RE: Skoda Octavia vRS Revo Technik: Driven

RE: Skoda Octavia vRS Revo Technik: Driven

Author
Discussion

SuperchargedVR6

3,138 posts

222 months

Friday 19th February 2016
quotequote all
everyeggabird said:
We have a similar car to a standard Octavia VRS. Even with decent tyres on the front, if the road is slightly damp or greasy it will spin it's wheels for England.
Good for scene points though!



SuperchargedVR6

3,138 posts

222 months

Friday 19th February 2016
quotequote all
Scottie - NW said:
SuperchargedVR6 said:
I bet the AMG is more repeatable too as they will have used an intercooler that's up to the job. The Skoda's is still the same one the factory turbo / boost pressure required. As AER said, IAT has a big impact on torque.
That post was a good summary, but just to add re the bit about the intercooler, REVO confirmed in one of their posts the Skoda in this example has an uprated FMIC fitted but they forgot to include it in the PH article spec.
Ah OK, I missed that. Good stuff!

everyeggabird

351 posts

108 months

Friday 19th February 2016
quotequote all
SuperchargedVR6 said:
Good for scene points though!

I just don't understand how people can put their cars through such punishment.

AER

1,142 posts

272 months

Friday 19th February 2016
quotequote all
gigglebug said:
The FQ400 and the FQ440 were developed by Mitsubishi UK and sold as official Mitsubishi products including manufacturer warranties. Not really the same thing is it?
I'm pretty sure they're effectively a fiddled with grey import. I can't find them on the VCA database so they won't be sold as a new, unregistered vehicle. I'm not 100% sure of the rules they operate under so stand to be corrected.

gigglebug

2,611 posts

124 months

Friday 19th February 2016
quotequote all
AER said:
I'm pretty sure they're effectively a fiddled with grey import. I can't find them on the VCA database so they won't be sold as a new, unregistered vehicle. I'm not 100% sure of the rules they operate under so stand to be corrected.
The FQ400 and FQ440 as far as I am aware were a product of the Colt Car Company (Mitsubishi UK) which is a subsidiary of Mitsubishi Japan, the development work however wasn't done by Mitsubishi themselves but rather in conjunction with outside specialists under the guidance of Mitsubishi UK motor sport division. Both were sold through official dealers and both came with official warranties (although there were some stipulations to service intervals and mileage) The FQ440 can still be viewed on the official website. So it's a Mitsubishi product effectively and isn't remotely comparable to cars that have been tuned by an aftermarket developer and which won't be backed in any shape or form by the manufacturer. Not a great deal of difference between these and something like an AMG really, well not at least until Mercedes took full control anyway.

AER

1,142 posts

272 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
gigglebug said:
AER said:
I'm pretty sure they're effectively a fiddled with grey import. I can't find them on the VCA database so they won't be sold as a new, unregistered vehicle. I'm not 100% sure of the rules they operate under so stand to be corrected.
The FQ400 and FQ440 as far as I am aware were a product of the Colt Car Company (Mitsubishi UK) which is a subsidiary of Mitsubishi Japan, the development work however wasn't done by Mitsubishi themselves but rather in conjunction with outside specialists under the guidance of Mitsubishi UK motor sport division. Both were sold through official dealers and both came with official warranties (although there were some stipulations to service intervals and mileage) The FQ440 can still be viewed on the official website. So it's a Mitsubishi product effectively and isn't remotely comparable to cars that have been tuned by an aftermarket developer and which won't be backed in any shape or form by the manufacturer. Not a great deal of difference between these and something like an AMG really, well not at least until Mercedes took full control anyway.
You may be right with all of this, but the question I ask myself is, if it's so bloody good, why is it a UK-spec only vehicle? Why does it not have any homologation data registered with the VCA and how have they managed to get so much more torque and power out of it than the original JDM-spec vehicle, for example? I think the reality might actually be that it's a post-registration mod package applied to the standard import that clears them past all the normal scrutiny of homologation. Chances are the whole vehicle also comes in via the LVTA or SVA or something similar hence the limited numbers. Yes, it's backed by a UK dealer warranty of sorts (with a data logger so they can tell you to FRO for driving it like knobber...), but no it's not engineered or tested to the same standard as the JDM or US spec car, hence I believe the claimed power figures are mostly marketing bullshït - probably from a rolling road test - or, even if they are near to reality, the whole thing is sitting a gnat's cock away from melting into a pool of aluminium - yes you have 440 WHP, but no, don't use it 'cos we're watching...

