GolfGTIforum.co.uk

Model specific boards => Golf mk5 => Topic started by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 15:40

Title: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 15:40
OK, post up your graphs.

Here's mine:

(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t108/Teutonic_Tamer/Golf%20V/DynorunMarch091-crop-edit.jpg)

(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t108/Teutonic_Tamer/Golf%20V/DynorunMarch092-crop-edit.jpg)

Any comments?

I'd like to see what differences between IATs peeps got.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: bacillus on 10 March 2009, 16:27
Did your gti just have the uprated ICs TT?
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 16:30
Did your gti just have the uprated ICs TT?

Yup.  Well it has another few non-engine mods too - but they wont affect how many ponies are under the bonnet.  So the intercoolers give an extra 8 ponies over stock.  :cool:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Saint Steve on 10 March 2009, 17:17
Nice torque curve on yours T_T, seems that the Intercoolers help hold boost??,rather then falling away like most ive seen on jkm's rollers.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Hurdy on 10 March 2009, 17:19
SWMBO not fancy a remap TT?

Superchips maybe :rolleyes:


I must say it does look a rather smooth curve for both torque and power. :cool:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 17:46
Nice torque curve on yours T_T, seems that the Intercoolers help hold boost??,rather then falling away like most ive seen on jkm's rollers.

Thanks mate.  Yes, the uprated coolers do help at the top end - quite a lot.  It is much more apparent with the 'mk1 butt dyno'  :wink:

And it is why I tried to persuade RedRobin to go down this route when he had his turbo issues.  OK, whilst they will never make up for what a K04 can offer at top end, the uprated coolers do cancel out one of the main limitations of the K03, whilst still retaining the K03s low down bottom end.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 17:49
SWMBO not fancy a remap TT?

Dunno about her, but I do!  :lipsrsealed:  And after a turbo back unres milly!  :drool:

Superchips maybe :rolleyes:

Cough, cough.  My ears must be going dicky!  :evil:

I must say it does look a rather smooth curve for both torque and power. :cool:

Yeah, I was well pleased with it.  Not bad power for OEM map, particularly as Jim explained that an OEM map will always try and 'top out' at 200PS/197bhp.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RobGTI on 10 March 2009, 18:53
Nice torque curve on yours T_T, seems that the Intercoolers help hold boost??,rather then falling away like most ive seen on jkm's rollers.

Thanks mate.  Yes, the uprated coolers do help at the top end - quite a lot.  It is much more apparent with the 'mk1 butt dyno'  :wink:

And it is why I tried to persuade RedRobin to go down this route when he had his turbo issues.  OK, whilst they will never make up for what a K04 can offer at top end, the uprated coolers do cancel out one of the main limitations of the K03, whilst still retaining the K03s low down bottom end.

You convinced this Rob anyway. I got a deal on a Twintercooler following some tips from TT. Got it powder coated black as well. Not had it fitted yet but hopefully it will give that little extra the top end needs.

BTW my car standard made 199.2bhp and 230lbft on JKM rollers last year.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 19:06
Nice torque curve on yours T_T, seems that the Intercoolers help hold boost??,rather then falling away like most ive seen on jkm's rollers.

Thanks mate.  Yes, the uprated coolers do help at the top end - quite a lot.  It is much more apparent with the 'mk1 butt dyno'  :wink:

And it is why I tried to persuade RedRobin to go down this route when he had his turbo issues.  OK, whilst they will never make up for what a K04 can offer at top end, the uprated coolers do cancel out one of the main limitations of the K03, whilst still retaining the K03s low down bottom end.

You convinced this Rob anyway.

:afro:

I got a deal on a Twintercooler following some tips from TT. Got it powder coated black as well. Not had it fitted yet but hopefully it will give that little extra the top end needs.

Powder coated - yikes, that isn't too good.  If it is powder coated, then the thickness of the actual coating will impair its efficiency quite a bit.  A thin 'flash coat' of matt or satin black is all that is needed.  No primer, no clearcoat - just a very thin colour coat.

Anyway, how many notes did you have to lay out?

And what about adding the S3 cooler too?  :wink:

BTW my car standard made 199.2bhp and 230lbft on JKM rollers last year.

