Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    Page 4 of 29 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
    Results 106 to 140 of 1012

    Thread: Technical Data and Modifications for Hardcore Enthusiasts

    1. Banned BetaOp9's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 4th, 2006
      Posts
      5,408
      Vehicles
      2008 VW R32 [TR #2392]
      03-29-2012 05:51 PM #106
      Quote Originally Posted by autofi View Post
      These calipers are the same as '08 Passat without the paint scheme!Same rotors also.
      The '08 caliper/brakes from the Passat is the same as the MKV R32 but in silver. So again, I must ask how the MKVI R calipers differ.

    2. Banned BetaOp9's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 4th, 2006
      Posts
      5,408
      Vehicles
      2008 VW R32 [TR #2392]
      03-29-2012 05:55 PM #107
      Quote Originally Posted by Tyrol Mike View Post
      On the list, but given that the relocation is so expensive, it's lower in the pecking order.
      Consider pulling a good portion of the battery relocation supplies from one of the many front end damaged MKV R32's out there.

      Not a highly sought after part so might be reasonable in price!

    3. Forum Sponsor TyrolSport's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 4th, 1999
      Location
      New Yawk
      Posts
      10,651
      Vehicles
      GolfR, Q7 4.2, G60 Corrado, 5.0 Fox, '55 Roadmaster
      03-29-2012 06:00 PM #108
      Quote Originally Posted by BetaOp9 View Post
      The '08 caliper/brakes from the Passat is the same as the MKV R32 but in silver. So again, I must ask how the MKVI R calipers differ.
      Will post pics tomorrow of both calipers.

    4. Forum Sponsor TyrolSport's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 4th, 1999
      Location
      New Yawk
      Posts
      10,651
      Vehicles
      GolfR, Q7 4.2, G60 Corrado, 5.0 Fox, '55 Roadmaster
      03-29-2012 06:02 PM #109
      Stock Golf R calipers;


    5. Member TechEd's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 11th, 2000
      Posts
      2,000
      Vehicles
      2012 Golf, 2012 Golf R & 93 Corrado SC Evo CASC OR GT3 Racer
      03-29-2012 06:37 PM #110
      Quote Originally Posted by CarbonR View Post
      First thing I do when I climb into the right seat of a student's car at an HPDE is ask in real friendly way, "Nice ride! What kind of mods have you done?". If I hear about all these suspension swaps, I'm on high alert to reign things in before real damage is done. Why am I so sensitive? Because the guys at the factory are not idiots. However much of a genius you may be in your back yard mods, you're car is a statistic to me. And statistically, modded cars are more likely to do unfortunate things rather quickly. And I want you to bring your baby home all shiny and nice, like it was when you got to the track.
      When I had a regular instructing gig, I would open my classroom sessions with a request to "...please leave your egos at home or at the motel", and I never hesitated from uninviting participants if their egos got in the way of skill development. Like you, I would also home in on those with suspension mods and try to get behind the wheel of those cars first to see first-hand where the balance was at various speeds.... search for lowered cars on soft rates that suddenly go to 1000lb. rates when they run out of travel or hit the bumpstops. I would place those students in other people's cars because it was next to impossible to teach tire load transfer basics on such cars.

      Probably the hardest message to get across, both to students and in posts here, was that of compromise management, both from a driver's approach to lines, use of road, braking points etc. and especially that of mechanical/setups. The best example in my experience was the exit of Mosports fast downhill, double apex corner 2, that used to have a notorious bump right on the track out exit line. A stiff spring/damper setup on a low ride height would unsettle the chassis big time at the bottom of 2, often needing a tighter exit line and delayed roll-on to WOT. It bothered most drivers, but some had the skills to manage that severe upset and get on the throttle sooner, at the risk of a broken thumb when the steering kicked back or a spin if a sudden lift-off WOT was needed. A higher, more compliant setup allowed the chassis to run over the bump on the proper exit line and an earlier roll-on to WOT ...resulting in a drive that was easier on all drivers over a stint, and faster on the clock when we raced there as well. However, taking that same compliant setup to a Shannonville, which was smooth with hardly any elevation changes, was a disaster.