As for being anything like AMG, you perhaps should pay a visit to Afalterbach for a look round. It's a huge operation these days and still hasn't broken the 400hp mark for a production 2.0L turbo engine...

gigglebug

2,611 posts

124 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
AER said:
gigglebug said:
AER said:
I'm pretty sure they're effectively a fiddled with grey import. I can't find them on the VCA database so they won't be sold as a new, unregistered vehicle. I'm not 100% sure of the rules they operate under so stand to be corrected.
The FQ400 and FQ440 as far as I am aware were a product of the Colt Car Company (Mitsubishi UK) which is a subsidiary of Mitsubishi Japan, the development work however wasn't done by Mitsubishi themselves but rather in conjunction with outside specialists under the guidance of Mitsubishi UK motor sport division. Both were sold through official dealers and both came with official warranties (although there were some stipulations to service intervals and mileage) The FQ440 can still be viewed on the official website. So it's a Mitsubishi product effectively and isn't remotely comparable to cars that have been tuned by an aftermarket developer and which won't be backed in any shape or form by the manufacturer. Not a great deal of difference between these and something like an AMG really, well not at least until Mercedes took full control anyway.
You may be right with all of this, but the question I ask myself is, if it's so bloody good, why is it a UK-spec only vehicle? Why does it not have any homologation data registered with the VCA and how have they managed to get so much more torque and power out of it than the original JDM-spec vehicle, for example? I think the reality might actually be that it's a post-registration mod package applied to the standard import that clears them past all the normal scrutiny of homologation. Chances are the whole vehicle also comes in via the LVTA or SVA or something similar hence the limited numbers. Yes, it's backed by a UK dealer warranty of sorts (with a data logger so they can tell you to FRO for driving it like knobber...), but no it's not engineered or tested to the same standard as the JDM or US spec car, hence I believe the claimed power figures are mostly marketing bullshït - probably from a rolling road test - or, even if they are near to reality, the whole thing is sitting a gnat's cock away from melting into a pool of aluminium - yes you have 440 WHP, but no, don't use it 'cos we're watching...

As for being anything like AMG, you perhaps should pay a visit to Afalterbach for a look round. It's a huge operation these days and still hasn't broken the 400hp mark for a production 2.0L turbo engine...
All I am trying to provide are facts. All you are providing are guesses and speculation (even if they do turn out to be correct), something I try not do if I can help it. There have always been special editions for specific markets from various manufacturers and individual representatives of the manufacturers in specific area's so I don't see why you would need to question yourself on this matter, it's from an an isolated example of it happening. It's actually quite easy to google the list of outside specialists used for the original FQ400 and the modifications made over the existing FQ cars if you need to know the exact details of how they may have gained any extra power and torque, the information is readily available. You can also find out the modifications to the newer 400 and 440 as well, it's all there. Whether or not it will make it any more believable you'll have to decide for yourself. As far as I can tell Mitsubishi supplied Premium spec Evo's for the FQ440 which were then modified under the guidance of Colt Cars/Mitsubishi UK then supplied with a full 36 month/36000 mile warranty the same as any other Mitsubishi car at the time, all be with stricter service intervals. The 440 was the only car to have the data logger in the series, yes it may be a bit big brother but it again is not an isolated example of data recording on a car. If nothing else then being able to see clearly if your potential purchase has been driven by a knobber or not is actually a pretty cool thing on a second hand car regardless of any conditions imposed on the original buyer by the manufacturer. All of this is digressing though as the point being made wasn't whether or not the FQ series claims were justifiable or not but the fact that the FQ series of cars are not directly comparable to any aftermarket operation with no affiliation to the manufacturer and no official dealer support.

