MK7 GTI Facelift

[fredgroves]

I wondered if the 7th gear would drop the revs at 70ish mph to below the point at which the turbo comes in.

That's pretty much how the GTD is geared.

[Daz Auto]

For everyday driving I'd agree about the PP. But, for that one occasion when the better brakes make the difference between an accident and a near miss, worth every penny.

The performance pack is an option I am really interested in. So I have done a little research.

I went onto fastestlaps.com and did a comparison. The 2 cars have both been tested on 4 tracks. On Winton (National Circuit) they posted exactly the same time. On 2 circuits only a second or less separated their times. Strangely the non-PP was almost 5 seconds faster on the Virginia International Raceway Grand East Course. They appear to have been tested a year apart. So I suspect something significant changed. The GTI PP should not be slower.

The brakes probably feel better, though for some reason, they don't seem to make a significant improvement to lap times. This surprised me.

Edit: here is a link - http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/lni25zh64v6u

[monkeyhanger]

^looking at that graph, there'll be a very noticeable improvement in motorway cruising economy with the DSG, 2600ish revs maintaining 80mph in 7th vs 2900 revs in manual 6th, but probably won't improve town (sub 40mph) driving economy much if at all.

[fredgroves]

^looking at that graph, there'll be a very noticeable improvement in motorway cruising economy with the DSG, 2600ish revs maintaining 80mph in 7th vs 2900 revs in manual 6th, but probably won't improve town (sub 40mph) driving economy much if at all.

Where does the turbo come in on the TSI engine? If its 2.5k I reckon 70mph would be just under 2.5krpm...

[Watts]

For everyday driving I'd agree about the PP. But, for that one occasion when the better brakes make the difference between an accident and a near miss, worth every penny.

The performance pack is an option I am really interested in. So I have done a little research.

I went onto fastestlaps.com and did a comparison. The 2 cars have both been tested on 4 tracks. On Winton (National Circuit) they posted exactly the same time. On 2 circuits only a second or less separated their times. Strangely the non-PP was almost 5 seconds faster on the Virginia International Raceway Grand East Course. They appear to have been tested a year apart. So I suspect something significant changed. The GTI PP should not be slower.

The brakes probably feel better, though for some reason, they don't seem to make a significant improvement to lap times. This surprised me.

Edit: here is a link - http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/lni25zh64v6u

Seems an odd outcome, I expected pretty similar times but not the PP to be slower. But as that was only the one instance then perhaps there was a reason. Would still go for a PP though, even if just for the red calipers

[Daz Auto]

... but probably won't improve town (sub 40mph) driving economy much if at all.

... that makes sense. So I had a look for the fuel economy figures of the S3 fitted with the 6-speed S-tronic. I could not find an old brochure, so the figures are from another forum.


Facelift S3 Sportback, 7-speed S-tronic, in mpg:
Urban 34.4,
Extra Urban 51.4,
Combined 43.5.

Pre-facelift S3 Sportback, 6-speed S-tronic, in mpg:
Urban 32.1,
Extra urban 47.9,
Combined 40.9.

It appears the urban driving fuel economy has improved with the new 7-speed S-tronic as well.

From the VW quote, "a new 7-speed DSG... high-efficiency gearbox..."

Edit: I wondered if they made engine changes to account for the increased fuel efficiency figures. So I checked the urban figures for the manual - 31mpg vs new 30.7mpg. It looks like it is not the engine.

[monkeyhanger]

Daz: across the board (multiple engines), everything's new mpg figures have dropped and CO2 figures have risen in the VAG stable where new data is shown, not by much, but presumably they're not stretching the truth as much as they used to, pre-dieselgate.

Officially the old DSG 6-speed was a smidge more economical than the manual, but in reality it is about 10% thirstier in both GTD (comparing my old manual with my Dad's) and R (comparing mine with an extended test drive in which I started off driving as I normally would, and disregarded the drop in mpg when I started caning it). As the official gap has opened with 7-speed DSG vs manual, i'm expecting them to be about the same in real world driving around the doors, maybe the DSG will edge it on the motorway, as that rpm/speed difference in top gear can't be ignored.

The DSG's cost will be offset a little as the DSG will end up being cheaper on showroom tax than the manual under the new regime coming in April 2017.

[Daz Auto]

... presumably they're not stretching the truth as much as they used to, pre-dieselgate.

Officially the old DSG 6-speed was a smidge more economical than the manual, but in reality it is about 10% thirstier...

... then why are they only posting these improvements for this box? None of the other S-tronic equipped cars are showing any significant improvements with their official post-dieselgate figures. And the new data for the Golf R is appearing to show even greater improvements of the DSG over the manual figures.

Edit: none of the other new Golfs with DSG in the German Konfigurator are showing much difference either.

[Restlessnative]

I'm still saying they will include Ad Blue if no engine changes.

Mine spends half it's life doing DPF regens.Lost count of the number of times the fan is running after i switch off.No wonder the fuel economy is sh!te.It doesn't like the cold either.Will rev highly for ages until it warms up.
45mpg.Not quite the 67 i was promised.

[Poached]

Is Fastestlaps even reliable? There could be numerous reasons laptimes differ even if the data added is verifiable.

PP - LSD/Bigger brakes/More power - one of the better options.