high modified miles

[rubez]

what do you think of this?

2007 Audi S3. specifically, the combination of the high miles (100k) and the high bhp (380)

that's more than an extra 100bhp over stock (265bhp) it is a revo stage 2.

is that dodgy? seems a lot of power for an S3. all that extra strain, and with 100k on the clock... a recipe for disaster?

[sgtbash]

rubez said:

what do you think of this?

2007 Audi S3. specifically, the combination of the high miles (100k) and the high bhp (380)

that's more than an extra 100bhp over stock (265bhp) it is a revo stage 2.

is that dodgy? seems a lot of power for an S3. all that extra strain, and with 100k on the clock... a recipe for disaster?

100k isnt high.

Also, Stage 2 isnt exactly extreme levels. It will be fine.

[Cupramax]

Entirely down to how its been serviced and with what level of mechanical sympathy its been driven, but its very likely to be tired.

[Al U]

Sounds like you've made your mind up.

Also sounds like you've come on here for someone to reassure you that it will all be OK so you can go for it, when really no one can do that truthfully.

[kambites]

It depends on a lot of things. If the engine is modified sensibly, it'll be no more stressed at partial throttle than a standard engine is. I suspect 99.9% of those 100k miles will have been done at <265bhp (probably <150bhp).

[Cupramax]

sgtbash said:

100k isnt high.

But 100k having the living daylights ragged out of it at 380hp is.

[J4CKO]

Cupramax said:

sgtbash said:

100k isnt high.

But 100k having the living daylights ragged out of it at 380hp is.

It doesnt always follow that its been hammered, really, a small hatch with 380 being hammered all the time would result in a ban, being ten years old it could be pristine and well looked after or a clocked, battered shed, it might be the wheels of a well heeled enthusiast who maintains it above and beyond, or it could be the local drug gangs pool car.

Drive it, listen to it, look at it in detail, check the service records, does it smoke, clonk or is it a dustbin, use common sense, an extra dose due to age/mileage and being modified.

[sgtbash]

Cupramax said:

But 100k having the living daylights ragged out of it at 380hp is.

Not in my experience of highly tuned cars combined with 100k+ miles. Hence why I commented.

I assume you've had different experiences?

[rubez]

Al U said:

Sounds like you've made your mind up.

Also sounds like you've come on here for someone to reassure you that it will all be OK so you can go for it, when really no one can do that truthfully.

not at all.

i have the option of a significantly cheaper 350z which i am leaning more towards due to cash flow.

certainly, i'd rather go for the S3 if money was no object.

[Lowtimer]

Quite often, especially with tweaked turbos, it's not the BHP that wrecks the engine, it's the torque that wrecks the transmission, driveshafts, CV joints etc. No-one will have extracted 380 bhp from that car on the public roads very often in terms of ts total running time, but I would bet they will have extracted the full torque a lot more often.

[Don1]

Engine should be fine - will the Haldex etc be ok at that BHP and mileage?

[sgtbash]

rubez said:

not at all.

i have the option of a significantly cheaper 350z which i am leaning more towards due to cash flow.

certainly, i'd rather go for the S3 if money was no object.

In my opinion, id much rather have a 350z for multiple reasons.

[rubez]

from what i understand revo is a "safe" remap. sort of standardized and sensible? i just thought a 120bhp hike over stock was a lot for what isn't exactly a true performance motor.

obviously the stock audi parts can handle more than 265bhp, but do revo upgrade any weaker parts which are at danger with a remap?

[rubez]

sgtbash said:

rubez said:

not at all.

i have the option of a significantly cheaper 350z which i am leaning more towards due to cash flow.

certainly, i'd rather go for the S3 if money was no object.

In my opinion, id much rather have a 350z for multiple reasons.

how so?

i am torn. the 350z is significantly less miles and significantly less money - though also significantly less power.

also, looks are important to me personally... and this S3 i am mulling is a looker. though i have found a pretty nice looking 350z also.

[J4CKO]

sgtbash said:

rubez said:

not at all.

i have the option of a significantly cheaper 350z which i am leaning more towards due to cash flow.

certainly, i'd rather go for the S3 if money was no object.

In my opinion, id much rather have a 350z for multiple reasons.

I had a 350Z, good car,t eh boosted Audi will be a hell of a lot quicker, even standard for standard I would say the 265 bhp Audi would be on par or quicker, but by and large, the 350Z will not break, some had oil consumption issues but by and large pretty strong, the benefit of being a hefferlump.

[sgtbash]

rubez said:

how so?

i am torn. the 350z is significantly less miles and significantly less money - though also significantly less power.

also, looks are important to me personally... and this S3 i am mulling is a looker. though i have found a pretty nice looking 350z also.

Im partial to Jap cars.

The 350 is rwd, sounds nicer, looks nicer, is cheaper and less miles. To me, driving a 350 would make me feel special, a german hatch wouldn't.

The S3 in my opinion is dull, yes its quick, but will it be as much as an experience as in a 350?

[essIII]

DSG or manual? The manual clutches are made of cheese so it'd be good to know if it's been upgraded to a Sachs (or similar) item.

DSG boxes tended to be much better at dealing with Stage 2 levels of power.

As others have said, it'll all come down to how it's been driven and serviced - 100k isn't a lot if it's been properly looked after.

[rubez]

the S3 is a manual.

hefferlump? i assume that's the engine. what are the benefits of a 3.5l engine over a 2.0l engine? (say were were equal bhp for talking sakes) more torque? better reliability?

the 350z does seem more special, but this particular S3 looks better... from the front and sides anyway. although a front splitter and rear wiper delete would boost the 350z's looks considerably.

with the 350z, 270bhp seems a *tad* on the slow side. not to mention how many of those horses have escaped? (same can be said for the S3, but it has more to play with...)

[J4CKO]

sgtbash said:

rubez said:

how so?

i am torn. the 350z is significantly less miles and significantly less money - though also significantly less power.

also, looks are important to me personally... and this S3 i am mulling is a looker. though i have found a pretty nice looking 350z also.

Im partial to Jap cars.

The 350 is rwd, sounds nicer, looks nicer, is cheaper and less miles. To me, driving a 350 would make me feel special, a german hatch wouldn't.

The S3 in my opinion is dull, yes its quick, but will it be as much as an experience as in a 350?

They do feel quite special, but the Audis are pretty good to be fair,

Better interior,
Faster, well feels it, not really muc in it
4WD traction, 350Z in the wet is like an excitable Boxer dog in slippers on a parquet floor that been sprayed with Pledge.
Point to point, 350Z wouldnt keep up


350Z

Nicer noise
RWD slidy stuff (if you turn the over zealous ESP off)
Character


Think you need to drive one of each to make a decision, I would, in all honestly go for the Audi.

[rubez]

J4CKO said:

350Z in the wet is like an excitable Boxer dog in slippers on a parquet floor that been sprayed with Pledge.

internet quote of the day


would it help to see both cars? i can get the price down on the S3...

https://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/...

https://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/...

Edited by rubez on Thursday 13th April 16:50