Right..On a set of traffic lights that lead onto the M60....

Late and night, no one about and my mate was in his Accord Type R 2.2 Vtec (straight through exhaust,air filter)

I was in My A3 2.0 TDI S-Line DSG (standard...i think).

We both went for it and my acceleration was better and top end i took him and got away (slowly).

I then hit 70ish and had to slow but i was atleast two car lengths ahead before i slowed.

my spec:

General

Performance

His spec:

General

Performance

Similar weight, he's got more BHP....i thought he was going to leave me for $)-(!7 but i was suprised when i started edging ahead and then we had to slow....

Now...to the main bit...Is this possible? Are the TDI engines really this quick or has the prev owner done a remap (which i doubt...). And these tuning box's (which i dont liek at all), where so they bolt on to so i can just double check to make sure there isn't one.

My car's had one prev company owner so doubt he's anything....

Thankss

PS. I'm not a boy racer or a daft idiot that rags his £12k car to wrecks...I just believe that you buy a sports car thats meant to be driven, why not put your foot down every now and then when its safe to do so?

Come on...who on here has got a GTTDI, GTI or R32 and can honestly say they've never booted it and always drive like my grann ?

:D

Cheers 

Perhaps the 105 NM of torque difference had something to do with it. BHP means arse all really.

Yohan:

Perhaps the 105 NM of torque difference had something to do with it. BHP means arse all really.

But Top end....wouldn't the Type R have tooken me?

On Parkers...The 0-60 is said to be quicker on the type r too.

 was yer mate really raggin the TypeR, like the FULL rev range - coz they go on a bit and that is where all their power is.

Maybe his 'performance' mods have crippled it?

you have a 50% torque increase over him so by the time he hits vtec you should have pulled in front and used the torque to keep you there. Jap engines are useless without a turbo the produce no torque at all and need to be murdered to go!

I'll try and explain it a bit. The Honda is faster over 0 - 60 (62 actually), yet still gets beaten by the TDI. The reason being the torque advantage means that the 8.9 seconds time of the TDI is achieved quicker than the 7.3 seconds of the Honda simply because the acceleration is more forcefull. The extra torque lower down the rev range means that the TDI is quicker into the acceleration than the Honda, hence actually beating it on the road.

That's why I never take much notice of manufacturers quoted figures. They drive them in a straight line, over flat ground up to 62mph, and how often do you do that on the roads? Soon as you get to an uphill gradient the torque beats bhp hands down. An Accord Type R will never beat a Golf TDI (even a 90bhp one) up a hill. Not till it has a torque transplant anyway.

Just out of interest where did you get those figures in your first post from?

Yohan:

Perhaps the 105 NM of torque difference had something to do with it. BHP means arse all really.

you got that the wrong way round, it's bhp that allows you to compare different engine type's performance.

 you can't teach pork!

 TBH i don't think your mate was driving it properly,those things fly.Any passengers in the Honda?

 This is down to torque, dsg, gearing of the honda and the fact that peak torque on his jap barge comes in so late.  You'd be suprised at what I've kept up with in my 170!

I was behind a new A4 3.0tdi yesterday and managed to keep up (just) until we had to pull the reigns.

I out-accelerated a 730D up a motorway slip road too the other day.

These engines do sound agricultural but they don't half pull!

 My old corrado g60 pulled away from a mapped pd130(twice)ask Austin21,so much for torque.

 If torque is more important why don't we see more diesel drag cars, if they can produce more torque?

Whats going on in Rustynuts brain this morning? Doesn't matter if one car has more torque, more horses, spoilers, go faster stripes or whatever, if the 0-62 time is quicker then it's quicker! A tractor has more torque advantage than either car - doesn't mean it's faster to 70mph !  Apart from engine power, the car's gearing + aerodynamics + weight etc,  all have their part to play. If a car is quoted as being 1.5 secs faster to 62mph then it's faster - no arguement. 

That junction onto the motorway - is it flat, downhill or uphill? If it's uphill then i would have expected a more equal contest, but if flat or downhill the Accord should have seen you off.

Also the Accord figures you quote are for a car in 100% condition. Your mates Accord is between 8-10 years old against your relatively new car - that will have a big say on the contest.

All things being equal an Accord type-R would have seen you off to 70mph.

...and it degenerates into a Petrol v Diesel debate once again....

 I think what Rustynuts is trying to say is that the tdi would cover more ground initially i.e. from say 0-30mph, then the Honda should creep back.  It would be interesting to do a re-test on a flat road over a full mile!

 Think it's down to the Honda drivers right foot not being fully down.Faster car from the line FACT

Now if it was through the gears,say both floor it in third,i'd expect the diesel to win.That's where the low down torque comes in usefull.Please correct me if i'm wrong.

JonJon:

you got that the wrong way round, it's bhp that allows you to compare different engine type's performance.

WRONG! Bhp is a by-product of torque! Torque is what makes accelleration,thats why an equivalent diesel is quicker through the gears than a petrol.

eyeamsparticus:

Whats going on in Rustynuts brain this morning?

Just ...

Looks like I caught a couple aswell.

Rustynuts:

...and it degenerates into a Petrol v Diesel debate once again....

I'm not quite sure how you come to that that concusion. What does it matter if it's diesel, petrol, electric, hydrogen, jet or Freddy Flintstone powered?

Ask yourself this. If one car does 0-62 in 5 secs and another does it in 7 secs, how many people do you reckon will inquire about the power plants before placing their bets on which car will reach 62mph first?

That'll be the low down torque effect...    ha! ha! ha!

boranik:

JonJon:

you got that the wrong way round, it's bhp that allows you to compare different engine type's performance.

 

WRONG! Bhp is a by-product of torque! Torque is what makes accelleration,thats why an equivalent diesel is quicker through the gears than a petrol.

i,m not wrong btw.

many people forget that when comparing a diesel to petrol you have to take into consideration the extra 2 thousand or more rev's the petrol engine produces, this is then reduced down in the gearbox and converted to torque at the wheels, thus engine speed is as important as torque.FACT!

picture this-

you have 2 cars,1 petrol and 1 diesel,both cars are the same dimensions and weight,the same coeficient of wind resistance and the same bhp.

the engines will clearly have different specific performance figures, but as a whole each car would have the same top speed and will reach that said top speed in the same time duration, mid gear times will vary slightly but will average itself out over the jeourney to max speed in favour of niether 1.

Tought or pork?

I own a diesel and have to admit that torque means pretty much sod all in a drag race and has very little influence over the 'pace' of a car. The reason why a diesel may be quicker round a track is because they are easily kept in the power band and the petrol driver would have to work a lot harder to keep up.

A 200 BHP TDI can do a standing quarter mile in 16.1 s ('allard') but will have a 0-60 in 6.7 ish seconds. Why? Because as soon as you begin to accelerate you are in the power band, which is due to the immense torque of the engine.

There's no way that a 140 BHP TDI would match a 200 BHP Petrol on a drag run. It just wouldn&#