      As a result, I sincerely hope that this thread does not charge ahead full steam to generate perceptions that what will be achieved by Tyrol Mike is a silver bullet setup for everyone, everywhere, regardless, of skill. As I've mentioned elsewhere on numerous occasions on numerous topics, outcomes here will depend entirely on the driver's skill level and attitude, the tires used and the specific track venues on which the car will be driven. Instead, this should be witnessed as a good starting point for those willing to work hard and develop a spec that is appropriate for their skill level, driven on their tires, on their track, while respecting the factory compliance and engineering. Remember what Milliken & Milliken, Mark Ortiz and other suspension engineering pros have said, ....in that "everything affects everything else." A perceived improvement in one specific aspect of handling can actually degrade the overall handling, especially when it comes down to overall handling balance.

      From my many hundreds of hours behind the wheel of R, and GTI and Golf from both r&D and in competitive scenarios, I can say categorically that they are not chassis that respond well to manhandling. The R in particular needs a special, very patient touch on corner exits ...using all the road, no WOT like an on-off switch along with lots of steering angle. This one, simple technique needs to be "job 1" for anyone wanting to circulate quickly in an R ...long before the control arms and hubs are considered, if at all.
      "Professional Driver, Closed Course."
      SpeedWerks Racing 05/06 CASC OR GTA Champion
      2008 DCSCC Autox Series Top 3 PAX Points
      2009/10/12 DCSCC Autox THS Champion, Street Tire Champion & 2nd place PAX Points

    6. 03-29-2012 06:58 PM #111
      I don't listen to instructors with slower cars than mine, I go to the track to drive Flatout.


    7. 03-29-2012 07:12 PM #112
      TechEd, is there any detriment in switching from the cast iron to the aluminum pieces, assuming the suspension geometry is left stock? I'd think reducing unsprung weight would always be beneficial on its own? For example, switching to the Passat knuckles should keep the geometry but shed a few pounds - any harm in that?

      Thanks for the interesting posts.
      -Fab
      Last edited by ftillier; 03-29-2012 at 07:17 PM.

    8. Member
      Join Date
      Oct 28th, 2004
      Location
      Wstchstr Cnty, NY
      Posts
      12,555
      Vehicles
      2012 Golf R DBM
      03-29-2012 07:49 PM #113
      Quote Originally Posted by Tyrol Mike View Post
      Stock Golf R calipers;
      No more floating rotors? Did the MK V R32 have one-piece rotors as well?
      This Mk IV R32 is spoiling me. I'm really going to miss it when my Golf R finally gets here.

      --Chuck--

    9. Junior Member
      Join Date
      Oct 19th, 2011
      Location
      Baltimore MD
      Posts
      92
      Vehicles
      2003 GTI, 2012 Golf R
      03-29-2012 08:30 PM #114
      Quote Originally Posted by 18bora. View Post
      I don't listen to instructors with slower cars than mine, I go to the track to drive Flatout.
      Do you listen to instructors who are faster in their "slow cars" than you are in yours?


    10. Junior Member
      Join Date
      Oct 19th, 2011
      Location
      Baltimore MD
      Posts
      92
      Vehicles
      2003 GTI, 2012 Golf R
      03-30-2012 06:39 AM #115
      Quote Originally Posted by CarbonR View Post
      Do you listen to instructors who are faster in their "slow cars" than you are in yours?

      Oops sorry. Didn't watch the video first so missed your joke.

    11. Forum Sponsor TyrolSport's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 4th, 1999
      Location
      New Yawk
      Posts
      10,651
      Vehicles
      GolfR, Q7 4.2, G60 Corrado, 5.0 Fox, '55 Roadmaster
      03-30-2012 07:42 AM #116
      Quote Originally Posted by speedbump2 View Post
      No more floating rotors? Did the MK V R32 have one-piece rotors as well?
      This Mk IV R32 is spoiling me. I'm really going to miss it when my Golf R finally gets here.

      --Chuck--
      Mk4 R32 had semi-floaters, Mk5 R32 and Mk6 R do not.

    12. 03-30-2012 08:47 AM #117
      Almost positive the calipers from the MKV R32 and Golf R had the same part number, I'll see if I can track down the info.

      Great read though and a lot of good info coming in!!!!

    13. Forum Sponsor TyrolSport's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 4th, 1999
      Location
      New Yawk
      Posts
      10,651
      Vehicles
      GolfR, Q7 4.2, G60 Corrado, 5.0 Fox, '55 Roadmaster
      03-30-2012 08:53 AM #118
      TechEd brings up a hugely important point that I missed in my exuberance to "improve" the car. The car is hugely capable out of the box, and those of you who are new to performance driving or track events should leave the car stock and learn how to drive well first.

      I will try to document my impressions and testing as best as possible. The goal here is more to keep this thread and our readers focused on performance as opposed to aesthetics. What I do to my car may not be right for any/all of you. I am doing this for my particular skill level and usage. Hopefully some of it can apply to your particular scenario.

