1.6 does 60 in 7.2seconds?

[CoupeDean]

Im after trophy rims

Ok ok i give up trying to argue my case, my car come with about 116 - 117 like i said so 15bhp is very very easy to get from the work i have done (i cant see why people dont understand this, reember 4-5.C = 1bhp go and look at my air temp improvement taken on the same day),

I expected more than 15bhp tbh, the FVR/ICV/ECU modification did not do as good as i worked out. This maybe an error on my part though.

The car is due in any day now for a full top end rebuild, every consumable part on the car replaced, the head and inlet manifold ported and polished, cams reprofiled (very slightly), new exhaust system.

BTW i hate it when people do this but just so ya know im not a stupid college boy, i work in the defence industry and write the alogorithms for Radars, ICBM's, satalite systems etc.

This makes ECU and eeprom programing on cars feel like im asleep.

I trained as an electrical engineer and as such am quite clued up with simple car electronics.

I can make amplifiers etc myself no problems:

 

[MarkCup]

To whoever said higher revs doesn't increase power - my understanding is to get more power you need to burn more fuel. To burn more fuel you need more air. To get more air, you either need forced induction...or more revs. That's why Honda can get 240bhp from an S2000 - it revs to 9,000 rpm. That's also why F1 cars rev to something like 18-20,000 rpm. So with more revs, and a set-up to make sure it's being fuelled properly, surely that power figure is achievable?

I'll be the first to admit that I know f*** all about engine technicalities...but Dean's obviously obsessive (verging on OCD LOL) about his car...I'd love to see it run on a dyno along with some 172/182's just to see.

 

[CoupeDean]

Couple that with religious maintenance and a good set-up and I'd not be too surprised that you got near 130bhp or so if you also got a good'un.

To whoever said higher revs doesn't increase power - my understanding is to get more power you need to burn more fuel. To burn more fuel you need more air. To get more air, you either need forced induction...or more revs. That's why Honda can get 240bhp from an S2000 - it revs to 9,000 rpm. That's also why F1 cars rev to something like 18-20,000 rpm. So with more revs, and a set-up to make sure it's being fuelled properly, surely that power figure is achievable?

Or am I talking sh*te?

Yes mate bang on, 3.0 v8 F1 engine = 18000rpm and 800+bhp

3.0 v8 BMW engine = 7000rpm and 240ish bhp

Although the extra revs didnt not give me any more power. as i showed on my RR results my peak power was just below 6000rpm

 

[CoupeDean]

The honda engine produces peak power higher up the revs,you can inc a rev limit but if your peak power is say at 6k and you rev to 7k whats the point.I dont see how engines can vary by over 20% which is what he's saying

The point is if the power curve is fairly flat after the peak bhp its better to leave it in gear and start the next gear higher in the power band:

Also where did 20% come from. 7bhp from a book of 110bhp is = 6.3%

 

[MarkCup]

Get it on a RR with some Clios...I'll bring the humble pie (little one for you or a big one for everyone else?)

 

[theduck]

I can make amplifiers etc myself no problems:

nice comlicated desgins lol, sorry. I used to work in the hifi trade, and have desgined/built a couple of amplifiers myself, mainly valve based though.

oh and will you please answer my questions...

 

[SOHROB]

You said your car has 134 bhp,you aint done any mods worth mentioning and a re map is pointless unless you have manifold,cams etc.You may know about hi-fi's etc but thats nothing to do with engine tuning

 

[CoupeDean]

A modified FVR system to run full time with a second air intake is not worth mentioning?

Also a decent air intake like mine and an exhaust do help a bit.

My remap probably is twice as much gain as a normal one as it has been done to perfection on my specific engine. Yes still not all that much on a standard lump.

A remap is defo not a waste of time on a standard engine so thats you totally discredited in my eyes SOHROB.

You are like most, just say stuff but add nothing as you know nothing. Your last post i replied to made no sense and was completely wrong. Did you not realise 7 is not 20% of 110 haha lol

What are your questions Duck?

I know very little about hi-fi's tbh, just enough to make a simple class a, b or ab power amp tbh.

 

[SOHROB]

like i said 110 std and you quote 134 so thats a 22% gain.A backbox will add f**k all power and at best your ik will not have lost you any power.A remap on a std engine isnt worth it as quoted by wayne schofield who i think knows slightly more than you.Your talking s**t especially when you think you will keep with a 172 ha ha ha you fool

 

[CoupeDean]

lol.

You said:

I dont see how engines can vary by over 20% which is what he's saying

You not remember silly billy?

Ive never said i can keep up with 172 so lol at you, you fool as you cant even read.

Also my modifications / parts overhall which dont do nothing must be magic as they made me go from 119bhp to 134 on the same RR lol.

Wayne may be right about a remap but it depends if its done for free or if your paying full whack tbh.

