A3 1.8T vs 172 @ altitude

[viceroy]

Ok guys, there is someone on one of the local SA forums posting that his A3 1.8T is roasting a mk1 172 through the gears.

He did admit that the 172 was quicker off the line (1st and 2nd) but through the gears and in overtaking in 3rd, 4th, he was claiming the A3 was just killing the 172.

Now these tests were being done at 1500m (over 4000ft) above sea level in high temps (30 degrees C or above)

At these altitudes NA cars lose about 15 - 20% of their power while turbod cars only lose about 5%. also with the temperature being so high I would have thought the A3 would die from increased turbo lag.

What do you guys reckon?

From car tests the 172 does 0-62 in 8.4 seconds and 0-100 is done in about 21 seconds at this altitude.

What sort of mods would help the car breath better? cold air induction kit?, free flow exhaust? chip? what else could be done to improve the power in the higher gears?

oh just remembered, the Clio is standard and the A3 has a free flow exhaust.

http://www.cartoday.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=013192http://www.cartoday.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=013192

 

[RobFenn]

The altitude makes a big difference, the audi is turbo charged so it wouldnt be affected as much as the clio. Its therefore an unfair test and therefore a load of balls! It doesnt matter how much better it breathes, its the air density, the only modification worth doing is driving somewhere else! Its a bit pointless making comparatives in unfair conditions.

 

[cyue005]

i believe his one will be the 150hp version... actually run about the same time as Golf 4 Gti 150hp version.. so 8.5 from 0-62m

only those 225hp 1.8T will scare us ... but those create more lag like the TT quattro i drove in the weekend.

 

[RSTDL]

The 1.8T is the same unit in the Golf GTi and the quickest GTi is the V6$motion at 8.2 to 60 which is quicker than the 1.8T so me no thinkso, 172 piss all over that engine...................even the R32 is slow!!!!

 

[viceroy]

Yep it would be the 150bhp version but remember, they were at high altitude where the 172 can only manage an 8.4 to 60.

172bhp - 20% due to altitude = 138bhp

150bhp - 5% due to altitude = 143bhp

So basically the 172 needs 34bhp more from somewhere to as competative as it is at sea level.

So back to my original question...What is the best / cheapest way to get another 34bhp (Not NOS)

Filter? De-Cat Zorst? Chip? Fuel Pressure Regulator?