My 2013 Audi TT-RS Build Thread…

TT/All
#21

Saki, LOL… I have been over quite a few different passes of mine and others since I got home this afternoon to compare… Looks like we both came to a similar conclusion… I thought low 12.6x is where it should have been… I obviously can’t tell from the vid, but I am 100% sure I hit my shifts clean and fairly quick… I think it is a combo of the DA and lack of boost/timing up top… The timing on this car is laughable unless I am logging the wrong field? No pull so that’s good… IAT’s were actually good as well… Boost tapers in the upper R’s… Lots to learn and gonna be fun…

On a side note I am still shocked at my 60ft time… That is pretty fucking good for a stock haldex car… I know the RS is fairly light but still not many stock cars can cut that kind of a 60…

Oh yeah tweaked about the garbage video… I mounted the camera to my helmet and just tested… looks choice… I’m an idiot… Someone on one of the forums mentioned using the window so I went that route… grrrrr…

#22

Here is an interesting comparison…

Stock TTRS - Me TTRS stage I Stock S4 record
1.6732 60ft 1.728 60ft 1.846 60ft
5.2504 330ft 5.166 330ft 5.316 330ft
8.2121 1/8 mile 7.9601/8 mile 8.164 1/8 mile
84.71 1/8 mph 88.37 1/8 mph 87.01 1/8 mph
10.6962 1000ft 10.374 1000ft 10.623 1000ft
12.7932 1/4 time 12.384 1/4 time 12.698 1/4 time
108.68 mph 111.45 mph 108.49 mph

I need help after the launch… Look at how much I am down in MPH to the stock S4 at the 1/8th!!! Again, DA wasn’t good so that is important and it’s probably worth a tenth or so…

#23

My favourite part about a new car is the clean engine bay photo. It’ll never look the same no matter how hard you try…

#24

[quote=“SharkBait,post:23,topic:4360”]
I’ll have to disagree on that… granted I am not the norm since my toys don’t see rain or snow… I think they look better than new… Judge for yourself…


http://i1012.photobucket.com/albums/af247/concordslim/Concord-20130615-00474_zps0c131c11.jpg


http://i1012.photobucket.com/albums/af247/concordslim/Concord-20130615-00473_zps6930bb91.jpg


http://i1012.photobucket.com/albums/af247/concordslim/Concord-20130615-00472_zpsf64c3449.jpg


http://i1012.photobucket.com/albums/af247/concordslim/2009_0729_004303.jpg

#25

Nice! But hang on a sec ‘cause imma lil slow…so whatcha sayin’ is, you can keep the engine bays of all the cars you don’t drive in the rain or snow showroom-like? Amazeballs dawg!

#26

That wrap on your strat intake looks so well done, Ron. Mine is embarrassing. I don’t think I got it damp enough and I was breathing in fiberglass the entire time. I’m going to have to redo it sometime in the near future.

#27

primetime, trying to add this to the database but I don’t see octane anywhere. I was going to assume 100 since you mentioned that’s all you run in your performance cars, but let me know.

#28

Shell 93…

#29

We’re testing our clutch setup now.

BTW, will 700 HP be enough?

#30

Only if the 1/4 mile time matches :wink:

#31

^^ That.

#32

700 hp is lots. That’s 600whp in the real world…and if the TTRS can manage 600 whp stock motor from 6 cylinders at 1/2 a litre per cylinder, I’ll be shocked.

if that car doesn’t run 10.50 @ 145 MPH, something has gone horribly wrong in the estimation phase.

#33

Arin, nice… You’ll be hearing from me very soon… Just been slammed at work with our 2.5B acquisition we are closing on… Anyway it’s time for an exhaust, front mount and tune:). Congrats on your marriage and looks like you had a nice honeymoon…

Saki, it’s a 5 cylinder not 6 :slight_smile: dude on vortex just went 11.2 at 128… Unfortunately it’s a mock track but probably not a lot of real ones in his part of the world…

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6087161-TT-RS-1-4-mile

#34

Those stock and hybrid turbo times are always super amazing yet never at a real track and never come close to matching times at a real track either. ???

BTW, JC did nearly 130 mph last year on the GTX3071R and barely any tuning. We’re now using the GTX3576R, up on HP quite a bit and hitting peak torque near the same RPM through what’s been pretty extensive tuning work. I’m hoping we can get it to the tracks after waterfest. The DA around here is piss poor, but it is what it is.

What acceleration data would you guys like to see? I’d like to get access to the local Airport to get the times after my two recent 100+ run in’s with the law (Staties :frowning: ) collecting data for you guys. Seems whispering those magical “3” letters (Starts with an A) doesn’t work with those guys. ;D

I’m thinking 60-120, 62-124, 60-130 (all mph).

#35

Arin, you know me I prefer 1/4 mile times and traps but realize those are very driver dependent given the tranny… 60-130 would be cool though… The only numbers I’m really concerned about are what my other car will run with the 1.74:). You going to make any passes at waterfest?

#36

We don’t have any plans for passes at waterfest.

#37

Yeah not sure why I wrote 6 but I was aware it is 5 X 0.5

#38

Dump all the 60+ testing. It just cheepens the brand and opens things up to kits that have zero real world power. Why would anyone really care how fast you can exceed the speed limit only to see how fast you can doubble exceed it. I say set the standard for real world safe tests. Start a new test that really reflects the real world and the people in it.

You want a real read real world test. Start a new trend. 5mph to 70mph. Serious. you can do this on an expressway.
I don’t fucking care about 100+ tests thats for fags and loosers with super turbo lag that wanta feel better for having a shit car that is slow from 5mph-70mph the speeds 99% of people drive 99% of the time

#39

Yeah standards for me are 0-60, 0-100, 1/4 mile

For people terrified of launching something like 10-100 would be interesting.

#40

I like that 5-70 mph idea. I remember putting importance on a 50-70 time as well as it reflected the ability to overtake on one lane each way type roads.