As for AMG your correct. They are a huge operation these days but it wasn't always the case was it. There was a time where they were only part owned by Mercedes, a bit like the Colt Car Company and produced tuned versions of the standard cars, a bit like the FQ series. They then sold them in official Mercedes dealers with full warranties, a bit like the Colt Car Company did with the FQ series. So yes it is a relevant comparison, far more so than your comparison to a completely independent outfit like Revo.

AER

1,142 posts

272 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
So, what you're claiming is that the FQ440 is engineered to the same standards as the AMG A45 thingy? I call custard on that as an even remotely feasible proposition. The only thing they share in commons is being backed by a "manufacturer" and even then that's a stretch, given that the CCC is really just an importer.

Even AMG don't sell their product with a "bespoke ECU re-map" but they really do get listed in the VCA homologation database!

Nevertheless, at least the CCC claim to be producing their 440hp on the right side of unrealistic at 6800rpm. That's still a slightly dubious 29Bar BMEP but their torque figure at 35Bar is orbiting somewhere between the Moon and Mars...

You can believe their claims if you like, but I'm not buying it, even figuratively speaking.

MrBarry123

6,032 posts

123 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
I have nothing to add to this discussion however please continue as it's good reading and highly informative...

gigglebug

2,611 posts

124 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
AER said:
So, what you're claiming is that the FQ440 is engineered to the same standards as the AMG A45 thingy? I call custard on that as an even remotely feasible proposition. The only thing they share in commons is being backed by a "manufacturer" and even then that's a stretch, given that the CCC is really just an importer.

Even AMG don't sell their product with a "bespoke ECU re-map" but they really do get listed in the VCA homologation database!

Nevertheless, at least the CCC claim to be producing their 440hp on the right side of unrealistic at 6800rpm. That's still a slightly dubious 29Bar BMEP but their torque figure at 35Bar is orbiting somewhere between the Moon and Mars...

You can believe their claims if you like, but I'm not buying it, even figuratively speaking.
So at exactly what point have I claimed anything?? All I have done is provided the facts readily available to all, I haven't even expressed any personal opinion on the performance quotes provided nor made any suggestions as to their engineering standards when compared to the A45 (which, if you would have done the simplest of homework, is a product of AMG way after Mercedes took full control and not from the period I have clearly referred to in my posts). It looks like you are now trying to provoke an argument on a completely unrelated facet of the topic by insinuating that claims and personal opinions have been made, when in fact none have, merely for the sake of covering up the fact that you ignorantly compared the FQ series to a completely independent non manufacturer backed offering like Revo and got smoked for it because you didn't even have the common sense to look into it properly before posting.

My original post on the FQ440 was one of genuine interest as there doesn't seem to be any real world data from owners on the cars actual performance and there are little official stats for the types of readings people like you use to determine whether or not the output claims are likely to be achievable or not. It was you who then went into opinion and guesswork mode.

Edited by gigglebug on Saturday 20th February 11:55

George111

6,930 posts

253 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
The FQ-400 didn't look very well engineered: http://www.tdi-plc.com/mitsubishi-lancer-evo-8-fq4...

gigglebug

2,611 posts

124 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
It an interesting account. From doing a bit of reading it's always been claimed that the performance of the FQ400 could be matched or bettered at a lot lower price point if you took something like an FQ320 and spent a bit of money on it. Of course it then wouldn't have the manufacturer warranty so swings and roundabouts.

I wonder how much the TDI work cost?

Edited by gigglebug on Saturday 20th February 12:30

gigglebug

2,611 posts

124 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
AER said:
The only thing they share in commons is being backed by a "manufacturer" and even then that's a stretch, given that the CCC is really just an importer.
And for your information CCC is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mitsubishi Corporation and has been since 2008, pretty much in the same way as AMG have been a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mercedes since 2005. Where will the similarities end?

AER

1,142 posts

272 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
gigglebug said:
So at exactly what point have I claimed anything?.
You claimed that the FQ440 wasn't remotely comparable to the RevoT Skoda. I claim that it is much closer in nature to the RevoT effort than, for example, the AMG A45. And I have outlined my reasons for thinking this. Opinion? Sure, but borne of industry experience and my engineering background in engine development and backed by quantitative comparison with reliable benchmarks which you can verify as you wish.

I don't know what your agenda is here but it plainly doesn't square with my (professional) opinion that the FQ440 is a dubious and uncredible data point for engine performance. I'm not interested in continually repeating myself to point out the divergence from engineering reality of the various power claims people make. It isn't all that hard to do the sums and, I contend, it is more accurate sometimes to make a calculated estimate of engine power than it is to attempt measuring it. I have nothing more to add to this debate.

gigglebug

2,611 posts

124 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
AER said:
gigglebug said:
So at exactly what point have I claimed anything?.
You claimed that the FQ440 wasn't remotely comparable to the RevoT Skoda. I claim that it is much closer in nature to the RevoT effort than, for example, the AMG A45. And I have outlined my reasons for thinking this. Opinion? Sure, but borne of industry experience and my engineering background in engine development and backed by quantitative comparison with reliable benchmarks which you can verify as you wish.

I don't know what your agenda is here but it plainly doesn't square with my (professional) opinion that the FQ440 is a dubious and uncredible data point for engine performance. I'm not interested in continually repeating myself to point out the divergence from engineering reality of the various power claims people make. It isn't all that hard to do the sums and, I contend, it is more accurate sometimes to make a calculated estimate of engine power than it is to attempt measuring it. I have nothing more to add to this debate.
Oh dear, oh dear. Has someone had to pull the "look at me I'm a professional!" card?? How pathetic! Unfortunately your professionalism didn't extend to researching the topic you were so happy to comment on and has still yet to prove anything against the evidence that has been provided. In fact all your so called professionalism has provided is a counter argument to something that hasn't even been implied as it was the only way for you to try and save any face when you got toasted. So again I will put you in your place. This must be really embarrassing for a "professional".

Again I will have to highlight that no point have I given any sort of opinion on whether the performance figures stated by Mitsubishi UK are likely to be correct or not and at no point have I made any grand claims on their engineering integrity as it was completely irrelevant to the argument. It was actually you that decided to follow that route by providing counter arguments to claims which were not even being made as a tactic to deflect from the fact that you and your professionalism were being shown up. I haven't once bothered to try and refute your opinion on the "nature" of the car as again it was irrelevant and anyone with common sense, certainly someone claiming to be professional, should have and would have realised that it was in fact the marketing and the official manufacturer involvement of the car that I have been referring to in my posts and was a direct response to you claiming;

"The FQ-series are just the importer playing the same games as RevoTechnik. I'll bet the Japanese are mortally embarrassed that their name is used on such products."

To which my response was;

"The FQ400 and the FQ440 were developed by Mitsubishi UK and sold as official Mitsubishi products including manufacturer warranties. Not really the same thing is it?"

You have then continued to make claims that the FQ series are no more than an independent effort like Revo Technik, a notion that I have proven to be indeed incorrect and indeed to be a lot closer to an AMG product than any REVO product will be as;

1) Both AMG and CCC are wholly-owned subsidiaries of the parent companies supplying the base models to be modified
2) Both AMG and CCC products are/were sold through the manufacturers/parent companies official dealerships
3) Both AMG and CCC products are/were provided with full manufacturer warranties

None of these are applicable to Revo Technik or the products that they are able to supply. If Mitsubishi were "mortally embarrassed" then they surely wouldn't have allowed it to happen as they are the parent company.

Your "professional" opinion on the validity of any quoted performance figures or any engineering integrity are completely irrelevant as at no point was this the basis of the argument, you just brought it in as a way to try and carry on with something you had already been proved wrong on.

"I have nothing more to add to this debate."

You would have been far better off going with this before you started showing yourself up.

Edited by gigglebug on Saturday 20th February 16:57

George111

6,930 posts

253 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
gigglebug said:
AER said:
gigglebug said:
So at exactly what point have I claimed anything?.
You claimed that the FQ440 wasn't remotely comparable to the RevoT Skoda. I claim that it is much closer in nature to the RevoT effort than, for example, the AMG A45. And I have outlined my reasons for thinking this. Opinion? Sure, but borne of industry experience and my engineering background in engine development and backed by quantitative comparison with reliable benchmarks which you can verify as you wish.

I don't know what your agenda is here but it plainly doesn't square with my (professional) opinion that the FQ440 is a dubious and uncredible data point for engine performance. I'm not interested in continually repeating myself to point out the divergence from engineering reality of the various power claims people make. It isn't all that hard to do the sums and, I contend, it is more accurate sometimes to make a calculated estimate of engine power than it is to attempt measuring it. I have nothing more to add to this debate.
Oh dear, oh dear. Has someone had to pull the "look at me I'm a professional!" card?? How pathetic! Unfortunately your professionalism didn't extend to researching the topic you were so happy to comment on and has still yet to prove anything against the evidence that has been provided. In fact all your so called professionalism has provided is a counter argument to something that hasn't even been implied as it was the only way for you to try and save any face when you got toasted. So again I will put you in your place. This must be really embarrassing for a "professional".

Again I will have to highlight that no point have I given any sort of opinion on whether the performance figures stated by Mitsubishi UK are likely to be correct or not and at no point have I made any grand claims on their engineering integrity as it was completely irrelevant to the argument. It was actually you that decided to follow that route by providing counter arguments to claims which were not even being made as a tactic to deflect from the fact that you and your professionalism were being shown up. I haven't once bothered to try and refute your opinion on the "nature" of the car as again it was irrelevant and anyone with common sense, certainly someone claiming to be professional, should have and would have realised that it was in fact the marketing and the official manufacturer involvement of the car that I have been referring to in my posts and was a direct response to you claiming;

"The FQ-series are just the importer playing the same games as RevoTechnik. I'll bet the Japanese are mortally embarrassed that their name is used on such products."

To which my response was;

"The FQ400 and the FQ440 were developed by Mitsubishi UK and sold as official Mitsubishi products including manufacturer warranties. Not really the same thing is it?"

You have then continued to make claims that the FQ series are no more than an independent effort like Revo Technik, a notion that I have proven to be indeed incorrect and indeed to be a lot closer to an AMG product than any REVO product will be as;

1) Both AMG and CCC are wholly-owned subsidiaries of the parent companies supplying the base models to be modified
2) Both AMG and CCC products are/were sold through the manufacturers/parent companies official dealerships
3) Both AMG and CCC products are/were provided with full manufacturer warranties

None of these are applicable to Revo Technik or the products that they are able to supply. If Mitsubishi were "mortally embarrassed" then they surely wouldn't have allowed it to happen as they are the parent company.

Your "professional" opinion on the validity of any quoted performance figures or any engineering integrity are completely irrelevant as at no point was this the basis of the argument, you just brought it in as a way to try and carry on with something you had already been proved wrong on.

"I have nothing more to add to this debate."

You would have been far better off going with this before you started showing yourself up.

Edited by gigglebug on Saturday 20th February 16:57
Look, we all knew what he meant, why argue a point like this ? In any case, if you follow the link to the article about the FQ-400 you'll see it's probably not even as good as a third party like Revo could achieve, whoever did what or what warranty came with it is irrelevant as it's a technically pants.

ORD

18,120 posts

129 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
gigglebug said:
Oh dear, oh dear. Has someone had to pull the "look at me I'm a professional!" card?? How pathetic! Unfortunately your professionalism didn't extend to researching the topic you were so happy to comment on and has still yet to prove anything against the evidence that has been provided. In fact all your so called professionalism has provided is a counter argument to something that hasn't even been implied as it was the only way for you to try and save any face when you got toasted. So again I will put you in your place. This must be really embarrassing for a "professional".

