@robkita2010 That simply isnt true at all. The base GTT pack is circa 210bhp which is the same as the R53 JCW so thats just not true at all. Would need a good 250bhp to cause the R56 significant trouble. However R56 JCW + tune = ~250bhp and would eat the R53 on day to day drives...
@Keano04JCW lol noob thats the basic gtt pack they do 210 220 230 230 250 and 300 packs for the r53, any of which would blow a standard r56 into last week, any of the 220+ would do the same to the r56 jcw. learn about something before posting next time...
@robkita2010 er I did say that was the base pack. If you think the GTT tuning packs (they also do a 260hp pack too ~£5k+VAT lol) are the best option for the R53 you clearly are the noob lol. Dont forget we are talking about an R56 JCW here not just the S - having owned a 250+bhp R53 myself I know for fact that even with 250hp, I was only level pegging with a standard R56 JCW so Im speaking from experience here. Dont stick your neck out too far dude, especially when you're wrong...
@Keano04JCW lol the r56 is only 5% fast in the video so i dont see why u think that the extra 40hp wouldnt make it faster maybe you had a crap car to start with... since with 250hp and weighing only 50kg more than a 208bhp cooper s works r56.. it should more than beat a r56, if yours didnt then either the r56 wasnt standard (they map alone to 240hp) or yours wasnt the hp you thought it was, dont call me a noob when you have no evidence to support youre claim other than 'i once raced a mate...'
@robkita2010 only 5% fast? All of what you're saying is based on this video+numbers from brochures - have you owned either car to experience it for yourself ? Im speaking from experience here having owned these cars - my R53 JCW dyno'd 221bhp as stock so it was a fast car-check out my videos :) What evidence do YOU have?raced a mate seems more than you got, plus i got dyno outputs lol Anyhow, Im out - I dont need to convince you, was just trying to educate. TTFN
@Keano04JCW i havent owned either, but i have driven both a 240bhp r53 and a standard 208hp jcw r56 and the r53 was definately faster, i didnt buy either so i went and bought a a1 tfsi dsg (185ps) as it was nicer than both, and since i work bentley i thought i might as well (15% off) ps.. dynos are as relaible as a drunken mother having to pick her children up the difference in read outs can be as much as 20% so you might as well tell me your car has between 220 and 270bhp...
@robkita2010 OMG your basing your evidence on a test drive you had.. ok well you're right, sorry didnt realise you had so much convincing proof lol lol lol i trust a mustangs dyno more than your butt dyno !! lol Enjoy your A1 :)
@Keano04JCW dont be so quick to judge. yes dyno's are a good way of seeing a cars performance...however they should ONLY be used as tuning tools. no dyno is 100% correct and as such should only be used to get an idea of performance differences on the same car (i.e before and after a mod). a car that shows more hp on a dyno than a different car could very well have its ass kicked in a realworld drag race.....just saying :-)
@clutchplate totally agree dude. My point was that rob was basing his argument on a quick test drive and thats it. Im sharing my experience of having owned the cars in question (hence being able to do vaious onroad tests etc), tuning them and having numerous dyno runs. Your post on dynos is spot on. :-)
@Keano04JCW yup, u cant create an argument based on a single test drive. heck, ive driven in cars that feel like theyve got a ton of power (the porsche cayenne is 1 of them). but then i take my little peugeot 207 (which has the exact same powerplant as the r56)...and it just keeps edging away from the porsche.
@Keano04JCW it annoys the hell out of me when people start arguing about this and that car and which 1 is best.....yet theyve never owned either and can only go by the manufacturers posted power figures and acceleration times (which are hardly ever accurate). uve owned the r56 so u will know that those little 1600cc prince motors can pack a mean punch, even when they are stock....i love it when it surprises the much bigger boys with their v8s and 300+ hp :-P
@milloman25 Not much difference in a straight line as the GP would only have an extra 8bhp at best (c.f. the R53 JCW) so the end result would be the same.
This vid, is nothing more than a load of bs!... hello, those people shift like puss!
Goddamn, my grandma even drives better then this!
Exlipbit 1 month ago
The r56 might be a tad more powerfull... i'de take the r53 any day! <3 superchargers
Sorayan13 4 months ago
get a gtt pack for it and blow all r56's into last week =P
robkita2010 6 months ago
@robkita2010 That simply isnt true at all. The base GTT pack is circa 210bhp which is the same as the R53 JCW so thats just not true at all. Would need a good 250bhp to cause the R56 significant trouble. However R56 JCW + tune = ~250bhp and would eat the R53 on day to day drives...