      TechEd, you are always welcome to give your input and help others modify their Golf Rs in the appropriate manner(once their driving has achieved an appropriate level of course).

    14. 03-30-2012 10:56 AM #119
      Tyrol Mike/TechEd

      I am not sure if this is the appropriate place to ask but if I were interested in fitting 245 section tires on all 4 corners on my R (bone stock suspension) what would be the recommended wheel width and offset (I assume these would be 18" wheels but would consider 17" possibly)? This car might see the odd HPDE day but will see a number of autocrosses. I am looking for something that will not rub (understanding that in extreme circumstances this might happen but hopefully it is rare).

      Both of you appear to have either done these fitments before or have the means and intention to do them.

      Thanks for all your input. It is all very informative.


      Shawn

    15. Member Siliconrane's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 19th, 2009
      Location
      Camp Bullis, TX (San Antonio)
      Posts
      1,630
      Vehicles
      2012 Golf R - Black
      03-30-2012 11:08 AM #120
      Quote Originally Posted by Tyrol Mike View Post
      TechEd brings up a hugely important point that I missed in my exuberance to "improve" the car. The car is hugely capable out of the box, and those of you who are new to performance driving or track events should leave the car stock and learn how to drive well first.

      I will try to document my impressions and testing as best as possible. The goal here is more to keep this thread and our readers focused on performance as opposed to aesthetics. What I do to my car may not be right for any/all of you. I am doing this for my particular skill level and usage. Hopefully some of it can apply to your particular scenario.

      TechEd, you are always welcome to give your input and help others modify their Golf Rs in the appropriate manner(once their driving has achieved an appropriate level of course).
      As someone who has almost NO track experience and has never been to the drag strip, I find this thread to be of great help to myself. I find that I am a competent “operator”, but that my skill level as a “driver” is always in need of improvement. When time allows, I will attend some schools designed on improving my driving skill. My knowledge base is all on the technical side from my many years of experience in automotive systems gained through work experience, practical application, and professional education.

      I thoroughly enjoy reads like this. Keep up the good work and thank you for the wealth of knowledge that you bring to the table.
      2012 Golf R - Black WETDUB
      APR Stage 2++ (Build Thread)

    16. Member
      Join Date
      Aug 24th, 2003
      Location
      Miami, FL
      Posts
      1,207
      Vehicles
      2012 Golf R 2-Door
      03-30-2012 11:09 AM #121
      Quote Originally Posted by CnSR32 View Post
      Almost positive the calipers from the MKV R32 and Golf R had the same part number, I'll see if I can track down the info.

      Great read though and a lot of good info coming in!!!!
      The Golf R front calipers are slightly different from the MKV R32's.




    17. Member DaLeadBull's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 14th, 2011
      Location
      Northampton, PA
      Posts
      2,175
      Vehicles
      '12 Golf R
      03-30-2012 12:44 PM #122
      I have a question. Would it be possible for you to measure the stock ride height of the R.

      Does anyone know how much lower its supposed to be than the GTI?

    18. Junior Member
      Join Date
      Oct 19th, 2011
      Location
      Baltimore MD
      Posts
      92
      Vehicles
      2003 GTI, 2012 Golf R
      03-30-2012 01:27 PM #123
      Quote Originally Posted by Tyrol Mike View Post
      TechEd brings up a hugely important point that I missed in my exuberance to "improve" the car. The car is hugely capable out of the box, and those of you who are new to performance driving or track events should leave the car stock and learn how to drive well first.

      I will try to document my impressions and testing as best as possible. The goal here is more to keep this thread and our readers focused on performance as opposed to aesthetics. What I do to my car may not be right for any/all of you. I am doing this for my particular skill level and usage. Hopefully some of it can apply to your particular scenario.

      TechEd, you are always welcome to give your input and help others modify their Golf Rs in the appropriate manner(once their driving has achieved an appropriate level of course).
      Well said! Quite right!

    19. Member TechEd's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 11th, 2000
      Posts
      2,000
      Vehicles
      2012 Golf, 2012 Golf R & 93 Corrado SC Evo CASC OR GT3 Racer
      03-30-2012 04:22 PM #124
      Quote Originally Posted by ftillier View Post
      TechEd, is there any detriment in switching from the cast iron to the aluminum pieces, assuming the suspension geometry is left stock? I'd think reducing unsprung weight would always be beneficial on its own? For example, switching to the Passat knuckles should keep the geometry but shed a few pounds - any harm in that?

      Thanks for the interesting posts.
      -Fab
      Excellent question.

      No "harm" per se, but there's lots more to consider. Insights here are best broken down into two very clearly defined contexts.

      The benefits of low unsprung weight are irrefutable. However, this can become complicated on production cars because many unwittingly oversimplify the concept, and I’m sure most will agree that their knowledge of this comes from minimizing unsprung weight as a goal in purpose-built race car design and construction, and that many don’t know the applied physics of why this is a goal.

      As we’re literally talking about adapting parts from one particular production car model to a distant platform cousin, I suggest we not get hung up on the assertion that all reasons why low unsprung weight are good for a race car also apply equally to high performance production cars. While it is indeed relevant, and great for marketing, I feel this topic falls into the category of assigning contexts in broad, systemic terms as they pertains to production vehicles versus race cars. Also, and especially in a systemic sense, we should be careful not to build perceptions of cumulative or ultimate benefit because the lower control arms (lca), hubs and their dynamic functions are only two of many other players in the unpsrung weight party, and that many dynamic factors (voodoo) that we might not even be aware of also apply, and poke us in the back. Significant in this is that many dynamic factors that unique to FWD production chassis (where lots of aligning torque is applied from the drive axles mounted to a steerable hub, along with chassis load antis) are at work ...that normally are not part of a the front hub on a typical purpose-built race car with RWD. Not exactly apples and oranges, ...more like oranges and grapefruit.

      Low unsprung weight is good/needed for a race car for only 1.5 reasons: 1. It allows a race-calibrated damper to work more effectively and efficiently at controlling the high and low speed motions of the matched suspension springs in response to chassis motions typical in racing, plus .5. Lower race weights. Problem is (and here’s where the racing world and real world dissect), racing dampers must respond to and control extremely high effective wheel rates and chassis frequencies. These elements are typical of chassis design goals for tire load transfer management by the chassis and skilled drivers on high grip slick tires on relatively smooth track surfaces …totally unlike that of amateurs on the street or HPDE. These rates and frequencies in conjunction with average rates of suspension displacement due to cornering and compliance loads on a race track can be on the order of 10 times more than that found on production cars. Under these circumstances, should a relatively large unsprung mass be present on a race car, the damper will tend to overheat, cavitate its fluid and subsequently lose damping effectiveness over the course of a race. This often happens anyway with light unsprung weight when a driver overcome by “the red mist” overdrives or otherwise beats up on the chassis in order to make a pass or set a good time.

      Seen from a systemic “suspension corner module” point of view, that’s why lightweight wheels, tires, brake components, uprights, along with sophisticated 4-way adjustable dampers (for high and low speed bump and rebound control of the spring for load transfer management) are all considered together as a system, not separately, in race car design and construction. And once again, for race car applications where winning is everything with a skilled driver at the wheel, all this boils down to designing suspension corners that function optimally to ensure tire load transfer events that do not immediately oversaturate the tires laterally, longitudinally and especially diagonally (lat/long combined).

      For real world daily-driven production car use with moderate front wheel rates, the demands on the stock dampers are much, much, much (did I say, much) less. Stock VW dampers have also come a long way from historically being slightly underdamped in longitudinal and diagonal chassis motions to ones that are now very nicely buttoned down as part of the overall ride compliance/handling balance …on track, especially those with elevation changes, and off. To validate the need for two separate contexts here, compare the front spring rates of a Golf R or GTI at around 185 lbs to the approx. 1,000 lb. front spring rate of a TDI Cup Jetta. Damper rod speeds on a 1,000 lb. spring in bump and droop are supersonic at times. Even under HPDE and autocross conditions on production cars with stock or slightly stiffer wheel rates, for the three decades I’ve been doing this I have yet to encounter a situation where a new OEM or upgraded damper has overheated and failed …and to the point where an old, worn damper failed and the fix was deemed a lighter hub versus a replacement damper that was a more robust match for the spring. In this, shooting for less unsprung weight via lca and hubs results in a poor ROI IMHO.

      The use of aluminum lca and hubs on the TT and CC are merely an effort by the engineers to partially offset the increased unsprung weight of larger (heavier) brakes, wheels and tires. For the wheels and tires in particular, heavier and more robust components here are one of the tradeoffs needed for a production car in terms of safety and reliability. Again, the racing context does not apply here. That’s why I don’t daily drive my rather “delicate” Enkei RPF1 on Hankook R-S3. Using a TTS as an example, the stock 18” X 9” wheels and 245 section summer tires (total approximately 54 lbs.) is approximately 8 lbs. more per complete suspension corner module compared to the 18” X 7.5” and 225 section a/s tires on a stock R and GTI (total approximately 46 lbs.). On a TT and CC, the net benefit of aluminum lca and hubs for damper load transfer control purposes is zero due to the larger brake, wheel and tire fitments.


