Does anyone have a 0-100 time on an APR chipped Polo GTI ??

[Guy_H]

We have several acceleration measuring devices (Racelogic Databox & Reiner 3000).

We need to get a group of polo's together so we can log the data (standard vs chipped etc) - 0-100 is easy without breaking the law.

I agree with the rest - best time to measure is probably 60 to 100 time (our devices do that to) - need the same driver each time as IMHO the launch & gearshifts are really hard to repeat

[GT3]

Good idea Guy, the Racelogic Databox is used by auto companies and motoring mags to more accurately determine these things.

[ScottishPoloGTI]

Heres a video of me doin 0 - 60mph

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_xySB5BJT0

Everyone a ask gets different times D

[GT3]

It's probably about time the Polo GTI was 'officially' tested in stock/stage 1 chipped and stage 2 chipped. The Jan 08 edition of MOTOR conducted comprehensive tests for 'performance car of the year' using Drift Box (lap times at Winton) and VBox for straight line data. For us to replicate the test we would need to undertake the following:

0-20 kmh
0-40
0-60
0-80
0-100
0-120
0-140
0-160
0-180
400m(1/4)
1000m
Lap times (Winton)

Cars tested (and in order of the their performance results) were the Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera, Porsche GT3, Audi R8, BMW M3, Audi RS4, BMW Z4M, Audi S5, Jaguar XKR, HSV Maloo, Boxster S, Caterham, FPV GT Cobra, Megane R26.

In order to control for driver variation and consistency (see Guy's comments re launch and gear changes) we need to nominate a driver for all stock/stage 1/stage 2 comparisons. Given the performance test will be conducted in QLD, there's a few stock/stage 1 and stage 2 Polo GTIs to pick from. I propose we nominate Kai as the driver for all tests. Kai has managed 13.9 (with slips) in a stage 1 with minor modifications - chances are he's learnt something about launching the Pog.

For lap times, a few New South Welshmen and Vics would be able to conduct and/or verify existing Winton lap times.

Just to get our interest going, I reckon in either stage 1/stage 2 set up, based on the MOTOR results, we should be nudging close or bang on to the new Boxster S - it's figures are:

0-20 kmh - 0.93 sec
0-40 -1.75
0-60 - 2.72
0-80 - 4.16
0-100 - 5.69
0-120 - 7.64
0-140 - 9.91
0-160 - 12.41
0-180 - 15.93
400m(1/4) - 13.82 @ 167.4 kmh
1000m - 24.88 @ 217 kmh
Lap times (Winton) - 139.60

Bring it on

[Timbo]

Speaking of the Jan '08 edition of Motor, there's a very interesting column by Michael Taylor decrying standing start metrics as any measure of a car's performance.

Launches are hard to get right; they are affected by surface conditions; a full performance measurement launch is very hard on a car's drivetrain; and if you get it wrong, you can easily lunch your car.

In my view, anyone who wants bragging rights is free to post scans of time slips for quarter times and lap times, as well dyno sheets -- 'twas ever thus

[GT3]

there's a very interesting column by Michael Taylor decrying standing start metrics as any measure of a car's performance.

Launches are hard to get right; they are affected by surface conditions; a full performance measurement launch is very hard on a car's drivetrain; and if you get it wrong, you can easily lunch your car.

In my view, anyone who wants bragging rights is free to post scans of time slips for quarter times and lap times, as well dyno sheets -- 'twas ever thus

So we should cancel the test based on some subjective perspective from Michael Taylor?

You can get launches right if you know what you're doing. It's in the way the the clutch is used and deployed - done properly, it will be the first line of defense in protecting the drivetrain.

The test is not about bragging rights, it's a controlled and comprehensive performance test to verify the Polo GTIs performance parameters. 1/4 mile blasts, lap times done in isolation and dyno sheets only provide a narrow (and unrelated) snapshot of random events with differing conditons.

Why should we let the cynics prevent the test from going ahead

[SoVeReIgN]

I reckon very low 6 for just a chip and a mid 5 for chip + minor mods.

I think it'll be easier to get into 11s than do less than 5 seconds 0~100 with the polo, you'll need atleast slicks and/or and LSD to launch well enough for 4s.

[Timbo]

Why should we let the cynics prevent the test from going ahead

Being practical is not being cynical. n: Michael Taylor's comments were simply about the impact on cars of these tests, and their futility in any case as a metric. To do the tests you are suggesting would require an airstrip or at least a long, flat closed road plus access for a few suitably modded cars to Winton...where, I regret to advise, even with the best driver and most effective mods you can think of, a Pog will not come within a bull's roar of the Boxster S's times. And, given the choice of the Boxster, which part of the whole test proposal wasn't about bragging rights?

[SoVeReIgN]

Being practical is not being cynical. n: Michael Taylor's comments were simply about the impact on cars of these tests, and their futility in any case as a metric. To do the tests you are suggesting would require an airstrip or at least a long, flat closed road plus access for a few suitably modded cars to Winton...where, I regret to advise, even with the best driver and most effective mods you can think of, a Pog will not come within a bull's roar of the Boxster S's times. And, given the choice of the Boxster, which part of the whole test proposal wasn't about bragging rights?

I'd be willing to bet money that you could, even with a polo on the standard turbo.

[GT3]

Being practical is not being cynical. ..I regret to advise, even with the best driver and most effective mods you can think of, a Pog will not come within a bull's roar of the Boxster S's times. And, given the choice of the Boxster, which part of the whole test proposal wasn't about bragging rights?

The test isn't an exercise in pragmatism, it's a performance test, pure and simple. Unless you were asked to volunteer your car and/or participate, why is it necessary to shoot the proposal down - and the Boxter S was a random selection bc it seems close to what could be achieved, it's a just a benchmark, no need to pre-empt any outcomes.

I agree with Dave's assessment too.