93 gas is better on the engine. 87 causes more wear n tear. Some people say 93 gives better mpg but idk bout that. I have a 2021 Jetta gli and I ran both 87 and 93 and the responsiveness is much better and offers less tear in the engine.
@ballinshotcollin23 please provide me any real evidence that 87 octane fuel causes more wear & tear. I don't believe that for a second. Perhaps more carbon build up, but that's about it. Premium fuel does not get any better mileage innthis platform. I've already tested that on this car.
I really appreciate you saying that. I put a MASSIVE amount of effort into providing step by step, detailed and accurate data to everyone wanting to purchase software or hardware on any of the builds I have done over the past 5 years.
Lol, "Mexico". They have some wicked roads out there. I hear Hiway 99 Near Cozumel at night has nice straights to let her rip, at night. Paul Sr. was awesome at PG.
I live in South Surrey, used to watch the RS3 videos. Looking for a new car today and looked up some GTI info. Thanks for the great and local videos. Great to know some trustworthy Canadian fuel results on the (Plus) stage tunes.
I ran the high torque 93 ecu/tcu tune from APR on my '15 Golf R and was shocked. And now it appears you may be making more (392hp crank?) on your 91 octane GTI than I did on my 93 MK7R. And you can retain a warranty too. You're beating bolt on' 98-02 V8 LS1 Dyno numbers with a 91 4cyl turbo. Crazy. Can't wait to see some E85 MK8 numbers in the future.
By making those direct comparisons you're forgetting that every dyno reads differently. I made these power figures in very cold, dense air and at sea level like I mentioned in the video. You're also making the assumption that this car suffers from a 20% drivetrain loss. I'm willing to bet it is absolutely nowhere near 20% in a modern day FWD/DSG car. I'd put it at 10% or even less. Cars are MUCH more efficient than they used to be.
@@VancityAudiI think I factored in 17%, but if the 10-11% from the RS3 is any indication then the GTI likely is similar. So roughly 367 crank, which is still great. I think the MK7R on APR 93 was advertised as 370hp and 380tq crank.
@scottc78 my bad. Even 17% is way higher than you'd see in my opinion. With the RS3 being around 10%, this would be even lower. There is no power going through a driveshaft to the rear tires on this car, meaning it would suffer less drivetrain loss than the RS3
Have you tried using APR new high torque tune with out TCU and dyno it? The new high torque Tune does not require TCU tune, APR was able to make it happen.
A lot of the other companies have been able to do the same thing already. Sadly I don't own this car anymore so I won't be testing that software. Sorry!
@@VancityAudi oh no problem at all. You make great content, and you are very well-spoken. Gifted for TH-cam content. Keep those videos coming. I have 22 VW Arteon that's why I mention that.
Great video Adam! I can't wait for all the 2024 MK8 tune content. Also nice to see the boost gauge...I suspect that 91 just pushed a bit more timing advance up top to gain that extra power...cool as well pushing with a little e-blend. That fuel swapping rig was slick! Keep it up dude! They've had 87 tunes on the MK7 platform for a long time and people poo-poo them but clearly they work haha
Just had the unitronic stage 1 installed in my 2024 auto and I feel it don’t pull as hard as I expected. I also have 2010 with APR stage 1 that pulls like a freight train. Might just have to switch to APR when they have a tune for the 24.
Yea im super pumped to see you doing all this cause i was leading towards 023 cause they require a downpipe for a stage 2 which is more traditional.. But i also read the mk8 has a bigger stock downpipe and thats why apr doesnt really call for one from my understanding which tbh would be sick if it really can run reliability on stage 2 with stock downpipe.Heard so many bad stories of shops fuckking up downpipe installs @@VancityAudi
@dylan4119 not sure you've been informed correctly on that topic. APR stopped offering Stage 2 tunes years ago. They don't offer tunes that run and support modified performance exhausts due to wanting to comply with emissions. According to the other companies out there, you'll get more power out of an upgraded downpipe on a Stage 2 tune. When you said 023, I'm assuming you meant 034? I'm planning on testing the differences in performamce downpipes as well as the companies software offerings at those power levels.