      The complicated part within the discussions in this thread (and the point I made in the previous post) is that we should focus our attention on the higher roll center of the TT components, not their slightly lower unsprung weight. But, in order to get maximum benefit from the geometry and minimize the added lateral scrub due to higher ICs, we need a (lightweight if possible) 245-section EPS or R-Comp tire. Applying the systemic approach used for racing is tenuous here because the goal to source lightweight wheels and tires results in a combination that is ultimately ill-suited for daily use ...and quite honestly, all this pushes the ROI factor of slightly better geometry, slightly less unsprung weight, but with tons-of-at-limit-grip that increases roll moments into the twilight zone where even more in the way of compromise management voodoo on the part of driver skill and knowledge lives. For proof, check out this shot of Mark Smith’s D-Stock SCCA Championship winning TT on 285-section Hoosier R-Comps on custom lightweight CCW wheels:



      One of the reasons he was so fast, and set raw times faster than many in "faster classes" was that he respected the factory compliance with his approach to damper settings, and this helped immensely in fast transitions. However, the unsprung weigh benefit of lightweight wheels and tires alone requires extreme vigilance on the part of the amateur driver during longitudinal load transfer scenarios to prevent them from going all John Force smoky burnout on corner exists, and all Fillipe Massa smoky locked up front brakes on deep braking turn ins ...where a heavier wheel/tire combo does not. The perception issue is also sticky here, because what a seasoned Golf R driver will actually feel behind the wheel with the alu lca/hub is decreased roll moment tendencies, not a slight reduction in unsprung weight as a component of damper control for load transfer.

      For those brave enough to embrace the huge scope of the unsprung weight topic (without frying a brain) as it relates to racing and tire load transfer management (which is 90% of what racing is all about anyway), take a look a Mark Ortiz’s Suspension Newsletter analysis posted here.
      "Professional Driver, Closed Course."
      SpeedWerks Racing 05/06 CASC OR GTA Champion
      2008 DCSCC Autox Series Top 3 PAX Points
      2009/10/12 DCSCC Autox THS Champion, Street Tire Champion & 2nd place PAX Points

    20. 03-30-2012 04:45 PM #125
      teched,

      that was a really great discussion, but i didn't see an answer to the question! Would reducing the unsprung weight on the Golf R help or hurt. I would think for daily driving it would help the car ride better and handle better, but you are the expert. I'm surprised you think Enkei RPF1 are too fragile for daily driving. I drive them every day for three years with kumho MX, Falken Azenis, and RE11Rs with no problem.

    21. Member TechEd's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 11th, 2000
      Posts
      2,000
      Vehicles
      2012 Golf, 2012 Golf R & 93 Corrado SC Evo CASC OR GT3 Racer
      03-30-2012 05:01 PM #126
      Quote Originally Posted by 02VWGTIVR6 View Post
      teched,

      that was a really great discussion, but i didn't see an answer to the question! Would reducing the unsprung weight on the Golf R help or hurt. I would think for daily driving it would help the car ride better and handle better, but you are the expert. I'm surprised you think Enkei RPF1 are too fragile for daily driving. I drive them every day for three years with kumho MX, Falken Azenis, and RE11Rs with no problem.
      Like I said, no harm per se "...ride better and handle better" is an oversimplified, subjective minefield. With the current state of the OEM damper calibrations on VWs, only a very skilled R&D driver would be able to tell the difference, should everything else be equal (as in, no decreased roll moments due to higher roll center).

      As far as daily driving the Enkies is concerned, I live in a semi-rural part of Michigan. It's bad enough that I'm already on a first name basis with Martin at the Tirerack... due to needing replacements.
      "Professional Driver, Closed Course."
      SpeedWerks Racing 05/06 CASC OR GTA Champion
      2008 DCSCC Autox Series Top 3 PAX Points
      2009/10/12 DCSCC Autox THS Champion, Street Tire Champion & 2nd place PAX Points

    22. 03-30-2012 05:14 PM #127
      ok cool. i have read many of your posts, and it seems that you advocate keeping all cars stock or close to stock.