230lbft is good! :afro:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RedRobin on 10 March 2009, 19:47
Nice torque curve on yours T_T, seems that the Intercoolers help hold boost??,rather then falling away like most ive seen on jkm's rollers.

Thanks mate.  Yes, the uprated coolers do help at the top end - quite a lot.  It is much more apparent with the 'mk1 butt dyno'  :wink:

And it is why I tried to persuade RedRobin to go down this route when he had his turbo issues.  OK, whilst they will never make up for what a K04 can offer at top end, the uprated coolers do cancel out one of the main limitations of the K03, whilst still retaining the K03s low down bottom end.


....I may uprate my cooler in time, but it has to be one step at a time on the slippery slope!

I'll be posting my plots later tonight (hopefully!)

:afro:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 19:57
OK, waiting patiently Robin!  :wink:  :smiley:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RobGTI on 10 March 2009, 20:33

Forge themselves powder coated it I asked them to paint it black not powder coat it, they (John) claimed it wouldn't effect as he put it the "thermal efficiency" or warranty.

I'll might have to ask them about this bearing in mind what you say.  :undecided:


I paid £650 all inc plus £50 for the powder coating.

With regards the S3 cooler, I'll see how I get on with this maybe I'll need one with all the powder on it :laugh:

Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RobGTI on 10 March 2009, 20:48
All the results are located here:

http://www.jkm.org.uk/performance/GalleryGTI00309.htm
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RobGTI on 10 March 2009, 20:57
Nice torque curve on yours T_T, seems that the Intercoolers help hold boost??,rather then falling away like most ive seen on jkm's rollers.

Just dug up my graph as am interested in how much the intercoolers do.

Not that I profress to know about these things but here what I think:

On my graph the torque starts to drop away at 3500 rpm while TTs is flat all the way until 5500 rpm, I assume this holding the torque equates to the stronger top end!  :nerd:


BTW
It was actually 199.4 bhp not 199.2, that .02 will make all the difference :grin:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RedRobin on 10 March 2009, 23:10
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b308/RedRobin_05/Mods/JKM_Dyno_7Mar09copy.jpg)

(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b308/RedRobin_05/Mods/JKM_Dyno_AFR_7Mar09copy.jpg)

Have now changed Revo Fuel setting from F9 to F7 at my VW dealer. Taking Jim's advice to lower the AFR from about 12.2 to 12.0.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Max Q on 10 March 2009, 23:29

Robin,

Do you mind explaining the reasons Jim gave for recommending you change your fuel to 7 as opposed to 9? I was originally set up with B6, T5, F6 but when I queried the fuel setting with Revo they were recommending 9. :huh:

Cheers.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: bacillus on 10 March 2009, 23:32

Have now changed Revo Fuel setting from F9 to F7 at my VW dealer. Taking Jim's advice to lower the AFR from about 12.2 to 12.0.

If you have the standard oem HPFP, did they log your requested and actual fuel rail pressure after making the change?
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 23:36

Forge themselves powder coated it I asked them to paint it black not powder coat it, they (John) claimed it wouldn't effect as he put it the "thermal efficiency" or warranty.

I'll might have to ask them about this bearing in mind what you say.  :undecided:


I paid £650 all inc plus £50 for the powder coating.

With regards the S3 cooler, I'll see how I get on with this maybe I'll need one with all the powder on it :laugh:

I reckon John (or you!  :lipsrsealed:) might have confused the powder coating vs paint.  When I initially spoke to Russell from Forge, he carefully explained to me that they will only flash spray a very thin coat of black paint on their coolers - and when they sent mine, the paint was very thin - but is standing up well to the winter without a single chip.  Maybe you ought to speak to Russell.  :wink:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Hurdy on 10 March 2009, 23:38
Mine came spray painted black too. Like you say Sean, it is a very thin coat of black paint. :smiley:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 23:42
Nice torque curve on yours T_T, seems that the Intercoolers help hold boost??,rather then falling away like most ive seen on jkm's rollers.

Just dug up my graph as am interested in how much the intercoolers do.

Not that I profress to know about these things but here what I think:

On my graph the torque starts to drop away at 3500 rpm while TTs is flat all the way until 5500 rpm, I assume this holding the torque equates to the stronger top end!  :nerd:

Basically, yes.  Because the inlet tract is less restrictive with the larger intercoolers.  Robins plots are similar to yours.  Now bear in mind, Robin also has a freer flowing air filter, along with his Carbonio, whereas my air filter and inlet are pure stock - so that must mean the stock GTI is quite restrictive at high revs.

Oh, and don't forget the other primary benefit of uprated intercoolers - check out the differences in the air temperatures between mine and Robins - and work out what I am on about.  :wink:

BTW
It was actually 199.4 bhp not 199.2, that .02 will make all the difference :grin:

Pah, what's a fifth of a pony between mates!  :grin:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 23:46

Have now changed Revo Fuel setting from F9 to F7 at my VW dealer. Taking Jim's advice to lower the AFR from about 12.2 to 12.0.

If you have the standard oem HPFP, did they log your requested and actual fuel rail pressure after making the change?

The fuel rail pressure shouldn't really affect the air fuel ratio - unless you are truely maxing out the fuel injectors with a stage 3 setup.  And I think the stock injectors are more than adequate.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 23:46
Mine came spray painted black too. Like you say Sean, it is a very thin coat of black paint. :smiley:

Is yours holding up without any chips?
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RedRobin on 10 March 2009, 23:48

Have now changed Revo Fuel setting from F9 to F7 at my VW dealer. Taking Jim's advice to lower the AFR from about 12.2 to 12.0.

If you have the standard oem HPFP, did they log your requested and actual fuel rail pressure after making the change?


....Yes I have the standard HPFP.

JKM will have my logs from the dyno session and we'll be able to compare on next session on 18th April. << I've just seen T_T's post and so question your question.

We did the F9 to F7 change via a laptop at home (my friend who is both a VW mechanic/tech and Revo agent). JKM are 2hrs away.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 10 March 2009, 23:49
So does anyone have any comments on my second graph - particularly my air-fuel ratio?  Because mine does seem to drop off, yet still makes good torque and power at the top end?  :undecided:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Hurdy on 10 March 2009, 23:59
Mine came spray painted black too. Like you say Sean, it is a very thin coat of black paint. :smiley:

Is yours holding up without any chips?

There are one or two minor silver bits peeping through, but all-in-all it is holding up quite well :smiley:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RedRobin on 11 March 2009, 00:08

Robin,

Do you mind explaining the reasons Jim gave for recommending you change your fuel to 7 as opposed to 9? I was originally set up with B6, T5, F6 but when I queried the fuel setting with Revo they were recommending 9. :huh:

Cheers.


....All Revo's settings are designed to be safe and these variations are fine tuning individual cars AFAIK.

I find that Carl at Revo tends to encourage the more aggressive setting options and it's reasonable of him to assume that it's what most people want.

Jim and Keith are using a dyno and their knowledge of my individual car to form their recommendations.

I don't remember accurately enough to say why Jim said he preferred to see 12.0 than 12.2 but it made total sense at the time. In other words, I forgot, but I trust his advice.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Hurdy on 11 March 2009, 00:10
So does anyone have any comments on my second graph - particularly my air-fuel ratio?  Because mine does seem to drop off, yet still makes good torque and power at the top end?  :undecided:

Only poser I can think of is whether or not the engine moves into stratified mode during a power run at some point :undecided:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: stealthwolf on 11 March 2009, 01:32
No scanner, so unable to put up adequate scans. Anyway, here's mine:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/stealthwolf/RR_curve01.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/stealthwolf/RR_curve02.jpg)
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RedRobin on 11 March 2009, 07:39

There are one or two minor silver bits peeping through, but all-in-all it is holding up quite well :smiley:


....Talking about your hair is bit off-topic isn't it Hurdy? :evil:


:afro:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RobGTI on 11 March 2009, 09:10

Forge themselves powder coated it I asked them to paint it black not powder coat it, they (John) claimed it wouldn't effect as he put it the "thermal efficiency" or warranty.

I'll might have to ask them about this bearing in mind what you say.  :undecided:


I paid £650 all inc plus £50 for the powder coating.

With regards the S3 cooler, I'll see how I get on with this maybe I'll need one with all the powder on it :laugh:

I reckon John (or you!  :lipsrsealed:) might have confused the powder coating vs paint.  When I initially spoke to Russell from Forge, he carefully explained to me that they will only flash spray a very thin coat of black paint on their coolers - and when they sent mine, the paint was very thin - but is standing up well to the winter without a single chip.  Maybe you ought to speak to Russell.  :wink:

Not picked it up yet as I saved on the delivery charge as I drive by Gloucester every other week. When I pick up I will certainly inspect the part to try and guage the thinkness of the powder / paint. Just checking back my emails with John and they do state powder coating.

