I finally got the APR stage one for my 2010 A5 2.0T
04-30-2010, 02:49 PM
#51
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can type all you want about your "racing expertise" 
Facts are facts. Chipped 2.0T will beat your 3.2 in a straight line from a dig or a roll. And, when it comes to actual racing on a track, it is lighter and more nimble so it will out-handle your 3.2 (in the hands of the same drivers of course).
And, if you ever want to show off your "racing expertise," come on down to VIR any time. I'm an HPDE instructor there. I'd be happy to show you what real driving is all about.
Facts are facts. Chipped 2.0T will beat your 3.2 in a straight line from a dig or a roll. And, when it comes to actual racing on a track, it is lighter and more nimble so it will out-handle your 3.2 (in the hands of the same drivers of course).
And, if you ever want to show off your "racing expertise," come on down to VIR any time. I'm an HPDE instructor there. I'd be happy to show you what real driving is all about.
04-30-2010, 03:36 PM
#52
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: California
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to STaSIS an a5 2.0t with a ECU upgrade and an exhaust upgrade the 0-60 time is 5.5secs
it states on this website http://www.stasisengineering.com/sigSeries_a5.php then click under performance
it states on this website http://www.stasisengineering.com/sigSeries_a5.php then click under performance
04-30-2010, 03:43 PM
#53
AudiWorld Member
What's the 0-60 on a chipped 2.0, I know the 3.2 is 5.8 for manual. I can't see a chip gaining almost a second for the 2.0t, even with a chip the 2.0t is at a HP deficit although it's slightly lighter. A whole second almost I don't think any chip is doing that. Maybe if you add a new turbo, and a chip, you just might maybe get that much more.
What's interesting in that C&D test is that they talk about both cars being identical in acceleration until they reach 80mph and the extra displacement of the 3.2 takes over.
Anyhow, 0-60 isn't a true indicator of a car's straight line performance.
You need to look more at trap speed in the 1/4 mile and dyno charts and real-world experience.
There are threads in this forum in the B8 A4 section about 3.2 vs. 2.0T. Check them out. Or, hit your local dragstrip this summer. Late last year I saw a chipped 2.0T B8 A4 absolutely walk a 3.2 S5 at The Rock dragstrip in NC.
Another example is the MkV GTI vs. MkV R32. In stock form, the R32 is slightly faster than the GTI. But, chip the GTI and it obliterates the R32.
I realize I'm not talking specific to the A5 in these examples, but the discussion is between the 2.0T and 3.2 engines which, when in other cars, can be compared and applied to the A5.
In the end, the weight advantage of the 2.0T A5 plus all the additional HP/TQ gained from a chip like Stasis or APR just add up to too much for the 3.2.
04-30-2010, 03:51 PM
#54
AudiWorld Member
What's the 0-60 on a chipped 2.0, I know the 3.2 is 5.8 for manual. I can't see a chip gaining almost a second for the 2.0t, even with a chip the 2.0t is at a HP deficit although it's slightly lighter. A whole second almost I don't think any chip is doing that. Maybe if you add a new turbo, and a chip, you just might maybe get that much more.
04-30-2010, 03:52 PM
#55
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York State
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're worried about the wrong thing...0-60 depends too much on the driver and varies too much test-by-test. For instance, look at Edmunds when they've tested the B8 A4 2.0T and 3.2 and you'll see they say the 2.0T is slightly faster to 60. Or, look at this article from C&D: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
What's interesting in that C&D test is that they talk about both cars being identical in acceleration until they reach 80mph and the extra displacement of the 3.2 takes over.
Anyhow, 0-60 isn't a true indicator of a car's straight line performance.
You need to look more at trap speed in the 1/4 mile and dyno charts and real-world experience.
There are threads in this forum in the B8 A4 section about 3.2 vs. 2.0T. Check them out. Or, hit your local dragstrip this summer. Late last year I saw a chipped 2.0T B8 A4 absolutely walk a 3.2 S5 at The Rock dragstrip in NC.
Another example is the MkV GTI vs. MkV R32. In stock form, the R32 is slightly faster than the GTI. But, chip the GTI and it obliterates the R32.