Again I will have to highlight that no point have I given any sort of opinion on whether the performance figures stated by Mitsubishi UK are likely to be correct or not and at no point have I made any grand claims on their engineering integrity as it was completely irrelevant to the argument. It was actually you that decided to follow that route by providing counter arguments to claims which were not even being made as a tactic to deflect from the fact that you and your professionalism were being shown up. I haven't once bothered to try and refute your opinion on the "nature" of the car as again it was irrelevant and anyone with common sense, certainly someone claiming to be professional, should have and would have realised that it was in fact the marketing and the official manufacturer involvement of the car that I have been referring to in my posts and was a direct response to you claiming;

"The FQ-series are just the importer playing the same games as RevoTechnik. I'll bet the Japanese are mortally embarrassed that their name is used on such products."

To which my response was;

"The FQ400 and the FQ440 were developed by Mitsubishi UK and sold as official Mitsubishi products including manufacturer warranties. Not really the same thing is it?"

You have then continued to make claims that the FQ series are no more than an independent effort like Revo Technik, a notion that I have proven to be indeed incorrect and indeed to be a lot closer to an AMG product than any REVO product will be as;

1) Both AMG and CCC are wholly-owned subsidiaries of the parent companies supplying the base models to be modified
2) Both AMG and CCC products are/were sold through the manufacturers/parent companies official dealerships
3) Both AMG and CCC products are/were provided with full manufacturer warranties

None of these are applicable to Revo Technik or the products that they are able to supply. If Mitsubishi were "mortally embarrassed" then they surely wouldn't have allowed it to happen as they are the parent company.

Your "professional" opinion on the validity of any quoted performance figures or any engineering integrity are completely irrelevant as at no point was this the basis of the argument, you just brought it in as a way to try and carry on with something you had already been proved wrong on.

"I have nothing more to add to this debate."

You would have been far better off going with this before you started showing yourself up.

Edited by gigglebug on Saturday 20th February 16:57

To everyone sentient on this thread, AER has shown himself to be a knowledgable, articulate and fairly expert poster.

You, by contrast, have reminded me why so few people with actual knowledge post on here these days. People who know their stuff get frustrated with ignorant, small-minded, smart arse chumps like you that cannot even be respectful and pleasant.

xjay1337

15,966 posts

120 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
I'm with gigglebug on this

The fq400/440 is an official Mitsubishi product like the amg. The revo stuff us pure aftermarket.

Although irrespective of this i find it very sad that people are so opinionated/aggressive.
This goes for both people.

"Experts" who cant see that maybe there are companies doing great things and people who suck up to these experts. Conversely there are people who have no knowledge at all and seem to just enjoy the argument.

Reading this thread, and the super turbo diesel thread (old Mercedes) really has me wondering what a lot of people are doing on this forum because they aren't car enthusiasts.

George111

6,930 posts

253 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
ORD said:
You, by contrast, have reminded me why so few people with actual knowledge post on here these days. People who know their stuff get frustrated with ignorant, small-minded, smart arse chumps like you that cannot even be respectful and pleasant.
This is happening more and more on PH, there are experts in all sorts of fields who I'm sure we all appreciate hearing from but the constant abuse from self important know it alls who in reality know little is spoiling it for everybody.

gigglebug

2,611 posts

124 months

Saturday 20th February 2016
quotequote all
George111 said:
Look, we all knew what he meant, why argue a point like this ? In any case, if you follow the link to the article about the FQ-400 you'll see it's probably not even as good as a third party like Revo could achieve, whoever did what or what warranty came with it is irrelevant as it's a technically pants.
So your happy to defend a professional that is arguing a point that wasn't even being made? If you care to look back and actually read the posts you will see that indeed it was AER who decided to start the belittling, I merely reacted and showed where he/she was wrong.