Keano04JCW 4 months ago
@Keano04JCW lol noob thats the basic gtt pack they do 210 220 230 230 250 and 300 packs for the r53, any of which would blow a standard r56 into last week, any of the 220+ would do the same to the r56 jcw. learn about something before posting next time...
robkita2010 4 months ago
@robkita2010 er I did say that was the base pack. If you think the GTT tuning packs (they also do a 260hp pack too ~£5k+VAT lol) are the best option for the R53 you clearly are the noob lol. Dont forget we are talking about an R56 JCW here not just the S - having owned a 250+bhp R53 myself I know for fact that even with 250hp, I was only level pegging with a standard R56 JCW so Im speaking from experience here. Dont stick your neck out too far dude, especially when you're wrong...
Keano04JCW 4 months ago
@Keano04JCW lol the r56 is only 5% fast in the video so i dont see why u think that the extra 40hp wouldnt make it faster maybe you had a crap car to start with... since with 250hp and weighing only 50kg more than a 208bhp cooper s works r56.. it should more than beat a r56, if yours didnt then either the r56 wasnt standard (they map alone to 240hp) or yours wasnt the hp you thought it was, dont call me a noob when you have no evidence to support youre claim other than 'i once raced a mate...'
robkita2010 4 months ago
@robkita2010 only 5% fast? All of what you're saying is based on this video+numbers from brochures - have you owned either car to experience it for yourself ? Im speaking from experience here having owned these cars - my R53 JCW dyno'd 221bhp as stock so it was a fast car-check out my videos :) What evidence do YOU have?raced a mate seems more than you got, plus i got dyno outputs lol Anyhow, Im out - I dont need to convince you, was just trying to educate. TTFN
Keano04JCW 4 months ago
@Keano04JCW i havent owned either, but i have driven both a 240bhp r53 and a standard 208hp jcw r56 and the r53 was definately faster, i didnt buy either so i went and bought a a1 tfsi dsg (185ps) as it was nicer than both, and since i work bentley i thought i might as well (15% off) ps.. dynos are as relaible as a drunken mother having to pick her children up the difference in read outs can be as much as 20% so you might as well tell me your car has between 220 and 270bhp...
robkita2010 4 months ago
@robkita2010 OMG your basing your evidence on a test drive you had.. ok well you're right, sorry didnt realise you had so much convincing proof lol lol lol i trust a mustangs dyno more than your butt dyno !! lol Enjoy your A1 :)
Keano04JCW 4 months ago
@Keano04JCW dont be so quick to judge. yes dyno's are a good way of seeing a cars performance...however they should ONLY be used as tuning tools. no dyno is 100% correct and as such should only be used to get an idea of performance differences on the same car (i.e before and after a mod). a car that shows more hp on a dyno than a different car could very well have its ass kicked in a realworld drag race.....just saying :-)
clutchplate 4 months ago
@clutchplate totally agree dude. My point was that rob was basing his argument on a quick test drive and thats it. Im sharing my experience of having owned the cars in question (hence being able to do vaious onroad tests etc), tuning them and having numerous dyno runs. Your post on dynos is spot on. :-)
Keano04JCW 4 months ago
@Keano04JCW yup, u cant create an argument based on a single test drive. heck, ive driven in cars that feel like theyve got a ton of power (the porsche cayenne is 1 of them). but then i take my little peugeot 207 (which has the exact same powerplant as the r56)...and it just keeps edging away from the porsche.
clutchplate 4 months ago
@Keano04JCW it annoys the hell out of me when people start arguing about this and that car and which 1 is best.....yet theyve never owned either and can only go by the manufacturers posted power figures and acceleration times (which are hardly ever accurate). uve owned the r56 so u will know that those little 1600cc prince motors can pack a mean punch, even when they are stock....i love it when it surprises the much bigger boys with their v8s and 300+ hp :-P
clutchplate 4 months ago
r53 have supercharger but r56 with turbocharger.
insafplease 7 months ago
How would the r53 GP fair against the r56 JCW though... anyone?
milloman25 8 months ago
@milloman25 Not much difference in a straight line as the GP would only have an extra 8bhp at best (c.f. the R53 JCW) so the end result would be the same.
Keano04JCW 4 months ago
Damn, R56 really does pull away from our R53's :(
MrHyperblue 1 year ago
@MrHyperblue
Just do what I did put more parts on and then you can pull them top end and low end.
mre19862 1 year ago
@MrHyperblue The JCW has 208HP though, a standard S would probably be the same.
29ryan49 1 year ago
@MrHyperblue ya for real! What a significant difference!!!
giancheech 10 months ago