what is the most accurate way to convert from kw to bhp anyway?
raf


Manufacturers figures for the GR from 97 on is 180BHP (pre 97 's have 170BHP) or probably about 160BHP (guess) at the wheels for a manual. The GPX should have about 200BHP with about 180BHP (guess)at the wheels of a manual. The Tip box does cost extra power though so I'd expect about 145BHP (guess) at the wheels of a GR Tip and 175BHP (guess)at the wheels of a GPX Tip. I have a suspision that these are Jap figures where the car runs on 104 ron fuel rather than the 95unleaded catwee we put in the car over here. Most guys that put their cars on the rollers over here on 95 unleaded fuel will not get these type of figures. I have only got my GPX a few months and have not got to a rolling road yet but I'd like to think that with a de-cat RSR exhaust - ITG induction + cold air - Denso iridium plugs - 98 fuel and an engine that is running perfectly (tappets sorted, serviced etc) I would like to think I could get close to 175BHP at the wheels.

1 BHP = .7457 KW.


I would expect a GR Tip to reach 60 in approx 8 seconds with 0-100 taking about 18-19secs.
My 0-60 on a GPX manual is certainly under 7 seconds - but my 0-100 is circa 16secs - showing the strength of the GPX on the top end. My last car had a sub 7 second 0-60 (helped by traction control & low gearing) but took 21secs to reach 100 - The 60 + bracket is where an FTO will generally leave a hot hatch for dead.

Incidently - I'd really like a 6 speed manual in the FTO to be honest - I'm not exactly thrilled with the spacing of the 5 gear ratios.
Last edited by Myfeckin FTO on Tue Oct 26, 2004 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Myfeckin FTO
Forever Ticking Over
Forever Ticking Over
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Clare/Limerick

Postby rsg » Tue Oct 26, 2004 3:33 pm

I'm now running 100 leaded, as opposed to 93 unleaded, no problems and this is what the mech recommended. I don't think it possible to lose 50bhp odd because I'm not at sea level, although I do know that there is quite a difference. Do you think that I should go and have the timing checked out?

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby Myfeckin FTO » Tue Oct 26, 2004 3:58 pm

rsg wrote:I'm now running 100 leaded, as opposed to 93 unleaded, no problems and this is what the mech recommended. I don't think it possible to lose 50bhp odd because I'm not at sea level, although I do know that there is quite a difference. Do you think that I should go and have the timing checked out?

raf


Have you found much of a difference in performance between the fuels??
I'd say to go to another rolling road (at sea level) and get a reliable base BHP figure to work from. If the figures come out in the same ballpark then I think its safe to say there is something not quite right with your engine.
Image
User avatar
Myfeckin FTO
Forever Ticking Over
Forever Ticking Over
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Clare/Limerick

Postby rsg » Tue Oct 26, 2004 5:11 pm

I can't get a dyno at sea level, because the coast is about 600km away, but I will try another dyno. Thanks for the info!

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby rsg » Tue Oct 26, 2004 5:15 pm

Sorry, I haven't noticed much difference in the petrol, maybe 1 or 2 BHP, but nothing serious. Though the mech reckons the petrol I'm using is slilghtly better quality so the engine should be healthier.

My honest suspisions are that his dyno isn't right because If I can beat or keep up with a golf 4 GTI and a BMW 325i, then it definitely can't only have only 93bhp.

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby Myfeckin FTO » Tue Oct 26, 2004 5:53 pm

rsg wrote:My honest suspisions are that his dyno isn't right because If I can beat or keep up with a golf 4 GTI and a BMW 325i, then it definitely can't only have only 93bhp.raf


Maybe get one of your mates to stick their car on this dyno and see what kind of bhp figures they are putting out - I think this would shed some light on the subject. :wink:
Image
User avatar
Myfeckin FTO
Forever Ticking Over
Forever Ticking Over
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Clare/Limerick

Postby Myfeckin FTO » Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:09 pm

rsg wrote:I can't get a dyno at sea level, because the coast is about 600km away, but I will try another dyno. Thanks for the info!raf


Erm - sea level doesn't neccessarily mean you need to be by the coast :lol: - I doubt you live on a 600KM mountain range - are all your major towns at altitude?? :?
Image
User avatar
Myfeckin FTO
Forever Ticking Over
Forever Ticking Over
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Clare/Limerick

Postby rsg » Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:45 am

Well thats the nearest coast line, and you pass through a mountain range and the trip is mostly downhill, it's 1 753 metres (6000 feet) above sea level and the humidity is much less. I live in Johannesburg and I'm not going to drive all the way just to check it out yet, I'll make a plan sometime though.

I think getting a friend on this dyno is a good idea, so we'll see what I can organise. Right now I need to get some 17's and tyres, cause I've only got those standard 15's at the moment.

The Lambda sensor is broken, but the chip replaced this so that shouldn't be a problem. Anyways, thanks for all the help.

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK

Postby CJ » Wed Oct 27, 2004 10:23 am

rsg wrote:The Lambda sensor is broken, but the chip replaced this so that shouldn't be a problem.


I assume that fueling has been statically set on the chip? A faulty lamdba sensor can cause a significant power loss, this is probably why you saw significant power gains after mapping was carried out. If this is the case then we're still none the wiser as regards the potential gains from the Dastek :roll:

CJ
User avatar
CJ
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9083
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2003 4:44 pm
Location: Dublin 15

Postby rsg » Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:17 pm

Good point CJ, but the last FTO he did got almost Identical results, with the lambda intact. I'll have a chat with him soon and get more details.

raf
User avatar
rsg
FTO nut!
FTO nut!
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:14 am
Location: London, UK


Return to General FTO Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron