AmD vr6 re-chip

[vr6storm 0]

hi all,

well as some of you may know,i took the plunge and went down to AmD for one of their custom re-chips.............a bit of a drive right enough...easy 450+miles one way

anyway it was a funny set of "before" figures that i got..............180bhp & 177lb/ft :oops: :shock: :? very strange considering that just a month prior my figures at the scottish region rolling-road day were 195bhp & 183lb/ft....now the only difference in the car between the star figures and AmD figures was that i used 95RON u/l for going down to AmD(on recommendation of a well-informed mate) and i used optimax and some octane booster for doing the star-performance rolling road day.......now there is no way that those wee differences could/would cause a 15bhp difference so i don't know if star's rollers were out or if AmD's were needing re-calibrated following their previous weekends rolling road day

 

anyway my after figures showed an improvement of nearly 14bhp(well 13.9bhp to be precise) and 18lb/ft more.....giving figures of.......193.9bhp and 195.4lb/ft...so a fair improvement.........once on the road though the vr has a lot more urgency/pull to it and also seems to run a lot smoother giving just fractionally better mpg too

 

so apart from my "dissapointing" figures its something well worth doing if you have a vr6

 

and i'll be getting the vr rolling-roaded again in the summer to see what sort of figures i get from star

 

 

 

btw here's the scottish region rolling road figures

 

Venue: STAR Performance. Date: Sunday 16th March 2003

Name Model Year Engine Specification Power (bhp) Torque (lb ft)

John Kerr 1.8 G60 1991 Stage 3 charger with chip/pulley, K&N panel filter, modified airbox, Miltek exhaust with decat. 194.5 191

Sandy McKenzie 1.8 G60 1992 Stage 3 charger with chip/pulley, big valve head Shrick cam, K&N panel filter, 4 into 1 manifold, Scorpion exhaust with decat. 194.5 * 183 *

Daniel Steele 1.8 G60 1991 Stage 4 charger with chip/pulley, Powerflow exhaust and decat. 173 * 180 *

Alex Stobie 1.8 G60 1991 Standard with only 16K miles since new !

170.5 169

Antonio Poggi 1.8 G60 1992 K&N panel filter and Samco hoses. 169.5 163

Kevin Finlay 2.0 16V 1994 Modded airbox, JR panel filter and Ecotek. 146 139

Mark Tereny 2.0 16V 1995 Powerflow exhaust. 141 140

Dougie Grubb 2.0 16V 1995 Standard. 137.5 135

Stuart Bailey 2.9 VR6 1996 AMD chip, Green induction kit, Miltek exhaust, Ecotek valve. 200.5 191

Roddy Kennedy 2.9 VR6 1996 K&N panel filter with modded airbox and Miltek exhaust. 195.5 183

Euan Maxwell 2.9 VR6 1994 Standard. 192.5 183

John Snook 2.9 VR6 1993 Standard. 192 180

Jamie Geddes 2.9 VR6 1993 K&N Panel Filter. 191 175

Paul Brodie 2.9 VR6 1995 Standard. 190 180

Alistair Robinson 2.9 VR6 1994 Remus back box. 189 175

Mark Dawson 2.9 VR6 1994 K&N induction kit and Miltek exhaust. 186.5 182

Robert Burnie 2.9 VR6 1994 Standard with Auto box. 174.5 154

[Scott 0]

Mate the difference between normal UL and optimax DOES make a difference in excess of 10bhp due to knock sensors on the engine - when running UL the timing is retarded until the knocking stops... Optimax increases the timing... now if you look on the inside fuel flap it says premium 98 octane to be used.... hence why you lost power from the 95 UL....

 

Scott.

[vr6storm 0]

the only flaw in that though scott is that when i first had my vr6 rolling-roaded in march 2002 i was also using 95RON (optimax wasn't readily available up here in aberdeen and i didn't notice any difference in performance between 95RON and Super u/l) and the figures i was making were pretty close to standard 187.5bhp and 183lb/ft.........all in all very strange

[Scott 0]

the only flaw in that though scott is that when i first had my vr6 rolling-roaded in march 2002 i was also using 95RON (optimax wasn't readily available up here in aberdeen and i didn't notice any difference in performance between 95RON and Super u/l) and the figures i was making were pretty close to standard 187.5bhp and 183lb/ft.........all in all very strange

 

 

You should notice difference between Optimax and S/UL and S/UL and UL.... at least I can....

 

Have you tried plugging in VAGCOM to see if something is a miss? - although I assume AMD have done this?

 

Perhaps time for fresh filters, plugs and fluids?

 

Whats mileage now?

[Kevin Bacon 5]

How's the VR been recently Roddy? I find my VR has good and bad days. Seems to go like a rocket on hot sunny days and so-so on mild overcast days.

 

Scott may have a point with the plugs as when I hoiked out my Bosch twins and replaced them with NGK twins (not plats) there was a noticeable improvement, especially lower down the rev range. I put this down to the NGKs having a wider gap and therefore producing a slightly larger spark.

 

If Nology hotwires weren't so expensive and huge, I would try a set.

 

Not sure on the Optimax debate though, mine feels torquier with 95 but smoother with Optimax.

 

Kev

94 VR6

[vr6paul 0]

if optimax makes 10bhp difference does that mean i should have been sitting around the 200bhp mark at star had i used it instead of regular unleaded!!!!!

cheers

paul brodie

[vr6storm 0]

You should notice difference between Optimax and S/UL and S/UL and UL.... at least I can....

 

Have you tried plugging in VAGCOM to see if something is a miss? - although I assume AMD have done this?

 

Perhaps time for fresh filters, plugs and fluids?

 

Whats mileage now?

 

 

don't get me wrong scott m8.....i noticed a very small difference between 95RON and optimax......but to say that 95RON would result in losing almost 15bhp is a bit ott

 

as for fluids and filters..........my annual service(by the local vw-stealer) was only performed at 51k in Dec 02 (and included a new fuel filter)and now after my wee foray into england its sitting on 56k btw i only use synta-gold

 

my plugs were replaced in july last year at approx 47k and i only used the non-platinum ngk's

 

and my air-filter is a K&N panel filter in a modded(but not swiss-chessed) airbox.......this was done at approx 48k

 

 

as for the fault codes.....they were checked as soon as i got back to aberdeen....just to make sure that the abs ones were cleared after being on the rolling-road and to check that the camshaft pos sensor was behaving too....everything came up clear

[vr6storm 0]

How's the VR been recently Roddy? I find my VR has good and bad days. Seems to go like a rocket on hot sunny days and so-so on mild overcast days.

 

Scott may have a point with the plugs as when I hoiked out my Bosch twins and replaced them with NGK twins (not plats) there was a noticeable improvement, especially lower down the rev range. I put this down to the NGKs having a wider gap and therefore producing a slightly larger spark.

 

If Nology hotwires weren't so expensive and huge, I would try a set.

 

Not sure on the Optimax debate though, mine feels torquier with 95 but smoother with Optimax.

 

Kev

94 VR6

 

 

hi kev m8...............so far since the re-chip(touching lots of wood)the vr has behaved its self very well.......i've noticed in general it s alot smoother running and is pulling a wee bit better since getting back on to its normal diet of optimax....all in all if you're near AmD and have £300 spare kicking about i would strongly recommend that you go for the re-chip

[Ess Three 0]

Mate the difference between normal UL and optimax DOES make a difference in excess of 10bhp due to knock sensors on the engine - when running UL the timing is retarded until the knocking stops... Optimax increases the timing... now if you look on the inside fuel flap it says premium 98 octane to be used.... hence why you lost power from the 95 UL....

 

Scott.

 

Sorry, but I'll have to dissagree...

Optimax does nothing to the timing...the timing is set by a binary number copntained in a load map in the ECU...this is a constant.

The ECU may indeed back off the timing id detonation is detected due to using a lesser quality fuel...but it in itself cannot adjust the timing.

 

I have dynod many cars...back to back on 95 unleaded, super plus and Optimax and the differences have been very small.

 

Now, I've never dyno'd my own VR6 - so I may be talking out of my arse here - but on my 2.0 16V (ABF) engined Golf - which indicentally has a more advanced engine management system than mt Corrado VR6 - the change to 95 / 97 Super or optimax makes absolutely no difference!

That is less than 1 repeatable BHP anywhere...going from any fuel to any fuel.

So how a Corrado can make 10BHP of a difference is beyond me...although like I said...not impossiblr...I've just never seen it.

 

Another example:

Take a turbotharged car (1.8T) and dyno it on 95 / 97 Super and 98.6+ Optimax...how much difference with a standard ECU map? Less than 1 BHP.

Take a performance map (APR 95 Octane 1.4 bar) and do the same for all fuels...the difference? Less than 1 BHP.

Now select a dedicated Optimax map...one designed to run much more ignition advance...one specific for the high octane Optimax juice...one that is likely to hole pistons if used with 95 unleaded...how much of a gain over the 95 octane map? 5 ish BHP / 10 ish lb-ft.

 

And these were gains on a well sorted S3 (also mine) running specific maps for the fuel...

So forgive me when I say I'm sceptical about a 10BHP+ gain just from running Optimax.

 

I appreciate that these examples are not Corrado VR6 specific...but nor is the Corrado VR6 playing by it's own dedicated set of rules!

 

 

Let's not forget that rolling roads can be manipulated to show anything to want...unless you are actually doing the runs yourself...I would be very suspicious of a 10+ BHP gain from running optimax.

[Joe M 0]

How do the "at the wheels" figures compare Roddy. Maybe AMD and Star work out drivetrain losses differently.

[Scott 0]

Well I have read into the VR6 engine management system in extensive detail being a qualified engineer myself - I stated my opinion from my knowledge although I agree 10bhp might be a bit OTT there is some advantage to be had from running different octane rated fuel.... otherwise why bother?

 

I do agree with some of the points though...

 

Roddy.... I change plugs at 5k intervals.... suggest you change yours anyway as worth a go... Have seen VR's loose as much as 15bhp due to dirty filters, dirty plugs, etc... and whilst you have not done many miles since last service.... if you have done town miles or do low mileage per year then you may be past the 'time' intervals... who knows - but as they say to cure the fault first weed out the basics - thats making sure the engine is running in top condition - until you have done that and tested the car again on RR no point guessing....

 

Also dont read into RR figures too much - they vary a fair bit... what counts is on the road... does it feel the same?

 

Cheers

 

Scott.

[vr6paul 0]

Surely changing plugs every 5K means you are only using half their life.

What is the benefit from it?

cheers

Paul

[Scott 0]

Well I FEEL the difference between new plugs and old ones... thats enough for me - I service my VR6 alot more regularly than some people can be bothered but thats personal preference... VAG service intervals are shite if im being honest... *:)

[20valver 0]

Just to add to the Optimax debate....

 

An Audi TT quattro will only produce 210-215 BHP on 95Ron UL

 

To get the stated 225 BHP you've gotta use Optimax

 

My 2p's worth.......

[Scott 0]

Just to add to the Optimax debate....

 

An Audi TT quattro will only produce 210-215 BHP on 95Ron UL

 

To get the stated 225 BHP you've gotta use Optimax

 

My 2p's worth.......

 

Which is EXACTLY my point.... on the fuel flap it STATES use 98 RON Premium UL petrol.... now there is a reason and those knock sensors are also there for a reason.

 

Nuff said *;)

[vr6storm 0]

Just to add to the Optimax debate....

 

An Audi TT quattro will only produce 210-215 BHP on 95Ron UL

 

To get the stated 225 BHP you've gotta use Optimax

 

My 2p's worth.......

 

 

to be honest the Corrado vr6's engine management is a bit primative compared to the engine management of the likes of the 1.8t's.....for example most 1.8t's have "drive-by-wire" technology.......so i would reckon that a 1.8t could loose more power on a lower octane rating.........i could of course be completely way of the mark there though

[vr6storm 0]

Well I have read into the VR6 engine management system in extensive detail being a qualified engineer myself - I stated my opinion from my knowledge although I agree 10bhp might be a bit OTT there is some advantage to be had from running different octane rated fuel.... otherwise why bother?

 

I do agree with some of the points though...

 

Roddy.... I change plugs at 5k intervals.... suggest you change yours anyway as worth a go... Have seen VR's loose as much as 15bhp due to dirty filters, dirty plugs, etc... and whilst you have not done many miles since last service.... if you have done town miles or do low mileage per year then you may be past the 'time' intervals... who knows - but as they say to cure the fault first weed out the basics - thats making sure the engine is running in top condition - until you have done that and tested the car again on RR no point guessing....

 

Also dont read into RR figures too much - they vary a fair bit... what counts is on the road... does it feel the same?

 

Cheers

 

Scott.