Notice how i try to back everything i say. You are just: "this dont do this", "that cant do that". Classic sign of a stupid person lol

 

[SOHROB]

Ok well you carry on believing you have 134 bhp and i'll just stick to proven gains.

 

[Caramel]

preach else where. i just cannot believe it till i see it. and your spending alot of money on this car which imo is not worth it.

 

[SOHROB]

Id be lucky to get a " real " 134 bhp from my vts and ive added a manifold,de-cat,full exhaust and enclosed ik.Having driven a 1.6 coupe they are s**t slow and cant even be compared to 172's

 

[CoupeDean]

I find it easy to believe as its been RR'd, measured on gtec and measured via diagnositics which is mega accurate if your speedo is calibrated which mine is.

How can 15bhp improvement be so hard to believe lol, well as some of you drive 60bhp 1.2's or 75bhp 1.4's it is quite big i suppose.....

The probelm i got which is understandable is that im a newbie here so will never win, you just have to think why the clio kid questioning what i said got banned twice within minutes. Its because everyone who has followed my progress on my club finds it very very easy to believe as its completely true.

15bhp = full strip and rebuild off every consumbale part, custom tuned length intake tract and imported filter for exact right flow rate, modified FVR system as mentioned before (sorry if you dont know what this even is), multiple live remaps involving static and rolling RR tuning as well as pages and pages of ECU procedure evaluating, new 0w 40 every 2k, injection and fuel system cleaner every other fill up, ALWAYS run on SUL.

If you cant believe that then more fool you tbh.

 

[CoupeDean]

Id be lucky to get a " real " 134 bhp from my vts and ive added a manifold,de-cat,full exhaust and enclosed ik.Having driven a 1.6 coupe they are sh*t slow and cant even be compared to 172's

ooooo you drive a saxo.....

Yea the 1.6e 8vs are well slow.

 

[Caramel]

im guessing we have the same engine 1.6 16v dynamique clio (but yours is in a coupe)? if so i should know as i have actually modded my car, and is a 1/4 prep' car and like i stated before i just cant believe that yours can achieve a 7.2 or close. the only way to sort this would be santa pod or similar.

O you can win this arguement, we just want prove. i would be more then happy if you were right

 

[theduck]

my main question is can we see a rolling road graph and how have u reduced intake temp so much? also where are you based as i'd be interested in seeing your car. as much as i'm still sceptical about ur gains, i'm interested in seeing some proof of them.

 

[CoupeDean]

im guessing we have the same engine 1.6 16v dynamique clio (but yours is in a coupe)? if so i should know as i have actually modded my car, and is a 1/4 prep' car and like i stated before i just cant believe that yours can achieve a 7.2 or close. the only way to sort this would be santa pod or similar.

O you can win this arguement, we just want prove. i would be more then happy if you were right

Yea same engine but we have a better box (well same box basically but more sporty ratio's and a different select mechanism) I dont mean to be mean but the 1.6 clio was not designed to be sporty.

So what do you think you can get 0-60 Caramel? Its a known FACT a fair few 1.6 16v coupes do very low 8's and sometimes dip into the very high 7's standard. If yours is "modded and 1/4 mile prepared" and your not doing good times you have bought a shed i fear.

I only have my last RR print out. I am not showing this as you dont even believe ^^ this yet and this RR print out was with a n02 / c02 experiment (not a success you could say lol). Its not been shown on my club yet purely becuase i try to keep everything fact based and as such i neve rhave these problems.

 

[Caramel]

i have done a 15.8 on my first try 1 sec slower then some cups in a straight line in not perfect conditions, so thats in the 7's. but wont find out anymore as im purchasing a diff car.

 

[CoupeDean]

yea thats a bit slower than a standard 2.0 coupe i think.

Il find out.

TBH a lot of you seem very very into all power and performance, im not really (i own a french 1.6 16v lol), another reason i wouldnt lie about it as i know its not quick as i drive quick cars all the time.

All ive tried to do is make my car how it should have left the factory really, just got the best from what i have.

 

[theduck]

so reducing intake temp?

 

[Caramel]

maybe ask the question in big red letters lol

 

[CoupeDean]

reducing air temp was simply removing the filter from a big black box 1cm behind the head and 1cm above the exhaust manifold to behind the grill and enclosing it, then adding a feed from the bumper.

As can be seen from my RR figures i posted the intake temp is near on ambient

 

[MarkM]

Dean I have not read all the thread and you seem like a knowledgeable chap.

You claim 134bhp from a 1.6 which = 134/1.6 = 83.75bhp/litre

compared to a 172 = 170/2 = 85bhp/litre

The high compression 172 with an aggressive cam profile only makes slightly more bhp/litre then your very lightly modified 1600 engine???