    23. Member Lamfalus's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 7th, 1999
      Location
      Bay Area, California
      Posts
      1,431
      Vehicles
      '97 Jetta GLX; '01 GTI 1.8T; '12 Golf R
      03-30-2012 05:31 PM #128
      From a daily driver perspective I would think at a minimum the alu pieces and lighter weight wheels allow better efficiency (not that it would be super obvious). It's simply easier to start moving less mass than more. And ignoring the curvy racetracks, from say a 1/4mi performance perspective, you will accelerate faster in a straight line with less mass on your car. Let's be honest be here, what a lot of people on this forum like to see is their car pull away from a stop light faster than the other guy, not that I'm condoning stoplight shenanigans.

      Love the discussion here. Keep it up!
      Past - 2001 GTI 1.8T, 1997 Jetta GLX VR6
      Present - 2012 Golf R

    24. Member Lamfalus's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 7th, 1999
      Location
      Bay Area, California
      Posts
      1,431
      Vehicles
      '97 Jetta GLX; '01 GTI 1.8T; '12 Golf R
      03-30-2012 05:34 PM #129
      Quote Originally Posted by 02VWGTIVR6 View Post
      ok cool. i have read many of your posts, and it seems that you advocate keeping all cars stock or close to stock.
      I think he's saying it really depends on what you are trying to do with your car and what your skill level is at doing it. Nothing is a panacea.

      My take away is drive it stock before throwing $5k worth of "upgrades" at it assuming they make the car better in all scenarios.
      Past - 2001 GTI 1.8T, 1997 Jetta GLX VR6
      Present - 2012 Golf R

    25. Member YoungMedic's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 21st, 2006
      Location
      Jacksonville Fl
      Posts
      1,639
      03-30-2012 11:20 PM #130
      I thought the brakes were straight over from a TT-S



      Last edited by YoungMedic; 03-30-2012 at 11:25 PM.
      '12 Golf R 2D Rising Blue #1026
      www.oemplus.com
      www.goapr.com

    26. Global Moderator iThread's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 27th, 2005
      Location
      Bay Area, California
      Posts
      19,377
      Vehicles
      67 Bug, 92 Miata, 12 Golf R.
      03-30-2012 11:35 PM #131
      They are.

    27. Member Lamfalus's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 7th, 1999
      Location
      Bay Area, California
      Posts
      1,431
      Vehicles
      '97 Jetta GLX; '01 GTI 1.8T; '12 Golf R
      03-31-2012 12:52 AM #132
      Quote Originally Posted by TechEd View Post
      For proof, check out this shot of Mark Smith’s D-Stock SCCA Championship winning TT on 285-section Hoosier R-Comps on custom lightweight CCW wheels:



      One of the reasons he was so fast, and set raw times faster than many in "faster classes" was that he respected the factory compliance with his approach to damper settings, and this helped immensely in fast transitions. However, the unsprung weigh benefit of lightweight wheels and tires alone requires extreme vigilance on the part of the amateur driver during longitudinal load transfer scenarios to prevent them from going all John Force smoky burnout on corner exists, and all Fillipe Massa smoky locked up front brakes on deep braking turn ins ...where a heavier wheel/tire combo does not. The perception issue is also sticky here, because what a seasoned Golf R driver will actually feel behind the wheel with the alu lca/hub is decreased roll moment tendencies, not a slight reduction in unsprung weight as a component of damper control for load transfer.
      here.
      This is great info. I spent some time around Jason Saini a few years (a few, heh, it's been 12) back when he was competing in a VR6 Corrado in GS, before he eventually won the SCCA SoloII Nat'l Championship in BS w/ an S2000. He had custom valved Koni's that had INSANELY high rebound damping. The car would get lower during a run because the spring could barely push the car back against the damping. Having actually driven his car in autox runs, it was super hairy. This setup caused it to be sensitive to longitudinal weight xfer, aka it would snap oversteer in an instant. This goes to the driver capability statement, Jason was/is an excellent driver, I was... far less so. You could barely lift off the gas without the car starting to rotate if you weren't in a straight line. A good driver could make this work but it was unforgiving of any wrong input. Just adding some info and things for people to think about.