 

 

well the difference on the road is quite noticable....so at the end of the day i've got an improvement........who knows it might even make over 200bhp when i next get it rolling-roaded

 

as for my service intervals......my annual mileage actually works out to near enough 10k pa........even if it was less my car still gets its annual inspection on the dot.......first week in december

and in between i get the oil changed every 6 months....

as for changing the plugs every 5k miles..........do they come out looking shagged or is it maybe just pyschological that they feel different to you.......afterall the service interval for the non-platinum tipped ngk's(vw's recommendation) is 20k as opposed to the 40k limit for their platinum counterparts

though as you say most of my mileage is in fact town driving so i obviously have to give it some more "italian tune-ups"

 

and i've also been told that rolling-roads are more or less just a rough guide to what an engine produces....its just my main surprise was that i had been told by a few well-informed sources that AmD's rollers were prone to giving a wee bit more flattering figures than would normally be expected

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Ess Three is exactly right. The engine has no means of detecting fuel type, so always assumes 95 UL (which is also on the flap sticker btw) as it's the lowest UK octance rating. Putting 98 in simply allows the knock sensors to relax a bit but any boost in performance is purely down to the fuel itself, which the majority of us agree is small.

 

Kev

[Ess Three 0]

Just to add to the Optimax debate....

 

An Audi TT quattro will only produce 210-215 BHP on 95Ron UL

 

To get the stated 225 BHP you've gotta use Optimax

 

My 2p's worth.......

 

Really?

So, if that were the case, that means that the 2001 TT 225 engine (BAM) and the 2001 S3 210 engine (AMK) are completely different entities - which incidentally they are not..they are identical bar the ECU mapping!..because as already stated above my 2001 S3 made about standard power (209 - 211 BHP depending on the dyno sheet you look at) on 95 unleaded...and less than 1 BHP difference swapping between 97 UL and Optiomax.

Surely if your analargy were correct, I'd be making 225 on Optimax?

 

 

 

 

I think people are missing the point of Optimax...it is not priumarily a high octane petrol...the main purpose of Optimax is to clean the engine internall by virtue of the additives...these detergants happen to give a higher octane rating...but the fact that the engine has less crap inside it is the main contributing factor to the engine running better.

[Scott 0]

Just out of curiousity what does the re-chip involve?

 

Im pretty sure AMD re-program standard chips on the shelf to a set custom map and then plug them into your ECU when you go to AMD and remove your old one - they then put car on rollers and setup the car to optimum values....

 

This is my thought on this anyway - possibly Im wrong - I will be having it done myself shortly though *:)

 

Scott

 

Ps. Is it worth the £300 ?

[jedi-knight83 0]

time to resurect this thread as i am thinking of getting my car done now... the questiong of

 

Is it worth the £300 ?

 

was never answered...

[vr6storm 0]

:oops: right enough that question was never answered :wink:

 

you should notice a difference in the way it drives.......it should rev harder to the redline and pull harder too......as for the cost implication there's very little that you can do to the VR for £300 and get an improvement like what can be acheived with the re-chip........thing is don't go expecting massive improvements in power......its more for better driveability

[jedi-knight83 0]

i dont want huge power gains but i do want the car to feel like i expected a v6 to feel. maybe mine just needs a service or maybe there is something else wrong (vag com should tell me that when i get round to visiting kevheywire) i dont know???

 

whould you fit the exhaust and then have the re-chip (i.e will they tune the car to the exhaust) or isnt it that specific???

 

cheers

[vr6storm 0]

i dont want huge power gains but i do want the car to feel like i expected a v6 to feel. maybe mine just needs a service or maybe there is something else wrong (vag com should tell me that when i get round to visiting kevheywire) i dont know???

 

whould you fit the exhaust and then have the re-chip (i.e will they tune the car to the exhaust) or isnt it that specific???

 

cheers

 

it could well be that one or more sensors are playing up with yours but best get kev check it over with VAG-COM to be on the safe side

 

as for the exhaust.......i had my panel-filter and exhaust fitted before getting the re-chip so it might be an idea to follow suit........afterall the chip is "optimised" to the characteristics of your particular car.......so if you do it before adding the mods you were thinking of then it won't be getting the best from them

[stevemac 0]

I would also make sure that the car has your usual fuel in the tank i.e. if you normally drive on Optimax then make sure Optimax is in the car when you get the re-chip done.

 

Broadly speaking, on a car which is otherwise functioning correctly, more timing advance can be used with higher octane fuel = more power. The benefits of higher octane fuel cannot be fully exploited unless the timing is also adjusted.

 

These cars are not new anymore and each car will have developed it's own charachteristics over the years - hence the debate earlier in this thread.