first pic of a blown 3.0TFSI - APR tuned

B8 S4
#21

No, that’s not the case.

Apr’s tune has been out for 4 years and has had zero issues until this case. So you have to weigh the facts. If you think apr’s tune blows motors, you’re probably not very good at that though.

How about the 1000+ people who have been running the tune for as long as four years and literally millions of miles, without blowing their motors? Were they all just lucky?

Do you think that when Apr tuned this particular car with the same tune they’ve sold to 1000+ other people they instead customized this guys tune, and accidentally checked the box for bent rods?

Revo got raped because within a couple of months of their tune being out 3 cars blew their motor, all of whom did so the exact same way. We have not seen other 3.0t cars blow their motor in that same way so weighing the balance of available information people concluded revo might be the issue. A look at their parameters confirmed that. They have since made substantial changes to their tune.

#22

I’m not even an APR customer. I have a GIAC tune. I doesn’t take a genius to see that until this “incident” APR’s tuning has a perfect track record. I said I doubt it’s the tune because no one else has blown up an APR tuned B8 S4.

#23

yes, but use your common sense. Nobody is shifting out of 3rd in a corner of any consequence. They’re in a gentle bend at best…because they’re going 160 km/h. And when you’re shifting out of 3rd, you’re not upsetting weight transfer nearly as much as when you’re shifting out of 2nd, since the car’s momentum is so much more pronounced. Watch your passenger’s head when you go 1st to 2nd at redline…they snap forward and snap back. Same in 2nd, but less so. When you do it in 3rd to 4th, they barely flinch. It’s still significant enough transfer if you’re on the ragged edge, but again, these are not happening on anything more than a gentle bend, and that’s all it takes to lose your perspective.

#24

if you need further attestation to the fact that this site is not a fanboy site for APR, check the destruction of APR’s reputation that happened in the general discussion section and the war room. Last time I looked, you were a happy participant in those threads, as were thousands of people across the audi forum and tuning spectrum. If you check, many of the names who have posted here also posted there, admonishing APR for their behaviour.

The site doesn’t play favourites…it favours facts.

#25

+1000. Also, Dinan cars don’t explode because they make you buy the entire stage in order to upgrade. It’s not $600 software to +100 HP and get away with it at instructor level on a racetrack.

#26

While logically, your note makes sense… We’re going to have to agree to disagree :slight_smile:
I really wonder if you’ve been on a road course at the top of 3rd gear in a sweeper. Shifting in this situation will upset the car. There’s a lot of load on the tires if you are actually driving it properly. Let’s say it’s a sustained 0.95g for arguements sake. You’re saying suddenly lifting throttle in a .95g situation @160kph is minimal distruption? No sir, it is not minimal.

What you say is true on an onramp, or any normal street situation. But in those scenarios, you are never at the limit of adhesion. When you’re talking nearly 1g (or sometimes even over 1g), shifting while in transition is never a good idea.

#27

+1. There are rare corners where you can have the wheel straight at the apex and hit 4th at the apex. Even for intermediate students, this is kind of busy with the hand and foot work. Most people are better off hitting 4th before turn in, or being patient through the apex and trying not to max out 3rd gear before the track out.

Even a DSG or M DCT doesn’t shift smooth enough to snap off a gear change mid corner. I would feel comfortable doing it in a PDK because it’s so seamless you can’t tell it shifted. Feels like a CVT.

#28

Agreeing to disagree with you is your standard go to when you refuse to RTFS.

Nowhere did I say that changing gears at the limit of adhesion and 1G of cornering force will not upset the car. Here’s what I said so that you can get up to speed…

[quote] yes, but use your common sense. Nobody is shifting out of 3rd in a corner of any consequence. They’re in a gentle bend at best…because they’re going 160 km/h. And when you’re shifting out of 3rd, you’re not upsetting weight transfer nearly as much as when you’re shifting out of 2nd, since the car’s momentum is so much more pronounced.
[/quote]
You took what I said, misunderstood it, exaggerated it, and then argued with yourself. Very odd.

Same as in the discussion about the ‘torque’ available in a 4.2 FSI high revving vs. a 3.0T …you gloss over the facts to support your conclusion, which you arrived at with no actual facts…strictly the repetition of forum banter. Then you say ‘agree to disagree’. No…“agree to not do any homework” is what you should post.

Oh…and happy birthday.

#29

It was negligent not to install the CPS on a stage 2 tune for road course use. A tune falls somewhere in the spectrum of safe to fast. We know APR is fast, and now we know it’s fast enough to blow motors.

Still waiting on the picture of the Revo motor that blew. I’ll supply one when my motor blows but that day never seems to come. I even lived dangerously and ran the 100 octane program all day Saturday and Sunday at Laguna.

#30

another one who doesn’t read, and just argues with himself

engineers…both of you?

best part is that you’re still under the impression PDK is special sauce. It’s a name for Porsche’s automatic transmission, of which there are 4 variants, all of varying pedigree. One of which is the Audi S4 DSG transmission you loathe.