2019 GLI full bolt on with EQT, this car still can get good mpg for the power it has. I don't know what is different from the gti but the 2022/2023 advertises 37 mpg on hw but ours 2019 advertises 32/34? Well that's a nice MK8 with light wheels, I'm at 100k miles debating on a upgrade bit boy I don't want to do another intercooler swap.
@jorgerojas3424 the 2019 VW GLI comes with the EA888.3 and the 2023 GTI comes with the EA888.4. It's extremely similar, but not identical. Just the newer generation of the same motor layout. I would imagine slightly more efficient and definitely makes more power.
There were little to no corrections running the 87 octane tune with 87 octane fuel. The graph would have been higher with a slight gain in whp & wtq, but the graph wouldn't have been any smoother. I proved this with the last run I performed.
Great video - will be interested to see the other tunes plus logs. APR really hit it out of the park with those numbers (but like you said - the DA really helped). When IE declined did they comment on why they haven't released a EA888.4 EVO tune yet? Seems like they're really focusing on audi engines 2.5/2.9/3.0/4.0.
Sorry, I won't be sharing any logs with the public. That would be super rude of me and unfair to all of the companies that have put in a TON of time, money and effort creating their software offerings. Sadly IE didn't provide me an exact answer on why. I'm sure eventually they'll come out with something though!
Sorry, I wasn't trying to be rude, it would be nice to know if there's more timing correction one tune to another, don't even need to mention total correction. That's not a knock on the tuning company, I've loaded multiple tunes on the same car same fuel over the years and there can be differences and most of the time determines what I run long term.
@oemtam neither was I! Haha. You can never tell tone via text. I totally get what you're saying but I won't be sharing logs or details on any of their software. They each put in a ton of money into making their software so I'm not about to go and share all of the details on how their software actually works. I'll continue showing my boost gauge so you guys can see the boost levels but that's about it.
Please watch the DISCLAIMERS portion of the video below to get a better understanding of why you shouldn't be comparing dyno figures like you're suggesting: th-cam.com/video/JKB73iMNnXY/w-d-xo.html
What other bolt-ons does this car have? Is it just a tune, That's it? I'm not really familiar with the MK8 platform, But do those cars need a better high pressure fuel pump for the direct injection? I have a Hyundai Elantra N, for some reason the HPFP from older Sonota 2.0 turbos have a higher flow high pressure fuel pump than what the N models have. So people are swapping those Sonata pumps in.
I just watched your 87 vs 93 octane on stock tune video. How come on that video it was showing 203 whp and this video is showing 246whp on stock 87 tune?
I was showing Mustang dyno numbers in that video. In this video I'm showing the Dynojet calibration numbers, seeing as they're closer to what is seen on APR's dyno.
Sorry if this was answered before. I was looking at your 87 vs 93 octane video and saw that you had 202 whp. What changed between that video and this one to get you to 240ish? Thanks!
Thanks for the reply. Crazy how much difference the mustang Dyno is. I am getting the 91 tune within the next two weeks and wanted to know what to expect. I appreciate it!
@@LoggusDoggus I stopped showing the Mustang dyno numbers in my videos because the general public couldn't wrap their heads around how much less power those figures showed. They always assumed something was wrong with my car, lol. Not realizing that all dynos read differently. Especially between the different dyno brands.
Literally searched APR Plus Limited Warranty on Google, and this was the second result, lol. APR Plus www.goaprplus.com › ...PDF APR Plus Terms and Conditions v2.1 It's a PDF doc that won't link correctly in this comment, but just Google it and it's there.
Awsome video!!!..I'm getting the APR ultralink and doing a 93 octane tune on stage 1 with TCU tune until I get a bigger turbo to go too a stage 3 but do you know if APR has any discount for the ultralink? Thanks
@philliprollman7421 unless this was released last week, their website isn't correct. I literally just spoke to them about it not being available for the Mk8 GTI platform yet.