      Past - 2001 GTI 1.8T, 1997 Jetta GLX VR6
      Present - 2012 Golf R

    28. Member pal's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 16th, 2000
      Location
      New Jersey
      Posts
      6,190
      Vehicles
      2007 BMW Z4M Coupe, 2008 Audi TT Quattro 3.2 Coupe
      03-31-2012 02:01 PM #133
      Amazing information and I hate you guys (esp Mike, climbingcue, CnS, vwtech and TechEd) since I just started shopping for a used TT Quattro

    29. Member droopy1592's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 13th, 2002
      Location
      Atlanta/Raleigh
      Posts
      2,538
      Vehicles
      2003 330i, 2004 A4, 2006 GTi, 2008 R32, 2012 RB Golf R, 2013 S4
      03-31-2012 03:56 PM #134
      Quote Originally Posted by YoungMedic View Post
      I thought the brakes were straight over from a TT-S




      They definitely have more feel than the old MKv brakes. A little more effort is needed as well.
      In many ways then this car is like herpes. Great fun catching it but not so much fun living with it every day. - Jeremy Clarkson

    30. Member Tailwagger's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 30th, 2008
      Location
      Boston, MA
      Posts
      270
      Vehicles
      2012 R 2dr Base CW 3/27/12
      03-31-2012 06:49 PM #135
      Quote Originally Posted by TechEd View Post
      From my many hundreds of hours behind the wheel of R, and GTI and Golf from both r&D and in competitive scenarios, I can say categorically...
      In the spirit of effecting the simplest, but potentially most critical mod of all...

      Went out this morning in my < week old R for the first real drive, damp to wet conditions, and realized pretty quickly that in my haste to begin enjoying my new car I had failed to check tire pressure after delivery. Given the behavior, it wasnt surprising that the post mortum found cold pressures at 46, a number which I do recall seeing when scanning the manual (oddly the door states 41). Regardless, assuming some of your R&D work was done on the stock rubber, do you have any recommendations regarding baseline road tire pressures, F/R?
      2012 R CW 2DR
      2011 F150 SCrew 5.0
      2009 WRX
      2000 911 C2 Aero Brumos Special Edition 'B59'
      1970/73 911 RSR residing within a 2011 ATC 24 ft VNose

    31. Member vr6fanatic's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 4th, 2003
      Location
      Mass
      Posts
      9,099
      Vehicles
      2004 VW R32
      03-31-2012 06:50 PM #136
      Quote Originally Posted by Tyrol Mike View Post
      There probably is, but I am working on a mod that will keep the subframe locked in place. If you are familiar with the Mk5 subframe clunking issue, you will understand that the Mk6 will have the same issue as the car ages. I will address that in future posts.

      MKIV R32 chiming in,

      Great Thread

      I do Recall that some of the MKIV R32's had some loose subframe bolts, as I was one of them!! I am still hearing this clunking Noise and it's driving me :banghead. None the less Great Post!!!
      Laz

      Many people enjoy eating apples and oranges, but in the end they are still… just apples and oranges. The R32 is passion fruit. . Live Long and Prosper.

    32. Member
      Join Date
      May 24th, 2011
      Location
      SoCal and El Paso, TX ;-)
      Posts
      1,933
      Vehicles
      MKIV.:R32 & MKVI.:R 2.:R's are better than one .:R!
      04-01-2012 03:05 AM #137
      Quote Originally Posted by Lamfalus View Post
      I think he's saying it really depends on what you are trying to do with your car and what your skill level is at doing it. Nothing is a panacea.

      My take away is drive it stock before throwing $5k worth of "upgrades" at it assuming they make the car better in all scenarios.
      ^^^^^THIS!!! 100%

      While I do track my car, I'm nowhere near the level of the experts in this thread. Having said that it made me feel good that I have come up with the same conclusions as these guys. I have always said you should drive a car stock for a period of time to get the feel of it. If you pay attention and do your homework you will be able to find out what is the proper direction to take the car in. After all if your car understeers in a corner in stock trim (assuming you don't have the abilities and experience of Tyrol Mike, TechEd etc..) its because of driver error. Even with thousands of dollars in suspension upgrades, the driver will keep makeing the same mistake. Thus thousands of dollars will not be able to do what a few laps of instruction from some of these fine gentalmen will accomplish!

      Vortex is watching (and learning), keep it up guys!!!
      UNDER STEER MUST DIE!!! As my skills/abilities increase UNDER STEER magically disappears!!!
      Stock is like virginity: Useless and should be gotten rid as soon as possible!!!!