I realize I'm not talking specific to the A5 in these examples, but the discussion is between the 2.0T and 3.2 engines which, when in other cars, can be compared and applied to the A5.
In the end, the weight advantage of the 2.0T A5 plus all the additional HP/TQ gained from a chip like Stasis or APR just add up to too much for the 3.2.
What's interesting in that C&D test is that they talk about both cars being identical in acceleration until they reach 80mph and the extra displacement of the 3.2 takes over.
Anyhow, 0-60 isn't a true indicator of a car's straight line performance.
You need to look more at trap speed in the 1/4 mile and dyno charts and real-world experience.
There are threads in this forum in the B8 A4 section about 3.2 vs. 2.0T. Check them out. Or, hit your local dragstrip this summer. Late last year I saw a chipped 2.0T B8 A4 absolutely walk a 3.2 S5 at The Rock dragstrip in NC.
Another example is the MkV GTI vs. MkV R32. In stock form, the R32 is slightly faster than the GTI. But, chip the GTI and it obliterates the R32.
I realize I'm not talking specific to the A5 in these examples, but the discussion is between the 2.0T and 3.2 engines which, when in other cars, can be compared and applied to the A5.
In the end, the weight advantage of the 2.0T A5 plus all the additional HP/TQ gained from a chip like Stasis or APR just add up to too much for the 3.2.
04-30-2010, 04:00 PM
#56
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: California
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2.0tchipped does 60mph in 5.5 don't know about 1/4mile time
04-30-2010, 04:01 PM
#57
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York State
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're worried about the wrong thing...0-60 depends too much on the driver and varies too much test-by-test. For instance, look at Edmunds when they've tested the B8 A4 2.0T and 3.2 and you'll see they say the 2.0T is slightly faster to 60. Or, look at this article from C&D: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
What's interesting in that C&D test is that they talk about both cars being identical in acceleration until they reach 80mph and the extra displacement of the 3.2 takes over.
Anyhow, 0-60 isn't a true indicator of a car's straight line performance.
You need to look more at trap speed in the 1/4 mile and dyno charts and real-world experience.
There are threads in this forum in the B8 A4 section about 3.2 vs. 2.0T. Check them out. Or, hit your local dragstrip this summer. Late last year I saw a chipped 2.0T B8 A4 absolutely walk a 3.2 S5 at The Rock dragstrip in NC.
Another example is the MkV GTI vs. MkV R32. In stock form, the R32 is slightly faster than the GTI. But, chip the GTI and it obliterates the R32.
I realize I'm not talking specific to the A5 in these examples, but the discussion is between the 2.0T and 3.2 engines which, when in other cars, can be compared and applied to the A5.
In the end, the weight advantage of the 2.0T A5 plus all the additional HP/TQ gained from a chip like Stasis or APR just add up to too much for the 3.2.
What's interesting in that C&D test is that they talk about both cars being identical in acceleration until they reach 80mph and the extra displacement of the 3.2 takes over.
Anyhow, 0-60 isn't a true indicator of a car's straight line performance.
You need to look more at trap speed in the 1/4 mile and dyno charts and real-world experience.
There are threads in this forum in the B8 A4 section about 3.2 vs. 2.0T. Check them out. Or, hit your local dragstrip this summer. Late last year I saw a chipped 2.0T B8 A4 absolutely walk a 3.2 S5 at The Rock dragstrip in NC.
Another example is the MkV GTI vs. MkV R32. In stock form, the R32 is slightly faster than the GTI. But, chip the GTI and it obliterates the R32.
I realize I'm not talking specific to the A5 in these examples, but the discussion is between the 2.0T and 3.2 engines which, when in other cars, can be compared and applied to the A5.
In the end, the weight advantage of the 2.0T A5 plus all the additional HP/TQ gained from a chip like Stasis or APR just add up to too much for the 3.2.
PRICE AS TESTED: $35,005 (base price: $33,525)
ENGINE TYPE: turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, direct fuel injection
Displacement: 121 cu in, 1984cc
Power (SAE net): 211 bhp @ 5300 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 258 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automatic with manumatic shifting
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 110.6 in Length: 185.2 in Width: 71.9 in Height: 56.2 in
Curb weight: 3686 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 16.2 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 7.2 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.4 sec @ 94 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 175 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 g
There is no way the 2.0T does 60mph in 5.7 with the Tiptronic or how they referred to as 'manumatic'. My guess they put a 5 when it should have been really a 6. Otherwise a manual 2.0T would do 60 in 4.9 sec if the Tip did it in 5.7!!!