@VancityAudi ok thanks I'm going to reach out too them and see if it's available because i got a email from them a few days ago about the ultralink being available but I will double check.
made 5.7 Hemi numbers with just a tune in a tiny little hatch back not bad cant wait to see the 1/4 mile. 87 oct APR did better than king dingaling JB4. great vid as always
I wouldn't be surprised for the JB4 to make the same power in these weather conditions as the 87 octane tune did. The JB4 was tested in significantly warmer weather.
@dakotajones8010 not sure what you mean. Like I said in the video, I would have absolutely gone with the APR PLUS Stage 1 91 Octane Low Torque file right off the bat and skipped JB4 if I knew then what I know now
@dakotajones8010 you knew that if I used a JB4, I couldn't then tune with APR PLUS software? You'd be one of the few that knew that. I did ask around. People said it was fine because it wasn't a tune.
As I explained in the video both my car and the APR stock Mk8 GTI on their in house dyno made virtually the exact same power. I also explained in this video: th-cam.com/video/csg_qukwA9A/w-d-xo.htmlsi=6TUnH_zi71VoRJaV at the 1:50 mark how stock Mk8 GTI's on 4 different company's dynos read from 223whp - 260whp in their completely stock form. These cars are very unrated for power from the factory as shown by multiple dyno results from multiple companies.
As shown in this video, the car doesn't require any additional hardware to run this software. I'm not sure APR has the software available for a 2024 yet though. I'd reach out to them to confirm.
Incorrect. There are Stage 2 options as well. This is shown on their website: www.goapr.com/products/software/ecu_upgrade/gasoline/4/20t_ea888_g4/parts/ECU-20T-EA888-4-LK2
I'm getting 36-37mpg on long drives and about 24-25mpg around town in stock form if I keep my foot out of it. I was just curious to know if mileage was the same, better, or worse. Thanks!
@@CaptainBackFat I was going to say that the gas mileage you are getting is insanely good, but knowing it's a manual is why. Expect your mileage to drop with the 91 octane tune.
@@VancityAudi Sorry I see that now. I am a guilty jump-arounder. Kinda shocked you saw these gains with no TCU tune. Everyone tells me I need it or I will make nothing over stock :/
@24Coup all good. Everyone you're talking to is a dumbass. You don't need a TCU to make more power. I made way more power than this in this video and I still don't have a TCU tune: th-cam.com/video/lTUH9yrH9SY/w-d-xo.html
@24Coup 😂😂😂 that's not a lot of torque. If you throw a larger turbo on these motors, you can safely make another 50wtq above what the 87 octane tune will make.
@@VancityAudi the factory also states that 10k mile oil changes are fine, yet you can find tons of videos showing blown up VW/Audi engines and a lot of them have oil sludge in the valve train. VW/Audi's primary customers are affluent, middle aged white people who would rather lease a car than buy one outright. Tuning the car to run on 87 and 10k mile oil changes aren't much more than marketing for people who don't really care about their cars. Don't talk to me like I'm a fucking child, Bob.
@le_potate3861 I've logged these cars extensively on 87 octane. The cars run as intended from the factory on 87 octane fuel. There is zero point in running a higher octane fuel. Lastly, I'm not sure what comment that you're referring to that I would have deleted. I rarely delete comments unless they're super rude.
A 93 octane tune doesn't come with APR PLUS as an option. I highly encourage everyone to use their 91 octane option to keep a powertrain warranty if they're worried about losing their warranty from the factory.
@@VancityAudi interesting, because Mustand Dyno’s are widely acknowledged as being the more reasonable reading dyno however, there are are several other factors that people almost never talk about such as corrected or uncorrected and the correction factor used. I can make a dyno say anything I want really. Sit on the weather station while doing a run and see what happens! Considering the factory Crank HP rating of the Mk8 GTi is 241 would it not stand to reason that perhaps making more WHP than the factory CHP rating would be a bit unreasonable? Yes, I know they’re “underrated” like EVERYTHING these days apparently. The reality of it is, they’re not underrated, they’ve fallen victim to the aftermarket’s desire to sell products by showing a big numbers. I see it all too often of people putting down insane numbers, so insane that they put down more power than the turbo is even capable of flowing, 450WHP from 300g/s of air mass, lol. What people should take away from this video is the percentage of power gain. That’s it. And I’m not saying that’s not impressive.
@@JordieG8 As much as I agree with you that people should be simply taking away the gains and not looking at the peak numbers being what they are (which is why I highlight the gains in the video), I disagree with almost everything else, lol. These numbers are uncorrected and that is why I mentioned the ambient conditions enabling the car to make massive power figures. I'll make sure to highlight that I showcase uncorrected numbers in the next dyno video on this Mk8 GTI. As I show in the video my car made virtually identical power figures when the car was stock, as APR did on their dyno with their stock Mk8 GTI. Not only that, I showed how much 4 different companies make on their own in-house dyno's on all their stock Mk8 GTI's to set their baselines power figures in this video at the 1:50 mark: th-cam.com/video/csg_qukwA9A/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=VancityAudi They vary from 223whp to 260whp, a 37WHP DIFFERENCE! LOL. Those are STOCK Mk8 GTI numbers on a variety of different dynos from multiple different companies, in different environmental conditions, with different qualities of fuel and so on. As I'm sure you can agree, it would be to the companies advantages to claim their baseline numbers as lower numbers so that their tunes appear to make more power in terms of what they gain. As you can clearly see though they are all extremely high power figures when comparing what VW claims they make from the factory. This proves that this particular engine/transmission combo does make more than advertised by VW especially in the really cold air at sea level. Lastly, this dyno reads extremely low. If I showed the numbers I made via the standard Mustang calibration the general public wouldn't understand and be able to compare my power figures to anything else on the market (seeing as all of the companies out there show significantly higher baselines numbers) which then in turn throws everything out of whack for my comparisons.
Fake yep here's why stock is advertised at 241 HP's and 273 TQ AT THE CRANK! How did you START with more than factory ratings on 91 octane at the CRANK, vs your gains on 87 octane at the wheels? You're gains are skewed sorry friend you're busted, period!
HELP SUPPORT THE CHANNEL BY USING THE FOLLOW LINK FOR YOUR APR PURCHASES!!!
- APR: www.goapr.com/?
Dang! You laid down more power and gains than we advertise on 93. Beast mode!
A little cold air, low DA, at sea level and some of that tasty corn juice helped spice things up! Solid numbers!
Nice tune! APR knows their stuff. Can’t wait to see where you take this build.
Thanks for watching!
You are doing Gods work here for us Mk8 owners lol thanks for the killer content!
You're very welcome! Thanks for watching.
Im convinced to get the 87 tune. I was deciding between 93 and 87. 87 has all the power i need
Make sure you use the URL: www.goapr.com/? when you purchase your software to help support the channel! Thanks!
93 gas is better on the engine. 87 causes more wear n tear. Some people say 93 gives better mpg but idk bout that. I have a 2021 Jetta gli and I ran both 87 and 93 and the responsiveness is much better and offers less tear in the engine.
@ballinshotcollin23 please provide me any real evidence that 87 octane fuel causes more wear & tear. I don't believe that for a second. Perhaps more carbon build up, but that's about it. Premium fuel does not get any better mileage innthis platform. I've already tested that on this car.
@@ballinshotcollin23 wrong lol
Got to love a APR tune good power and pricing is easy on the wallet 😎👍🏽
Enjoy only ever going Stage 1 though
@@BryceCzirr-jz7ju TCU is uncrackable ....stage 1 low torque for us GOLF R DSG guys😪
Love it. Really goes to show how engines and ECUs are so much more advanced to take full advantage of even 87 octane.
Mk8 gti also has a more powerful high preasure fuel pump than the mk7 which atomizes the gas more
I got the APR stage 1 87 Octane low torque tune along with the APR Intercooler and Intake. I'm happy with the results.
I was too! Very impressive stuff.
Still satisfied, and is it with a manual transmission?
Flash King ! Another great video Adam ! Wow on that 87 octane tune .
Thanks Lee!
Adam the sacrifices you make for the community is insane
I really appreciate you saying that. I put a MASSIVE amount of effort into providing step by step, detailed and accurate data to everyone wanting to purchase software or hardware on any of the builds I have done over the past 5 years.
Everyone smash the like and subscribe button! Adam does great work and puts a lot into his videos! Great work Adam!
Thank you very much!!!
Apr is is the sleeper tune. Good information on it being voided if it has a previous flash tune.. thanks for the videos hope to see many more
Lol, "Mexico". They have some wicked roads out there. I hear Hiway 99 Near Cozumel at night has nice straights to let her rip, at night. Paul Sr. was awesome at PG.
And now Paul Jr has taken the reigns!
I live in South Surrey, used to watch the RS3 videos. Looking for a new car today and looked up some GTI info. Thanks for the great and local videos. Great to know some trustworthy Canadian fuel results on the (Plus) stage tunes.
No problemo. As shown in my most recent fuel comparison video, our local fuel is WAY better than it used to be.
Amazing content. Keep it up man.
Thank you
I ran the high torque 93 ecu/tcu tune from APR on my '15 Golf R and was shocked. And now it appears you may be making more (392hp crank?) on your 91 octane GTI than I did on my 93 MK7R. And you can retain a warranty too. You're beating bolt on' 98-02 V8 LS1 Dyno numbers with a 91 4cyl turbo. Crazy. Can't wait to see some E85 MK8 numbers in the future.
By making those direct comparisons you're forgetting that every dyno reads differently. I made these power figures in very cold, dense air and at sea level like I mentioned in the video. You're also making the assumption that this car suffers from a 20% drivetrain loss. I'm willing to bet it is absolutely nowhere near 20% in a modern day FWD/DSG car. I'd put it at 10% or even less. Cars are MUCH more efficient than they used to be.
@@VancityAudiI think I factored in 17%, but if the 10-11% from the RS3 is any indication then the GTI likely is similar. So roughly 367 crank, which is still great. I think the MK7R on APR 93 was advertised as 370hp and 380tq crank.
@scottc78 my bad. Even 17% is way higher than you'd see in my opinion. With the RS3 being around 10%, this would be even lower. There is no power going through a driveshaft to the rear tires on this car, meaning it would suffer less drivetrain loss than the RS3
Why didn’t you go with the 93 octane? Is it tough to find in your area?
Have you tried using APR new high torque tune with out TCU and dyno it? The new high torque Tune does not require TCU tune, APR was able to make it happen.
A lot of the other companies have been able to do the same thing already. Sadly I don't own this car anymore so I won't be testing that software. Sorry!
@@VancityAudi oh no problem at all. You make great content, and you are very well-spoken. Gifted for TH-cam content. Keep those videos coming. I have 22 VW Arteon that's why I mention that.
That’s good info about the JB4 and APR+ never would have thought!
Me either!
Great video Adam! I can't wait for all the 2024 MK8 tune content. Also nice to see the boost gauge...I suspect that 91 just pushed a bit more timing advance up top to gain that extra power...cool as well pushing with a little e-blend. That fuel swapping rig was slick! Keep it up dude! They've had 87 tunes on the MK7 platform for a long time and people poo-poo them but clearly they work haha
Thanks! I'm super excited to see how all the other tunes compare to this one too!
Just had the unitronic stage 1 installed in my 2024 auto and I feel it don’t pull as hard as I expected. I also have 2010 with APR stage 1 that pulls like a freight train. Might just have to switch to APR when they have a tune for the 24.
You won't have to wait long for that exact comparison! I'll be doing a direct dyno comparison very soon!
Really excited to see how this goes for you I got a manual mk8 that I eventually think wanna take all the way to stage 2 for possibly apr
Ya, it's going be exciting to now see how well all the other tunes do in comparison to this one.
Yea im super pumped to see you doing all this cause i was leading towards 023 cause they require a downpipe for a stage 2 which is more traditional.. But i also read the mk8 has a bigger stock downpipe and thats why apr doesnt really call for one from my understanding which tbh would be sick if it really can run reliability on stage 2 with stock downpipe.Heard so many bad stories of shops fuckking up downpipe installs @@VancityAudi
@dylan4119 not sure you've been informed correctly on that topic. APR stopped offering Stage 2 tunes years ago. They don't offer tunes that run and support modified performance exhausts due to wanting to comply with emissions.
According to the other companies out there, you'll get more power out of an upgraded downpipe on a Stage 2 tune. When you said 023, I'm assuming you meant 034?
I'm planning on testing the differences in performamce downpipes as well as the companies software offerings at those power levels.
Love my low torque (91) octane APR tune on my 2019 GLI , with a 6 speed mt, and AWE track exhaust. If I baby it still manage 34mpg average.
Nice! The best mileage I've seen with my GTI is 35mpg from straight highway cruising, and that was when it was stock.
2019 GLI full bolt on with EQT, this car still can get good mpg for the power it has. I don't know what is different from the gti but the 2022/2023 advertises 37 mpg on hw but ours 2019 advertises 32/34?
Well that's a nice MK8 with light wheels, I'm at 100k miles debating on a upgrade bit boy I don't want to do another intercooler swap.
@jorgerojas3424 the 2019 VW GLI comes with the EA888.3 and the 2023 GTI comes with the EA888.4. It's extremely similar, but not identical. Just the newer generation of the same motor layout. I would imagine slightly more efficient and definitely makes more power.
Now try 87 octane file with 91 gas. The torque and power curves should be a bit better and less jittery.
There were little to no corrections running the 87 octane tune with 87 octane fuel. The graph would have been higher with a slight gain in whp & wtq, but the graph wouldn't have been any smoother. I proved this with the last run I performed.
Can u take the apr tuned mk8 to the track now so we can get some 1/4 times
I would if I could, but I can't. Track doesn't open for another 3 months, lol. By that time, I'll be at a much higher power level hopefully.
Great video - will be interested to see the other tunes plus logs. APR really hit it out of the park with those numbers (but like you said - the DA really helped). When IE declined did they comment on why they haven't released a EA888.4 EVO tune yet? Seems like they're really focusing on audi engines 2.5/2.9/3.0/4.0.
Sorry, I won't be sharing any logs with the public. That would be super rude of me and unfair to all of the companies that have put in a TON of time, money and effort creating their software offerings. Sadly IE didn't provide me an exact answer on why. I'm sure eventually they'll come out with something though!
Sorry, I wasn't trying to be rude, it would be nice to know if there's more timing correction one tune to another, don't even need to mention total correction. That's not a knock on the tuning company, I've loaded multiple tunes on the same car same fuel over the years and there can be differences and most of the time determines what I run long term.
@oemtam neither was I! Haha. You can never tell tone via text. I totally get what you're saying but I won't be sharing logs or details on any of their software. They each put in a ton of money into making their software so I'm not about to go and share all of the details on how their software actually works. I'll continue showing my boost gauge so you guys can see the boost levels but that's about it.
great vid. keep it comming bro👍
Thank you
Wild! HP made easy
Now putting that power down is the problem!
Hey I'm in prince George bc and got a mk8 golf r anniversary looking to spice up
I responded to your DM
I want to see Stage 2 87 octane. Curious if you'll get more or less than what APR advertised?
