a6 2.5 tdi quattro chip /performance

[Justlooking]

Surely if you are going to create a 450hp monster via the process complex and convoluted modifications, why the hell not save your cash and buy an RS6 to begin with?

Or are you like me and you just like getting oil on your hands??

[djl78]

Surely if you are going to create a 450hp monster via the process complex and convoluted modifications, why the hell not save your cash and buy an RS6 to begin with?

Or are you like me and you just like getting oil on your hands??

Totally agree.A RS6 or S6 would fit the bill.Brake and suspension mods are already included to match power increase.

[adamss24]

Totally agree.A RS6 or S6 would fit the bill.Brake and suspension mods are already included to match power increase.

You should think that its not cheap to get an RS6 for peanuts, its not cheap to maintain and service and i could not be able to live with the fuel consumption !

[Justlooking]

Well a 450bhp monster diesel is hardly going to have the last word in frugal fuel useage anyway?

The running costs of an RS6 would put me off, were I a few years older I'd have an S6 in a heartbeat.

The idea of modifying any car in that manner would frankly put the wind up me. Good bye clutch/gearbox/credit card/life!

[adamss24]

Well a 450bhp monster diesel is hardly going to have the last word in frugal fuel useage anyway?

The running costs of an RS6 would put me off, were I a few years older I'd have an S6 in a heartbeat.

The idea of modifying any car in that manner would frankly put the wind up me. Good bye clutch/gearbox/credit card/life!

The thing with a chipped Tdi is it will still be ecconomical to drive even when you boot it all the time ! The BMW 535 twin turbo made 11Mpg on the TOP GEAR track...a bit low in todays standards but very high if you consider that some petrol supercars drank a more than a galon a mile ! The audi LeMans diesel car won because of the fuel ecconomy and not because its a better engine than the petrol v12 ones, as it did not needed pit stops to refuel ! We are talking about 2 engines designed for different purposes: 1 with economy in mind, the other with performance...You can do a diesel to do a quarter mile in less than 12 sec(there is a scandinavian lupo PD tdi wich has about 433 Bhp and over 700Nm torque, watch it here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFy83fz7nNQ) but it will still do 50Mpg iff driven steady on the motorway at 70Mph ! Many guys i know they had rs4 and the like, they go now in v6 tdi a6 as they not so obvious for the plod, they can get them on lease and they remap very well and the torque they deliver is immense ! In states there are tractors/trucks who run compound turbochargers(one feeding another), air to water intercooler and propane injection to deliver over 1500Bhp... The horsepower is relative(everyone understands horsepower !) is the torque that matters and diesel have it in bucket loads! Wach this other clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0tdaYVl1Bg&NR=1 petrol supercars...against a diesel !

[Justlooking]

I don't argue that a diesel cannot offer comparable performance to a petrol engine, nor do I dispute that a diesel cannot offer better performance in a racing situation.

HOWEVER

What diesels don't have is a lovely long rev range, and the ability to rev up to a much higher speed is worth more than a few horsepower on its own.

Diesel engines have a massive amount of inertia in their moving parts, they have to be built heavier and more solid to take the forces involved. Their compression ratio by default has to be higher, meaning less time to get the gas stream in/out. I'm guessing a diesel engine would have a lower power/weight ratio, too.

I'm waiting for a team at Le Mans to run with a biobutanol engine or something and show the world the real future of the internal combustion engine...

I'd like to see the return of the rotaries actually more than anything. Although I think the Pug and Audi diesels are quite interesting in their own.

But we all know the Astons are the queens of that competition and long may it remain so.

[adamss24]

I don't argue that a diesel cannot offer comparable performance to a petrol engine, nor do I dispute that a diesel cannot offer better performance in a racing situation.

HOWEVER

What diesels don't have is a lovely long rev range, and the ability to rev up to a much higher speed is worth more than a few horsepower on its own.

Diesel engines have a massive amount of inertia in their moving parts, they have to be built heavier and more solid to take the forces involved. Their compression ratio by default has to be higher, meaning less time to get the gas stream in/out. I'm guessing a diesel engine would have a lower power/weight ratio, too.

I'm waiting for a team at Le Mans to run with a biobutanol engine or something and show the world the real future of the internal combustion engine...

I'd like to see the return of the rotaries actually more than anything. Although I think the Pug and Audi diesels are quite interesting in their own.

But we all know the Astons are the queens of that competition and long may it remain so.

Then again, the reason the conventional diesel engine is not revving past 4500(mechanical pumps go up to 6k) rpm is the limitation of the electronic pumps due to them not being able to supply the hungry pistons with the amount of fuel they need. Things have moved miles ahead since the common rail diesel engine as there is a constant supply of fine atomised fuel at ANY time of the injection stroke ! Most of the diesel clatter on older engines is the pump compressing the fuel and the injector nozzles oppening at high pressures. Comon rail engines have piezo electrical nozzles wich are able to vibrate/open thousands of times a second. Coupled with lover compression ratios and compound turbochargers(like the Bmw 535d) the diesel is here to give the petrol engine a good run for the money. The thing is the diesel fuel has more energy and thats why the gouvernment charges you more. Every refinery in Europe is set to produce 50-50 petrol and diesel. The diesel is cheaper on the continent because its cheaper to manufacture...You wanna go green they charge you more ! Anyway the horsepower is a relative term, it cames into its own at speeds of over 150Mph where there is wind resistance, what it matters is TORQUE gets you up to speed. Diesels have massive torque from barelly tick-over so, the quicker you get it in top speed the faster you will travel ! Modern diesel engines have blocks constructed from CGS(Carbon Graphite Stratified steel) wich allows the use of thinner walls between the cylinders and dramatically reduce weight. Dont forget volvo's brilliant 2.4D engine wich is a lightweight alloy block with steel liners and alloy head and only weighs about 180Kg for a 5cyl 200Bhp engine. The Peugeot and Audi latelly use symilar technology to produce their large displacement engines as it would not be reasonable to have a cast iron blocks due to weight distribution in FWD/quattro models... Running a petrol engine on bioethanol is gonna make it more powerfull but it will wear it quicker...The reason bioethanol is not allowed on the race track is it burns without a flame so, the driver will actually suffer 3rd degrees burns long before they realise the car is on flames ! Kerosen and the race fuel is a symilar formula fuel but its less explosive and less dangerous but nevertheless not as safe as diesel fuel !