I also (before you responded) asked John via email to back up the claims that powder coating doesn't effect the performance of the cooler. We'll see what the repsonce is.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RobGTI on 11 March 2009, 09:12

I've since the original graph that I refer to added a Dbilas intake so that should see a better top end also, well as least it did on my butt dyno :grin:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RedRobin on 11 March 2009, 09:30

Oh, and don't forget the other primary benefit of uprated intercoolers - check out the differences in the air temperatures between mine and Robins - and work out what I am on about.  :wink:


....On the printout, is "AT" the Air Temperature? Value 15 on yours and 13 on mine? What's it mean, please?

My AT was 11 in December and 13 in October - Both on JKM's dyno.

Thanks :afro:

Btw, T_T - I sent you an email (not PM)
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Mew on 11 March 2009, 09:36
No scanner, so unable to put up adequate scans. Anyway, here's mine:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/stealthwolf/RR_curve01.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/stealthwolf/RR_curve02.jpg)

They've been put up on the JKM site matey :wink:

http://www.jkm.org.uk/performance/GalleryGTI00309.htm
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RobGTI on 11 March 2009, 09:51

Forge themselves powder coated it I asked them to paint it black not powder coat it, they (John) claimed it wouldn't effect as he put it the "thermal efficiency" or warranty.

I'll might have to ask them about this bearing in mind what you say.  :undecided:


I paid £650 all inc plus £50 for the powder coating.

With regards the S3 cooler, I'll see how I get on with this maybe I'll need one with all the powder on it :laugh:

I reckon John (or you!  :lipsrsealed:) might have confused the powder coating vs paint.  When I initially spoke to Russell from Forge, he carefully explained to me that they will only flash spray a very thin coat of black paint on their coolers - and when they sent mine, the paint was very thin - but is standing up well to the winter without a single chip.  Maybe you ought to speak to Russell.  :wink:

Ok just had a phone conversation with John at Forge:
Here are the main points discussed:


1) The cooler is powder coated. Russel at Forge speciifes that powder coating is to be a min of 0.1mm and a maximum of 0.15mm.
2) The powder coating is offered in place of the spraying as a) it gives more of a uniform covering and b) it will not flake.
3) Forge (Chris) has run back to back tests with powder coated and non powder coated coolers and found no signifcant effect on the cooling. (less than 1 degree c loss)
4) Anodising was considered but not chosen as it would have weakened the weave of the aluminium.

Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Egbutt Wash on 11 March 2009, 10:11
You never seem to get a duff engine, way below the norm.
VW's turbo 4 pot is a beaut.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Hurdy on 11 March 2009, 12:31

There are one or two minor silver bits peeping through, but all-in-all it is holding up quite well :smiley:


....Talking about your hair is bit off-topic isn't it Hurdy? :evil:


:afro:

LOL

You're nearer the truth there than you think :grin:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: stealthwolf on 11 March 2009, 13:16
They've been put up on the JKM site matey :wink:

I know but I deliberately did them in excel. My car's been on the same RR twice, stock each time. The graphs from the second run are on a different scale to the first run so you can't adequately compare, which is why I did them in excel - for comparison reasons. Secondly, JKM have shown only the bhp/torque curves and not the bhp/afr:p plots which I've also analysed.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Mew on 11 March 2009, 14:24
Touché!
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 12 March 2009, 10:42
So does anyone have any comments on my second graph - particularly my air-fuel ratio?  Because mine does seem to drop off, yet still makes good torque and power at the top end?  :undecided:

Only poser I can think of is whether or not the engine moves into stratified mode during a power run at some point :undecided:

Huh - it shouldn't be doing that.  Stratified mode only happens under light engine loads at part throttle.  At WOT it should be on full 'rich' settings - and that is what is happening.  At the start of the run, the mixture is nearly stoich, but from 2,500rpm, starts to richen up - ending up at around 11:1.  Jim did confirm that our FSI engines run rich (as does my RS4) - but I just wondered what the 'blip' at 2,500 was about?
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 12 March 2009, 10:50
No scanner, so unable to put up adequate scans. Anyway, here's mine:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/stealthwolf/RR_curve01.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/stealthwolf/RR_curve02.jpg)

I would still state that differences in temperatures and humidity can cause those knids of differences.  Take your 1st graph, for both the red power curve and the blue torque curve - on a cooler day, the dotted line is producing slightly more power slightly earlier in the rev range - but as the manufacturers stated maximum power is achieved - those two red lines meet up, delivering roughly the same max power.

