CLIO TT - new bhp figure

[FlamingMonkey]

Whys is it not an everyday car Mitchy, its got the same engine as you, it has an interior with seats...wow, and f**k me it even has a stereo all the mods cons.

Im beginnig to think you dont like Clios Mitchy, why do you post on here, seems weird, I wonder if people will like me as much, I if I went to the Seat Curpa forums and slated their motors.

Hang on I think I get it now, yeah thats it, its faster than yours

How about get the f**k over it and stop moaning.

Take it for what it is.

 

[Mitchy]

Because im questioning 210bhp - 297bhp with just a remap (87bhp gain?)

Ive never once slated a 172/cup/182/V6 or any of the lower engined new breed of clios. Its just the old heaps i have a dislike for, mainly due to the chavs on here like Jesus

Nothing wrong with the engine transplant at all, ive already said it will be a rapid car, but an everyday car. No thanks! It is an eyesore, orange with steel rims and some crap bonnet vent

I was only asking a question on why the engine performed so much better when transplanted into a clio.

 

[Nath]

he he he thats a silly car.

 

[Mitchy]

Quote: Originally posted by FlamingMonkey on 17 March 2005


Hang on I think I get it now, yeah thats it, its faster than yours

Theres a difference between faster and quicker I wouldnt fancy doing 165 in an old clio

 

[TheJesus]

Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 17 March 2005


Fast and quick no doubt. Everyday car, no thanks!!!! - i dont think he built it for you to use as an everyday car...

And Jesus, you own a sh*t heap so you change the record pal. Stop being tight fisted and buy a decent car - awww, its come to common insults (could at least try and be funny or something)... Mitchy, you lack the brains or imagination... so hows a half wit like you afford such a lovely VW-a-like? http://www.cliosport.net/forum/smileys/smiley2.gif

LCRs/S3s and TTs all map to around 270, but stick it in a clio and outcomes 297? - thats prolly because Cupra owners bore the sh*t out the guy at the RR harping on about the VAG bed sheets so they cut the session short to get you out the door. Steve Davis had this happen to him... apparently he used to own a Scoob too... the fastest one in the world too I heard...

How does that work out? I doubt the turbo is efficient enough to make a true 297. - it works out by the fact they are experts and you are some gimp on a forum that has no f**king idea what hes talking about. Now, havent you got a copy of Max Power to be reading?
[Edited by Mitchy on 17 March 2005 at 1:01pm]

 

[Mitchy]

Too many coc*suckers on here, going woah, wow, yipee.

In my opinion i think its a heap and i certainly wouldnt want to own and drive around in it.

My LCR may be a sh*t heap and a barge in your eyes, but you know what? I couldnt give a toss. Speak your mind is what ive always been told!!

If i wanted something fast, i would have bought a bike!

 

[Mitchy]

I know the standard turbo will not push a genuine 297, which is all i need to know really.

 

[Ben j]

Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 17 March 2005
<FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #407db6">Nothing wrong with the engine transplant at all, ive already said it will be a rapid car, but an everyday car. No thanks! It is an eyesore, orange with steel rims and some crap bonnet vent


ummm i think your missing the point in it being a street sleeper?

 

[TheJesus]

Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 17 March 2005


Too many coc*suckers on here, going woah, wow, yipee. - I agree, now take the c**k outta yer mouth boy!

In my opinion i think its a heap and i certainly wouldnt want to own and drive around in it. - thing is no one cars about your opinion, theres being a tw*t, but having a laugh with it as I generally like to do, then theres being a tw*t and not being funny... which one are you I wonder

My LCR is a sh*t heap and a barge, but you know what? Im ghey and proud! Life is like a box of chocolates... thats what ive always been told!!

If i wanted something fast, i would have bought a bike!

I think I know why your such an upset and angry little boy.... sorry, everything I ever said I take back

http://http://mitchy.has-a-small-penis.commitchy.has-a-small-penis.com

 

[Chris n nic]

Its 285bhp and I didnt think 20% trans loss was amazingly huge. You say 285 with a performance exhaust and guess what....this doesnt have a 1.2 exhaust. Now has a side exit which was on when remapped. Also you could probably get s3/tt/lcr higher that 285 but it would be too risky so they settle for a lower figure like you quoted....

 

[Ben j]

lmao!

 

[Swervin_Mervin]

Quote: I know the standard turbo will not push a genuine 297, which is all i need to know really

Good for you Mitchy. Will you fvck off now please with your trolling?

 

[y0z2a]

Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 17 March 2005
<FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #407db6">I know the standard turbo will not push a genuine 297, which is all i need to know really.


why are you getting so het up... just let him have his moment, and get on with it. it is a sleeper that is there for a laugh...

get over it please, and dont start fighting about turbos and horses otherwise ill brand your ass

/y0z

 

[TheJesus]

dont ban him Yoz, who else is there on here that talks that much sh*t, is the butt of all jokes and provides comic entertainment at his own expense for all constantly?... and breathe......

 

[Chris n nic]

Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 17 March 2005


I know the standard turbo will not push a genuine 297, which is all i need to know really.

297 is not poss...but 285 is? Hardly a huge difference....maybe this is the reason he mapped to 285 because the turbo WILL do it but wont survive as long? The whole point of the sleeper has been done sooo many times. He has a 172 if he doesnt want to slum it in the turbo but I must admit I would love to drive it arond for a laugh...with wheel trims and a wash it isnt that much different to a std 1.2 so it isnt too much of an eyesore as you put it..

Chris

 

[Ben j]

umm maybe the simple fact in the difference in overall wheel sizes has affected the readouts?

 

[muz]

Mitchy strikes again !

You should have seen some of the stuff he put on the MGZR .couk

 

[TriO`]

Quote: Originally posted by j3ned on 16 March 2005

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y37/j3ned/sleeper004.jpg

Your cars crying out for hubcap spinners!

 

[Brazo]

Tis better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid rather than opening it and removing all doubt

Mark Twain

 

[TheJesus]

nah, fluffy dice!

 

[Mitchy]

Chris seems to be the only 1 making any sense. I made a valid point about the turbo and what it is capable of, and what it is not. Why should i argue with a few morons who will not believe the hard facts. I personally dont like the car but i bet its like sh*t off a shovel and will embaress a lot of higher bhp marques. Good on the guy for havin the balls to do it.

I also argued the point that 229 @ the wheels seems to be on the low side for a genuine 285 @ the flywheel. Compared with the LCR which is a front runner, it should be circa 245-255 @ wheels. Its a different car however so the TX losses might be slightly higher.

2 very valid points shot down by the morons of this site.

Oh and Muz, is it a wonder why i get worked up on the ZR forum with the amount of crap that comes out of it? I had a ZR160 remember and i know what they can and cant do.

 

[GeeUK]

I think some people just cant bare the thought of a sh*t heap being faster than ther £20+ car or watever.

At the end of the day its a sleeper, a f**king fast one at that, but personally I think it should be in my car as my car looks better

 

[Nick Read]

LOL you bunch of clowns. Heres my take on it -

285 or a top whack figure of 297 sounds a lot for that kind of lump and perhaps questionable when compared against the one figure that matters, the power at the wheels. But it certainly IS possible. I cant say for sure what the power figures are, because I dont know how it was tuned or what the trans loss is like. My gut feeling is that perhaps the calculated flywheel power is reading a bit high, because in my experience there is no RR in the world that can hope to be accurate about these things. All you can do is get a ballpark figure.

Ive got a valid perspective on this because for quite some time Ive been trying various things out with my turbo, power has fluctuated up and down at times. Probably the most mine has ever put out was around 240, the least maybe 200. At the moment, my feeling is that its running around 230 and with a remap that Im still waiting for itll run anything up to 250. But to be honest, once youre in the 200+ club you kind of dont worry too much about 10 or 20bhp here or there. Its just not important. In a Clio that is enough to make you quicker than most cars on the road in any kind of real world test.

So whether the orange beast has 280 bhp or 250bhp, the fact that it runs 229 at the wheels and probably weighs around a tonne, means it is very quick, and the calculated flywheel figure is neither here nor there.

I just want to see it quarter mile!

 

[SimonV6]

Quote: Originally posted by GeeUK on 17 March 2005

I think some people just cant bare the thought of a sh*t heap being faster than ther £20+ car or watever.





I reckon most cars here must be faster than a £20 car.....

shame it aint RWD drive though for 1/4 miles...

Simon.

 

[TheJesus]

Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 17 March 2005


Chris seems to be the only 1 making any sense. I made a valid point about the turbo and what it is capable of, and what it is not. Why should i argue with a few morons who will not believe the hard facts. I personally dont like the car but i bet its like sh*t off a shovel and will embaress a lot of higher bhp marques. Good on the guy for havin the balls to do it.

I also argued the point that 229 @ the wheels seems to be on the low side for a genuine 285 @ the flywheel. Compared with the LCR which is a front runner, it should be circa 245-255 @ wheels. Its a different car however so the TX losses might be slightly higher. -

2 very valid points shot down by the morons of this site.