04-30-2010, 04:03 PM
#58
AudiWorld Member
Trap speed for the 3.2 is between 98-100mph depending on which magazine/online site you read. Trap speed for a stock 2.0T is between 95-97mph depending on the magazine/online site. So, you've got around a 3mph deficit for the 2.0T.
The chipped 2.0T that I saw run against the 3.2 at the dragstrip ran 101mph. The 3.2 that I saw run against the 2.0T ran 98mph. Both drivers are very good drivers. This shows that a chipped 2.0T more than makes up the initial trap speed gap.
I've driven both cars, back-to-back when I was looking to buy my A5. From a start until at least 70mph, you really can't tell the difference between the two. The C&D article that I linked backs that up and says once you get beyond 80mph, the 3.2 pulls away because of the extra displacement. Since they are so close when both of them are stock, it's easy to see how the a chipped 2.0T will pull away from the 3.2.
I'll be chipping my 2.0T as soon as I'm done going through the break-in process. I've only had the car for a month and have only 800 miles on it.
My plan is to get a dyno run stock and a dragstrip run stock. Then get the chip and hit the dyno and track again.
04-30-2010, 04:06 PM
#59
AudiWorld Member
And, the difference between a tip and manual is more along the lines of .1-.2 seconds...not anywhere near the .8 seconds you believe. So, if the tip ran 5.7, the manual would maybe run 5.6 in their test...but that's just speculation because they didn't test a manual.
04-30-2010, 04:35 PM
#60
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dont forget the new exhaust. My buddy has a 2.0 with 265 hp. Is faster than a5 feels more nimble than my s5. Weight makes the difference.
Like I said in my other post, 0-60 varies too much to be a reliable indicator of a car's true performance, in some tests the 2.0T is faster than the 3.2.
Trap speed for the 3.2 is between 98-100mph depending on which magazine/online site you read. Trap speed for a stock 2.0T is between 95-97mph depending on the magazine/online site. So, you've got around a 3mph deficit for the 2.0T.
The chipped 2.0T that I saw run against the 3.2 at the dragstrip ran 101mph. The 3.2 that I saw run against the 2.0T ran 98mph. Both drivers are very good drivers. This shows that a chipped 2.0T more than makes up the initial trap speed gap.
I've driven both cars, back-to-back when I was looking to buy my A5. From a start until at least 70mph, you really can't tell the difference between the two. The C&D article that I linked backs that up and says once you get beyond 80mph, the 3.2 pulls away because of the extra displacement. Since they are so close when both of them are stock, it's easy to see how the a chipped 2.0T will pull away from the 3.2.
I'll be chipping my 2.0T as soon as I'm done going through the break-in process. I've only had the car for a month and have only 800 miles on it.
My plan is to get a dyno run stock and a dragstrip run stock. Then get the chip and hit the dyno and track again.
Trap speed for the 3.2 is between 98-100mph depending on which magazine/online site you read. Trap speed for a stock 2.0T is between 95-97mph depending on the magazine/online site. So, you've got around a 3mph deficit for the 2.0T.
The chipped 2.0T that I saw run against the 3.2 at the dragstrip ran 101mph. The 3.2 that I saw run against the 2.0T ran 98mph. Both drivers are very good drivers. This shows that a chipped 2.0T more than makes up the initial trap speed gap.
I've driven both cars, back-to-back when I was looking to buy my A5. From a start until at least 70mph, you really can't tell the difference between the two. The C&D article that I linked backs that up and says once you get beyond 80mph, the 3.2 pulls away because of the extra displacement. Since they are so close when both of them are stock, it's easy to see how the a chipped 2.0T will pull away from the 3.2.
I'll be chipping my 2.0T as soon as I'm done going through the break-in process. I've only had the car for a month and have only 800 miles on it.
My plan is to get a dyno run stock and a dragstrip run stock. Then get the chip and hit the dyno and track again.