The AFR (blue) on the second graph is more interesting - particularly at low revs.  Maybe it is a quirk of JKMs rollers which give a slightly unusual reading when first starting the power run.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 12 March 2009, 10:51

There are one or two minor silver bits peeping through, but all-in-all it is holding up quite well :smiley:


....Talking about your hair is bit off-topic isn't it Hurdy? :evil:


:afro:


^^^^ PMSL
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 12 March 2009, 11:04

Oh, and don't forget the other primary benefit of uprated intercoolers - check out the differences in the air temperatures between mine and Robins - and work out what I am on about.  :wink:


....On the printout, is "AT" the Air Temperature? Value 15 on yours and 13 on mine? What's it mean, please?

My AT was 11 in December and 13 in October - Both on JKM's dyno.

Thanks :afro:

I think AT actually stands for 'Ambient Temperature' (which is basically the air temperature).  That value, on its own isnt really important.  You actually need to compare the AT to the IT (which is 'Inlet Temperature') because this shows difference between the temperature of the air before the turbo has compressed it, and then after the turbo as compressed it (and therefore heated it up) - and how efficient the intercoolers are.

So, with mine, the AT is 15, whereas the IT is 18 - which means my S3 & Forge coolers have restricted the temperature rise to just three degrees (when will I see you again . . . .  :embarassed:  :evil:).  But your AT is 13 (your AT is cooler than mine maybe because you went on the rollers earlier in the day, when it was a touch cooler), but your IT is 19.  That means that the standard GTI cooler is allowing a 6 degree increase.  So this shows a clear benefit from the uprated intercoolers.  :wink:  Lower inlet air temperatures mean more power.  :nerd:

Btw, T_T - I sent you an email (not PM)

Whoops - sheepishly fires up Outlook!
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Teutonic_Tamer on 12 March 2009, 13:36

Forge themselves powder coated it I asked them to paint it black not powder coat it, they (John) claimed it wouldn't effect as he put it the "thermal efficiency" or warranty.

I'll might have to ask them about this bearing in mind what you say.  :undecided:


I paid £650 all inc plus £50 for the powder coating.

With regards the S3 cooler, I'll see how I get on with this maybe I'll need one with all the powder on it :laugh:

I reckon John (or you!  :lipsrsealed:) might have confused the powder coating vs paint.  When I initially spoke to Russell from Forge, he carefully explained to me that they will only flash spray a very thin coat of black paint on their coolers - and when they sent mine, the paint was very thin - but is standing up well to the winter without a single chip.  Maybe you ought to speak to Russell.  :wink:

Ok just had a phone conversation with John at Forge:
Here are the main points discussed:


1) The cooler is powder coated. Russel at Forge speciifes that powder coating is to be a min of 0.1mm and a maximum of 0.15mm.
2) The powder coating is offered in place of the spraying as a) it gives more of a uniform covering and b) it will not flake.
3) Forge (Chris) has run back to back tests with powder coated and non powder coated coolers and found no signifcant effect on the cooling. (less than 1 degree c loss)
4) Anodising was considered but not chosen as it would have weakened the weave of the aluminium.

I guess this must be something new then, because they didn't offer it at last years Inters.

I'd be interested in comparing their paint and powdercoating finishes!  :wink:
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: RobGTI on 12 March 2009, 16:00
Yes it is new. They don't offer the spaying service anymore. Can post pics but not sure they would be that useful for a comparison.
Title: Re: Mk5 specific results from the JKM RR day on 7th March 09
Post by: Micky 32 on 12 March 2009, 19:12
The Forge twintercooler is great, i'm running one along with full Milltek, Evoms, autotech fuel pump averaging 285bhp on a ko3 and pulls nicely up top to the redline. Even after a nice run if you pop the bonnett and touch the throttle body it's stone cold.