    33. Member TechEd's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 11th, 2000
      Posts
      2,000
      Vehicles
      2012 Golf, 2012 Golf R & 93 Corrado SC Evo CASC OR GT3 Racer
      04-01-2012 01:13 PM #138
      Quote Originally Posted by Tailwagger View Post
      ......it wasnt surprising that the post mortum found cold pressures at 46, a number which I do recall seeing when scanning the manual (oddly the door states 41). Regardless, assuming some of your R&D work was done on the stock rubber, do you have any recommendations regarding baseline road tire pressures, F/R?
      Short Answer (sort of ):

      To determine cold inflation pressures for optimum handling under no/half load conditions, most OEM chassis engineers use the formula below as a baseline and then fine tune from there. Engaged enthusiasts faced with tire pressure conundrums can do the same, and then fine tune to personal preferences or local driving/road conditions:

      Curb weight / 100 + 2 (+ 2 on heavy end)

      US R example:
      3300 lbs. / 100 = 33
      + 2 = 35 (rear)
      + 2 = 37 (front- heavy end)

      For autocross, where first run cold starting pressures need to be somewhat higher due to minimal heat buildup on first runs and resulting slow pressure buildup, most will add between 2 to 4 psi to the formula, depending on desired handling adjustments ...like really high or really low rear pressures to aid in trail braking rotation. On third or fourth runs during 80 - 90 degree F events, some tires benefit from bleeding some pressure off. Again, the goal for autocross tire pressures on most tires is to determine the lowest possible pressure that provides the highest level of lateral grip.

      For HPDE, where runs will last from 15 - 30 minutes and significant heat soak and pressure creep will be apparent, I recommend setting cold starting pressures to the curb weight-based formula above, but do not add +2 all around (only +2 on the heavy end). Each tire will be different, so it's important to use the above info as a baseline for further personal preference or empirical/instrumented testing.

      Long answer:

      Unfortunately, in the USA and Canada, the information contained on the door jamb tire pressure placard can in no way be 100% considered "the manufacturers recommendations" due to the full load pressure display requirement mandated by NHTSA FMVSS 110. I covered this topic a long while back for MKIV R32 in this thread .
      Last edited by TechEd; 04-03-2012 at 11:07 PM.
      "Professional Driver, Closed Course."
      SpeedWerks Racing 05/06 CASC OR GTA Champion
      2008 DCSCC Autox Series Top 3 PAX Points
      2009/10/12 DCSCC Autox THS Champion, Street Tire Champion & 2nd place PAX Points

    34. Member Tailwagger's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 30th, 2008
      Location
      Boston, MA
      Posts
      270
      Vehicles
      2012 R 2dr Base CW 3/27/12
      04-01-2012 04:03 PM #139
      Quote Originally Posted by TechEd View Post
      Short Answer (sort of )...
      Excellent info, thanks! While I've got you on the line, I'll say I've noted, in my car at least, an initial hesitancy on turn in rapidly followed by a dose of (possibly driver exaggerated) oversteer after which things go relatively neutral. Its a little spooky actually. My initial thought after checking the current alignment setup, was to hopefully dial in a little more front camber. So it occurs to me to ask if you had any opinion on base camber settings as well.

      But in thinking a bit more about what I was sensing, it occurs to me that the way the nose tucks under these circumstances is highly reminiscent of lift throttle steering (though my foot was steady). This makes me wonder if this characteristic is less of a chassis issue and more of an innate drive line one. It seems possible that what I'm experiencing is the Haldex detecting front slip on turn-in and moving power rearward and so adding traction fore, subtracting aft which results in a fairly rapid switch (twitch) from understeer to oversteer in early entry somewhat like a throttle lift. Am I over analyzing -or- should I be contemplating the HPA upgrade?

      I will say despite the fact I'll never track this car in anger, instead of buying a boost gauge, for a few hundred more, I'm seriously contemplating buying a SoloDL which AFAICT seems to be compatible with this ecu. As it can log all the wheel speed data, steering angle etc, if just from an educational standpoint, it might be worth the added cost.

      Anyhoo, look forward to the further discussion in this thread, thanks Mike and TE!
      2012 R CW 2DR
      2011 F150 SCrew 5.0
      2009 WRX
      2000 911 C2 Aero Brumos Special Edition 'B59'
      1970/73 911 RSR residing within a 2011 ATC 24 ft VNose

    35. 04-01-2012 07:07 PM #140
      Quote Originally Posted by pal View Post
      Amazing information and I hate you guys (esp Mike, climbingcue, CnS, vwtech and TechEd) since I just started shopping for a used TT Quattro
      Happy to let you take it anytime! Will be interesting to see how these things shape up and I hope after my upcoming trip to TN that I'll know a lot more about the handling characteristics of the car. So far it has been a blast right out of the gate just needed better tires to appreciate the stiffer chassis compared to the MKIV.

    Page 4 of 29 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •