RE: Skoda Octavia vRS Revo Technik: Driven

[daniel1920]

I may have missed something in the evo 400 talk, didn't read it word for word.
Quoted 405bhp and 175mph, with some aero stick on bits and a saloon shape, I think this is pretty representative

[ORD]

daniel1920 said:

I may have missed something in the evo 400 talk, didn't read it word for word.
Quoted 405bhp and 175mph, with some aero stick on bits and a saloon shape, I think this is pretty representative

The aero kit is likely to reduce maximum speed. And that is a real 175mph. The 170 for the Octavia will be somewhat below 170mph (although probably not hugely below).

400bhp and a top speed of something under 170mph is very strange, in my view.

[xjay1337]

thebraketester said:

It topped out at 170 (dial) in 5th gear.

But this car isn't actually 400bhp. It's 340 and Revo are big lying bad people!

[daniel1920]

ORD said:

daniel1920 said:

I may have missed something in the evo 400 talk, didn't read it word for word.
Quoted 405bhp and 175mph, with some aero stick on bits and a saloon shape, I think this is pretty representative

The aero kit is likely to reduce maximum speed. And that is a real 175mph. The 170 for the Octavia will be somewhat below 170mph (although probably not hugely below).

400bhp and a top speed of something under 170mph is very strange, in my view.

The majority of aero aids on FQ400 are for a slippery shape and to reduce drag(smaller wing mirrors, diffuser of edge of roof), not focused on downforce which would increase drag.

[gigglebug]

ORD said:

Find me a 400bhp car that tops out at 170mph.

It all depends on how close a comparison is required. The 400bhp Quattroporte appears to top out at around 170mph but is obviously a bigger heavier car. The Lotus Evora 400 with the auto appears to top out at just over 170 but again isn't a direct comparison and it must be the gearbox limiting the top speed as the manual can go faster (186mph) according to the official web page but would it be better aerodynamically in the first place? The E39 M5 reportedly will do 186mph delimited, a Macan Turbo only 165mph, a 400bhp Carrera 2S is back around 187mph. It's a bit hard to find anything official that is the same shape, weight etc even if it does have the same bhp so I don't think the question or this post confirms anything either way.

I've used official stats but take no responsibility for their credibility!!

Edited to show the question I was answering, looked a bit random otherwise!

Edited by gigglebug on Wednesday 24th February 19:20

[xjay1337]

Weight doesn't really have much of an effect from my experience. A few hundred KG will just make it slower to get there.

It's more to do with aerodynamics and gearing.

[gigglebug]

Is it the FQ400's top speed that is being questioned or the Revo? Or both? There seems to be posts about both of them at the same time.

[xjay1337]

Apparently the Octavia is only using 320bhp at 170mph and therefore it's not 400bhp , and Revo and liars! :'(

That is, according to AER, from my understanding.

[thebraketester]

Once more just incase those at the back were chatting....


170mph indicated... in 5th gear.

[daniel1920]

thebraketester said:

Once more just incase those at the back were chatting....


170mph indicated... in 5th gear.

Does it stay at '170' while revs increase, from looking at this pic, I'm pretty sure the digital dash is limited to 170 in line with the speedo?

Edit to add: Yes revs are rising at 170mph but speedos (digital and analog) are limited to 170. Case close 400bhp confirmed. Next

Edited by daniel1920 on Wednesday 24th February 16:31

[gigglebug]

You can watch it here for yourself, the link was in one of xjay1337's posts on the previous page.

http://www.revotechnik.com/product-details/softwar...

[SuperchargedVR6]

gigglebug said:

The Saab I had would have had 280BHP max when I had it, probably less though. It was still too much for the front tyres to handle if you booted it in the first two gears from low speeds so having any more power wouldn't have made it any quicker from that point of view (Eagle F1's as well so the tyres were as good as you could get at the time). Where it was really useful and where I appreciated it was the mid range punch for accelerating out of corners and especially for overtaking etc. The handy swell of extra torque and the fact it came in lower down in the rev range post remap saw to that.

Indeedy! Like you, I find the appendage at the bottom of my right leg quite useful for modulating the power

Any car can spin a tyre if you treat the throttle and clutch pedals like a switch. At the end of the day, which wheels are driven and how many of them is irrelevant on a public road because go into a corner at full throttle, undesirable things will happen in all of them!

Traffic light grand prix don't interest me. Despatching tailgating chiefs with midrange thump is more my bag, in the over-crowded south east.

There is this curious assumption on forums that everyone with RWD drifts round every roundabout and corner, and everyone with FWD gives it 100% throttle off every traffic light. Incorrect.

[gigglebug]

SuperchargedVR6 said:

Indeedy! Like you, I find the appendage at the bottom of my right leg quite useful for modulating the power

Any car can spin a tyre if you treat the throttle and clutch pedals like a switch. At the end of the day, which wheels are driven and how many of them is irrelevant on a public road because go into a corner at full throttle, undesirable things will happen in all of them!

Traffic light grand prix don't interest me. Despatching tailgating chiefs with midrange thump is more my bag, in the over-crowded south east.

There is this curious assumption on forums that everyone with RWD drifts round every roundabout and corner, and everyone with FWD gives it 100% throttle off every traffic light. Incorrect.

Yeah I've never really been one for hanging onto 0-60 times myself as I'm not one for screeching off from a standstill either. It's a stat that is good for indication but not much else in the real world. I tend to drive at a good pace but smoothly rather than like a wannabe racing driver as I'm far from being one of them! I've had various combo's of cars over the years but I'm settled with having a relatively powerful saloon with plenty of mid range clout for effortless ground covering backed up with a relatively low powered but light car with which I can have plenty of fun in at normal speeds. I've got a RWD and a FWD at the moment and enjoy both in their different ways. Very powerful cars are cool of course and I always enjoy having a go in them but as I don't tend to speed by any significant amount or drive around like I've stolen it there really does come a point where just enough power is enough.

Just to add my little fun car has around 120BHP per tonne and it's the perfect mix of being able to use all of the power most of the time without looking like a bit of a dick!

Edited by gigglebug on Wednesday 24th February 19:19

[Gtom]

daniel1920 said:

thebraketester said:

Once more just incase those at the back were chatting....


170mph indicated... in 5th gear.

Does it stay at '170' while revs increase, from looking at this pic, I'm pretty sure the digital dash is limited to 170 in line with the speedo?

Edit to add: Yes revs are rising at 170mph but speedos (digital and analog) are limited to 170. Case close 400bhp confirmed. Next

Edited by daniel1920 on Wednesday 24th February 16:31

It's nice to know I mananed to get it all back on track in the end. Whether or not it makes the exact power claimed is something we may never know. But we do know it has the power to pull an indicated 170+mph in fifth gear within the confines of a 1.8 mile runway.

[gigglebug]

It does seem as if everyone's buggered off now that we're all getting along though!

[Gtom]

I guess it's better than the st slinging that was going on earlier.

[ORD]

Depends on who is measuring the runway...

[gigglebug]

ORD said:

Depends on who is measuring the runway...

Boom Boom!

Edited by gigglebug on Wednesday 24th February 21:15

[gigglebug]

Gtom said:

I guess it's better than the st slinging that was going on earlier.

Yeah. It's good that there are different opinions and folks with different knowledge bases though, I'm sure that everyone learns something coming on here.

[AER]

daniel1920 said:

AER said:

So, it seems those who worship numbers don't do maths.

Is that because they can't or because they don't like the answers..?

I assume if using 220hp and 150mph you calculated the cdA to be 1.0909, which with 400bhp gives a top speed of 182.7mph, now if we factor in the inaccuracies you love to quote with the dyno accuracy, and the fact that the brochure figure are not 100% fact and data, and the possibility of a head wind, I would say the math can lead quite nicely to 170mph/400bph

Your assumptions are invalid. I showed all my working.

Aero power is only part of the story and I didn't have to stack the deck and assume unquantified errors in one direction to get an answer I liked the look of...