Mk6 Golf Acceleration & Performance Data

[Fab_R]

Thanks Beena. Very good info there and explains the variation which had me baffled.

Do you know if "rollout" can be switched on them?

[Corey_R]

Thanks for the confirmation Beena. That's some great investigation. I wasn't aware that you could get the times without the rollout via the software.

It also confirms the conclusion that Racelogic, the makers of the VBOXes and PerformanceBox came to in their comparsion between the three products (Vbox, PerformanceBox, and GTech). Being from 2007, it was with the older accelerometer only versions of the GTech, but they pretty much identified that the differences in reported times were due to the differences in the roll-out.

Racelogic actually recommend the GTech for casual users, for several reasons, one of them being that it's significantly cheaper than the Racelogic Performance Box, which itself is significantly cheaper than the 'reference" VBoxes which cost thousands of dollars.

[Corey_R]

Do you know if "rollout" can be switched on them?

Yes, a 1-foot roll-out can be enabled on the RaceLogic products (the document I linked to even tells you where in the menus to enable it in the PerformanceBox).

It seems that at least in your GTech Fab, that you can change the rollout to 0 inches to "disable" it. But you may want to read the doco to fully understand the effect it has (I haven't spent enough time this morning to re-read it in detail).

[Glennb]

I'd love to mate but can't afford the outcome!
Still waiting to sell my old car so that i can get Stage 1 done.

[Fab_R]

Yes, a 1-foot roll-out can be enabled on the RaceLogic products (the document I linked to even tells you where in the menus to enable it in the PerformanceBox).

It seems that at least in your GTech Fab, that you can change the rollout to 0 inches to "disable" it. But you may want to read the doco to fully understand the effect it has (I haven't spent enough time this morning to re-read it in detail).

Thanks Corey, will have a read up on it.

[robby_jai]

4.7 is an obvious tell em there dreaming.

I just like how everyone was sort of trying to say that they would be happy with the times published once they were done with a VBOX.

Well here they are children, and uncle REXman's predictions were pretty much spot on.

With Coreys run of 13.6 down the quarter, and times ranging from 5.2-5.7 with a VBOX.. There is no denying it. A STG 1 (and almost definitley STG 1 from all tuners) will NOT turn the GOLF R into a 4.7 sec car.

bloody hell what i have been saying for the past friggen 6 months and i got censored over it..... told ya 4.7 with a stage 1 was a no chance.

[robby_jai]

you do realise a 0-100 and a 0-60mph is completely different. 0-60 is 0-96kmh and looking at your GTECH results... you were using 0-60mph as your benchmarks... the way australian and UK magazine do acceleration testing is completely different to the yanks... they dont have this roll out crap and all this rubbish.. which is why most of their figures are SO optimistic its not even funny.

So to add some fuel to the fire...

I finally got my Gtech RR today (one of the GPS ones) and had a quick chance this arvo to do some runs.
The road was in pretty good nick, dead flat and dead straight. Ambient temp was 24deg. 1 pax, 1/2 tank of fuel.
Roof racks and 2 x bike carriers fitted to the roof. Car has 1700km on it. Stage 1 Tune only. 5dr DSG.

Run 1
0-100 4.87s

Run 2
0-100 5.02s

Run 3
0-100 5.07s

What was also interesting was the 200m (1/8 mile) time of 8.58s (run 2 i think...) which is almost exactly the same as wooduck's drag strip time of 8.592!

I'll download the data and have a closer look...

On the accuracy of such things... My old RaceTech AP22 (accelerometer only) proved to be within 0.2s to my 400m time and under 0.1s once calibrated for vehicle pitch. I can only hope that technology (and the inclusion of GPS) has improved this accuracy from 10 years ago!

Also, while I was reading about, AdamD stated that there was a "significant issue with the accuracy" with the GTech due to its 10Hz GPS engine, the RaceLogic PerformanceBox also has a 10Hz engine... a VBOX (depending on version) can be even slower!

GTech Fanatic 10Hz
PerformanceBox 10Hz
VBOX Mini 10Hz
VBOX Micro 10Hz
VBOX II Series 5/10/20Hz
VBOX 3i 100Hz 100Hz
RaceTech AX22 5Hz

What version of the VBOX has been used in the above testing?

Anyway, it seems RaceLogic are the only people who have properly compared a VBOX 3 with the Gtech (non-GPS) and determined it was accurate. There are some others who have compared a VBOX Mini and come to the same conclusion. (see next post...) As well as Car & Driver who have compared it to the strip! The info is out there guys!

[Corey_R]

Settle down robby_jai. You weren't "censored" for sharing your experiences, you were censored for pages of theoretical mathematics about cars that neither you own, or were related to the topic. It was also only a month ago in another thread which clearly states that many posts were deleted due to off topic and/or being insulting / inflammatory.

Back to reality, the most recent post by Beena explained the difference you mention above and also presented newer runs - the 1st run being 4.798s in the method Australia and UK test their cars (no 1ft rollout, 0 to 100km/h - on a device verified as accurate by the competing company who's multi-thousand $ products you say everyone should be using).

[robby_jai]

if i read correctly...... been did testing using 0-60 as the baseline for testing.

according to his screen shots. thats not the same as 0-100km/h

for a car to reach 0-96 vs 0-100 is actually a difference.

the best way to verify its accuracy is simple. a 12 second car in most cases = a 4.x car to the 100km/h

take this stage 1 car to a drag strip and rip off a 12. even a dead 13 i would be happy with and agree that it is possible.

are there any verified time slips of any one with a stage 1 thats done a 12 or even a dead 13??? heck even a 13.1 ?????

Settle down robby_jai. You weren't "censored" for sharing your experiences, you were censored for pages of theoretical mathematics about cars that neither you own, or were related to the topic. It was also only a month ago in another thread which clearly states that many posts were deleted due to off topic and/or being insulting / inflammatory.

Back to reality, the most recent post by Beena explained the difference you mention above and also presented newer runs - the 1st run being 4.798s in the method Australia and UK test their cars (no 1ft rollout, 0 to 100km/h - on a device verified as accurate by the competing company who's multi-thousand $ products you say everyone should be using).

[REXman]

Back to reality, .

But Robby and I(and many members, maybe 9, have PM'd me about it all) have so much more experience than you, and possibly others with modding, Dragging and acceleration times. it's reached the point Corey where you are now just being ignorant to it all.

Robby, I, and many others are actually planted very well in reality.

We both have had some serious horsepower and modifications done. Robby has had the lot done to his car. I have had the lot and then some to my already cracking car. (425hp and 1350kgs). I've also worked mildly (I think in APR Marketing speak that's STG 2+) on a HEAP of cars.

You bring to the table what exactly? A Polo GTI with a tune and air filter? Cmon man.

YOU come back to reality.

Further, I have Golf R, Robby has a very similar S3.. We both obviously love performance. Do you not think if they were faster I wouldn't be on the mountain tops about it?

if i read correctly...... been did testing using 0-60 as the baseline for testing.

according to his screen shots. thats not the same as 0-100km/h

for a car to reach 0-96 vs 0-100 is actually a difference.

the best way to verify its accuracy is simple. a 12 second car in most cases = a 4.x car to the 100km/h

take this stage 1 car to a drag strip and rip off a 12. even a dead 13 i would be happy with and agree that it is possible.

are there any verified time slips of any one with a stage 1 thats done a 12 or even a dead 13??? heck even a 13.1 ?????

This is what I have been saying for who knows how long. And Robby mate I have been on the same side of the fence about it all along. From what you have been preaching, I know you know your cars. Sick ****.

Need we be reminded of the lighter FWD pirelli with methanol injection and a stripped out interior, PLUS all the mods done FMIC turbo boost this that.. Ran a 12.888.

People use their little handheld devices they got in the mail, and think they have nailed it.. Cause it says so on the sellers website.

Look, all issues aside, what me and Robby are saying, is spot on regarding quarter mile times. The R with a tune, is not going to nail 12 second quarters. Maybe a 13.4.

But that's a massive difference to grabbing 12s.. Which actually would prove the 4.XX times.

But hey if the forum members are happy, thats cool. But I'm giving plenty of experience. And the fact that Corey keeps saying it's not about mathematics.. You couldn't be more wrong.