Oh and Muz, is it a wonder why i get worked up on the ZR forum with the amount of crap that comes out of it? I had a ZR160 remember? I won several championships and i know what they can and cant do.

The few morons you refer to, seem to be the majority, whereas you seem to be the minority... and last I heard you were no engine tuner, so it doesnt really matter what you think you may know

 

[Mitchy]

Ok mate

 

[TheJesus]

anyway, this is getting stale now, is there not a motorway you can go play on

 

[bsimmer3000]

my bro had something to say about these engines (VW technician) he said that he has seen golfs pushing similer bhp figure as j3neds. but he said that these engines have a problem of throwing the con rods through the engine block. also the head tech of VW also said the same thing to me bro whilst he was there. so these figures are possible but could be a risk of major engine damage. but it not an everyday car so who cares. rag the f**k out of it lol

 

[GeeUK]

Quote: Originally posted by SimonV6 on 17 March 2005

Quote: Originally posted by GeeUK on 17 March 2005

I think some people just cant bare the thought of a sh*t heap being faster than ther £20+ car or watever.






I reckon most cars here must be faster than a £20 car.....

shame it aint RWD drive though for 1/4 miles...

Simon.

Oppz, I meant £20,000 +

 

[Mitchy]

Bsimmer, the 1.8T engine is capable of 500+bhp.

Turbos are only efficient to x amount of power. When you reach x, a larger turbo is needed to go beyond x.

A 210/225 turbo is only efficient upto 290bhp before needing to be replaced with a larger unit such as an IHI VF34

None of the VW range use the 210/225 engines or turbo.

 

[bsimmer3000]

Mitchy he says the engine is the same enigne as the 20v 1.8t engines that are in the golfs? he has worked on them for 5+yrs he says not the same power output but they are the exact same engines.

 

[clean16v]

Different turbos mate
And the 225s had VVT, although its rumoured to be just a marketing ploy
[Edited by clean16v on 17 March 2005 at 7:59pm]

 

[Mitchy]

The same engines but VWs come in 150 and 180 format.

The 210 and 225 varients have uprated engines from 150/180 format. They have forged pistons/crank and conrods and good for 350bhp on stock internals. The 210/225 engined cars have a larger turbo unit and 2 side intercoolers. Only Audi and Seat have used these engines

A 150/180s turbo will max out at around 230bhp. A 210/225 will max out around 290bhp

Clean 16v, thats the 1st ive heard of my engine having VVT

 

[bsimmer3000]

yeah he said the differences from what he knows are the golfs run a k03 turbo and the other higger powered ones run the k04 turbo. he says he is sure the engine is vvt as the 150 and 180 fwd and 4wd are vvt so yours should be as well.

 

[Rich-D]

Quote: Originally posted by cliotuRS on 17 March 2005


is it York Raceway on the old Melbourne airfield near Seaton Ross ?

Yup...

 

[Rich-D]

Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 17 March 2005


I also argued the point that 229 @ the wheels seems to be on the low side for a genuine 285 @ the flywheel. Compared with the LCR which is a front runner, it should be circa 245-255 @ wheels. Its a different car however so the TX losses might be slightly higher.

Ok....

229bhp @ wheels with a "rule of thumb" 15% transmission loss means this is 85% of the 100% @ fly figure, so with some cunning trickery called maths we get >>>

((229 / 85) x 100) = 269bhp @ fly

Working that the other way round, 285bhp @ fly would equate to 242bhp @ wheels, however this is only using a theoretical 15% value for the losses and we dont know what they actually are, however 229 @ wheels to 285 @ fly gives a 20% loss which is high for a fwd car.

 

[Rich-D]

Quote: Originally posted by Nick Read on 17 March 2005


So whether the orange beast has 280 bhp or 250bhp, the fact that it runs 229 at the wheels and probably weighs around a tonne, means it is very quick, and the calculated flywheel figure is neither here nor there.

I just want to see it quarter mile!

Amen!

Power figures are just for bragging down the pub... lets see what it can actually do...

 

[clean16v]

Mitchy, i can only go off what ive heard, across audi-sport.net, and UKMKIVs it is believed teh 225 only had VVT over its 210. But alot of people question whether there is even a difference

 

[Ian_182]

QUOTE FROM MITCHY Oh and Muz, is it a wonder why i get worked up on the ZR forum with the amount of crap that comes out of it? I had a ZR160 remember and i know what they can and cant do.______________

I seam to remember you landed it on its roof and killed the car and nearly yourself because you were a moron on a country road

Hardly the best bit of your C.V is it????????????

ian

 

[Neil82]

210 and 225 both have VVT along with most 1.8Ts 01>