#31

You took what I said, misunderstood it, exaggerated it, and then argued with yourself. Very odd.

Same as in the discussion about the ‘torque’ available in a 4.2 FSI high revving vs. a 3.0T …you gloss over the facts to support your conclusion, which you arrived at with no actual facts…strictly the repetition of forum banter. Then you say ‘agree to disagree’. No…“agree to not do any homework” is what you should post.

Oh…and happy birthday.
[/quote]
Hey dude, I think you confused me with drob :slight_smile:
I didn’t take part in any of your v8 vs v6 debate hahahaha!

On the topic of shifting mid corner - sounds like we are in agreement then! No one is shifting in a high speed sweeper. Bad practice, shouldn’t be done. Non issue there.

#32

Oh and by the way, PDK was developed by ZF.
It’s not the same as Audi s-tronic.
Perhaps the R8 uses the same box, but normal Audi’s do not have PDK.

PDK was developed later, and can be considered a new generation of dual clutch boxes.

#33

I put together a little something for trolls who insist VW’s in house DSG is the same as ZF’s PDK:

They both have two shafts of gears and two clutches, but the similarities end there. For instance, the Audi model has shafts up front to turn the front wheels. The gears are in a different order, also. They really have zero parts in common.

http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/51/a-tale-of-two-porsche-seven-speeds-manual-and-pdk-photo-437848-s-original.jpg

http://jonchin.smugmug.com/Audi-Club-Singapore-Official/LUK-CVT-Technolo/DL501-Picture-5/737609586_6mcoR-L.jpg

#34

hmm…guy on forum vs. Porsche’s head of development. Tough choice.

However, I think I will listen to Porsche’s head of development.

“We then also developed a dual-clutch gearbox; a derivative of the DL501 Audi gearbox.”
Porsche Head of Development Wolfgang Hatz

http://www.automobil-produktion.de/2014/02/porsche-entwicklungsvorstand-wolfgang-hatz-exklusivitaet-ist-ein-hohes-gut/

#35

This is why you’re looking silly

PDK means Porsche Double Clutch

It does not refer to any particular type of double clutch gearbox developed by any particular person. It’s an umbrella term. You posted a pic of one type of PDK system. Not all of them.

Same as quattro…Audi says ‘quattro’ when they refer to AWD. That used to be a pretty simple thing, but now there are four different types of quattro on the production cars, and another electric version on their Le Mans car. Some Audi snobs think they’re better than volkswagen and that Audi quattro using a torsen differential is a cut above, however there is a haldex system used on some of the Audis and it is directly related to the 4motion system on some of the VW platforms. Reality is the nomenclature is irrelevant.

#36

Shoot! That’s cheating! You’re talking about a car based off the MLB platform - it’s no surprise it uses an Audi derivative gearbox! But ok, you win. But FWIW, the original PDK is a ZF development. Not a spin off of the Audi box. Anyway, I don’t really care. It’s an automagic box. zzzz.

Point is, an engine blew zomg!!!

#37

Nothing to see here guys. West has finished his exhaustive internet investigation.

#38

Let’s not get too excited about the Macan article in German. It’s a $25k VW Tiguan with a killer suspension and interior. I’m not shocked it uses a VW transmission. That car is $65k loaded, where even a poseur Porsche like my Boxster is underequipped at that MSRP.

The real deal PDK sports car thing is not that complicated. One entity has the patents for it, and other manufacturers license those patents in order to sell their own implementations of the technology. It would appear that ZF invented it in 2005, and Borgwarner has a derivative work:

http://www.google.com/patents/US7231843
http://www.google.com/patents/US8375816

PDK’s feature set is quite different from VW DSG, the most notable thing for the driver being the transmission decoupling when the car is cruising. They are unmistakably different. You could be blind or dense and still notice a gigantic difference, as you find yourself saying things like “this is the first automation transmission I actually like” and “this is better than a manual because it does the same thing with fewer inputs, but nothing I didn’t intend”. I credit both the intuitive software and superior clutch construction that can shift at high RPM or handle a high torque motor, without overheating nor reaching a lifetime “launch control cap” as the inferior but sufficient VW implementation does.

#39

The tiguan is similar to the golf, now the q3. It’s based on mqb. Macan is mlb. Someone could have a full-time job correcting all your misinformation.

#40

West, the most clueless troll on the forums…

Sorry that I ruined all your pdk arguments… I know you’ll continue to ignore facts even though people like saki and I continue to point them out…

As for your comment on the macan… Total lol… Have you driven one? The turbo starts in the 70s… Can I get a tt 3.6 motor in a Tiguan? Can I get torque vectoring? Can I get air suspension? I could go on but its a waste of time… The macan shares under 20% of its parts with q5 and I’m sure less with the Tiguan… It will spank your coxster and s4 in a straight line and probably on the track… Funny how you preach about the Porsche brand but shit all over the vehicle that will sell more than any other…