I am not saying you are lying but does this not seem slightly hard to believe. I am no engine expert by the way just an observation.

 

[CoupeDean]

Thanks for coming at it in a decent manor.

Yea it does seem very unlikely mate.

Again though i must stress im only 15bhp up so whatever the bhp/cc, look at what i have done and what i have gained.

It must be a capable engine or it would not be used widely in rallying at over 220bhp

 

[CoupeDean]

oh and btw if any 182 owners want a quick car, strip it out and fit a 6spd sequential. Leave the engine.

This is what palmer sport have done on their fleet of them and they lap faster than ferrari's. 4.0 0-60's

Was a great day if anyone was planning it.

 

[theduck]

reducing air temp was simply removing the filter from a big black box 1cm behind the head and 1cm above the exhaust manifold to behind the grill and enclosing it, then adding a feed from the bumper.

As can be seen from my RR figures i posted the intake temp is near on ambient

fair enough. So where are you based mate? I would be interested in seeing your car!

 

[CoupeDean]

Essex, im not bothered enough to waste my time though tbh fella.

If your at FCS come and have a look if you want.

 

[real coupe owner]

why you wasting your time? is that because your full of s**t live map my arse those dial pictures you showed are for digimotos software which doesnt give you the scope to reset your ecu or anything only your able to do with that software is turn off your service light what a load of bolloxs but you are a dreamer 1.6 being faster than a 172 my arse

 

[lemonslap]

why you wasting your time? is that because your full of sh*t live map my arse those dial pictures you showed are for digimotos software which doesnt give you the scope to reset your ecu or anything only your able to do with that software is turn off your service light what a load of bolloxs but you are a dreamer 1.6 being faster than a 172 my arse

1. He's not wasting money everyone wants the best from there motor and these are not cheap chav mods they improve on what renault have done as standard
2. He's not talking s**t look read all the findings in the prev posts
3. He hasn't clamed that his 1.6 16v megane is quicker than a 172 clio again READ ALL THE POSTS
4. Real coupe owner I think NOT!
Look my renault owning brothers dean is a very knowledgeable guy give him some respect he's claims have been proven!

 

[real coupe owner]

the pics on his comp are from digimotos and what mods has he done filter thats it he claimed on coupe club to have had a remap by chipped uk but i know he hasnt he's full of s**t just mugs like you believe evrything he says on there its good that everything he claims to know is stuff he has picked up off the forum as for claims been proven how has he proved anything and i do believe i am a real coupe owner at least i do believe thats what ive owned for last 4 yrs

 

[172 Dave]

:argue: i would say "Owned"

 

[lemonslap]

i'm sorry you are wrong clearly you do not understand

 

[172 Dave]

Clearly i do, if you would like to run your 1.6 coupe against my 2.0 172 then help yourself, you are quite simply dreaming and have now come too far down the line to backpedal; i dont disagree there are differences in tolerance/s from manufacturing applications but not to the extent that you claim.
Enjoy your car and spend your time and effort on it but be wary of what you post and claim m8, some things make you look very silly........

 

[172 Dave]

DeanoC vbmenu_register("postmenu_178612", true);
Coupé-Club Member



Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Essex
Posts: 10,444
Car: 1.6 16v Dynamique +

Im getting a bit agressive now lol.

Some of them are such stupid chavs!!
__________________

BTW be careful ................. somethings make you look more stupid than you already portray

 

[ant]

your forum that boring that you have to come over here and argue?

 

[lemonslap]

some things make you look very silly........

yep your posts do that to you no back pedaling just what has been said in the posts. Read all the posts and you'll understand

 

[lemonslap]

I'm not here to argue just to back up dean's claims I can't understand why this is such a big problem no one has said a 1.6 16v coupe is quicker than a 172 clio

 

[ajketley]

Just read the whole thread and it seems that dean has had the balls to come on another forum and prove his claims. Ok a 172 can beat it he hasnt said other wise. A bit shocked at the mpg bit but I know its possible (not around country roads though). The 0 - 60 time is possible as in my 1.2 could do it in late 8s (before people slate me I have proff) but have put most back to standard now as getting a 16v. Also I wish I could get my temp down that much. Good looking meggy by the way.

 

[172 Dave]

Lemonslap

I think that to refer to prople as 'stupid chavs' in their own environment is a brutal mistake....

Enjoy your car and if you dont want a Clio thats fine btw

XTR vbmenu_register("postmenu_178012", true);
Administrator



Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Washington, Tyne & Wear
Posts: 11,092
Car: Renault Megane Coupé Monaco

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeanoC
lol dont these numptys realise it does 0-60 in 8 seconds flat as standard

Where've ya been reading that? lol
__________________

EVEN your own kind laugh at u :rasp: :rasp: :rasp: :rasp: :rasp: