Do these 2.7t's get quicker as the mileage piles up???
01-17-2006, 03:48 AM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do these 2.7t's get quicker as the mileage piles up???
I had a '02 A6 2.7t that got quicker at 10,000 miles-almost as if there was something in the computer that changed the boost--my '03 AR has 50k on it and my butt dyno says it is accelerating faster--some times it suprises me when I catch a downshift at low speed--it just squats and goes. And I run 89 octane--think I will give it a drink of the hi-test just for fun--also I live in Fl (low altitude) and the weather has been cool. I am tempted to get a "chip" now that the factory warranty is up just to see how fun it can really be--I chipped my Passat 1.8t and loved it.
01-17-2006, 04:02 AM
#2
New Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Do these 2.7t's get quicker as the mileage piles up???
<center><img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/102875/finish_line.jpg"></center><p>Cooler air has a greater density...increasing boost pressure...I have noticed a slight increase in boost as winter has arrived...this summer...(in >90 Degree F weather)...I noticed the boost seemed to be less....
Please, someone set me straight if I am wrong..
Please, someone set me straight if I am wrong..
01-17-2006, 04:23 AM
#4
See the link under my other post about FATA. You can figure out for yourself, but I have to ask
if you care about performance why are you running 89 craptane? It makes a difference. You can log FATA times to see tank to tank. I certainly wouldn't consider getting a chip if you plan to continue to run the same fuel.
01-17-2006, 04:37 AM
#5
FYI... more octane=more efficency.
Your car's computer is DETUNNING the engine to accept the lower octane. You will acheve not only better performance but better MPG in direct ratio to the cost of the 93 octane.
I've tested this out numerous times with a stock ECU as well as a chipped ECU.
In the end you are saving absolutly nothing by using 89 oct. ie.. if 93 cost 5% more than regular, coincidentally you get about 5% better MPG with the 93. Same cost..better performance.
As far as added power goes did you buy your car new? Or are you a second owner?
I've tested this out numerous times with a stock ECU as well as a chipped ECU.
In the end you are saving absolutly nothing by using 89 oct. ie.. if 93 cost 5% more than regular, coincidentally you get about 5% better MPG with the 93. Same cost..better performance.
As far as added power goes did you buy your car new? Or are you a second owner?
01-17-2006, 07:29 AM
#7
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
car actually runs less boost in the winter as less is required to hit requested engine output...
- you can see this if you compare logs taken in summer (hot) months to winter (cold) months
- awe's K04 kit for the S4 will request 1.425 Bar for most of the year but when it gets cold, it only requests 1.2 Bar (at WOT)
- colder air = more O2 = more power = less boost required to hit desired power output
- awe's K04 kit for the S4 will request 1.425 Bar for most of the year but when it gets cold, it only requests 1.2 Bar (at WOT)
- colder air = more O2 = more power = less boost required to hit desired power output
Trending Topics
01-17-2006, 08:27 AM
#8
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First owner-----nore----
I got it new--I have made many trips from Orlando to Buffalo and back, and tried 89 and 93 octane--the mileage is always the same no matter what I put in and car always runs great. slight diff in performance.--what effects my mileage the most is speed--cruise at 75 to 80 and I get about 22.5-23--at 65 it jumps to 24/24.5. I average 21 to 22 around town with the 89 octane. I think this is good mileage considering the HP and weight.