Please watch the DISCLAIMERS portion of the video below to get a better understanding of why you shouldn't be comparing dyno figures like you're suggesting: th-cam.com/video/JKB73iMNnXY/w-d-xo.html
Any plans to try their new DSG “full torque” files????
No, I sold the car. Sorry
Dang, really enjoyed your MK8 vids
@jcook8191 I still have 2 or 3 more vids coming for this platform. I just won't be using my car for the testing.
What other bolt-ons does this car have? Is it just a tune, That's it? I'm not really familiar with the MK8 platform, But do those cars need a better high pressure fuel pump for the direct injection? I have a Hyundai Elantra N, for some reason the HPFP from older Sonota 2.0 turbos have a higher flow high pressure fuel pump than what the N models have. So people are swapping those Sonata pumps in.
I provided that information in the video.
Any idea when the tunezilla video goes up they have a sale ATM 😅
The first tuner battle video drops on Saturday! If you like what Tunezilla has to offer, make sure you use promo code VANCITYAUDI to save 15%!
I just watched your 87 vs 93 octane on stock tune video. How come on that video it was showing 203 whp and this video is showing 246whp on stock 87 tune?
I was showing Mustang dyno numbers in that video. In this video I'm showing the Dynojet calibration numbers, seeing as they're closer to what is seen on APR's dyno.
Sorry if this was answered before. I was looking at your 87 vs 93 octane video and saw that you had 202 whp. What changed between that video and this one to get you to 240ish? Thanks!
These are Dynojet dyno numbers. The ones before were Mustang dyno numbers.
Thanks for the reply. Crazy how much difference the mustang Dyno is. I am getting the 91 tune within the next two weeks and wanted to know what to expect. I appreciate it!
@@LoggusDoggus I stopped showing the Mustang dyno numbers in my videos because the general public couldn't wrap their heads around how much less power those figures showed. They always assumed something was wrong with my car, lol. Not realizing that all dynos read differently. Especially between the different dyno brands.
What is the Ethanol content on plain 91? Usually ITs around 10%. Same in your case?
Every time I've rested it locally, it has been between 7.5 & 10%
Where do u find info on the limited warranty. I cant find that option on the website. Im in the US
Literally searched APR Plus Limited Warranty on Google, and this was the second result, lol.
APR Plus
www.goaprplus.com › ...PDF
APR Plus Terms and Conditions v2.1
It's a PDF doc that won't link correctly in this comment, but just Google it and it's there.
@@VancityAudi thanks for the help
Awsome video!!!..I'm getting the APR ultralink and doing a 93 octane tune on stage 1 with TCU tune until I get a bigger turbo to go too a stage 3 but do you know if APR has any discount for the ultralink? Thanks
They don't have the capability of tuning Mk8's yet with the Ultralink. It's coming eventually, but it's not available yet.
@VancityAudi I think they have it out now on apr website
@philliprollman7421 unless this was released last week, their website isn't correct. I literally just spoke to them about it not being available for the Mk8 GTI platform yet.
@VancityAudi ok thanks I'm going to reach out too them and see if it's available because i got a email from them a few days ago about the ultralink being available but I will double check.
@philliprollman7421 good luck! I know when it is available for Mk8's I'll be using it myself too.
made 5.7 Hemi numbers with just a tune in a tiny little hatch back not bad cant wait to see the 1/4 mile. 87 oct APR did better than king dingaling JB4. great vid as always
I wouldn't be surprised for the JB4 to make the same power in these weather conditions as the 87 octane tune did. The JB4 was tested in significantly warmer weather.
@VancityAudi yah but isn't jb4 pushing more boost basically the 87 octane is the "meh" tune in my opinion vs jb4 baller 93 tune
@dakotajones8010 not sure what you mean. Like I said in the video, I would have absolutely gone with the APR PLUS Stage 1 91 Octane Low Torque file right off the bat and skipped JB4 if I knew then what I know now
@@VancityAudi you couldve asked ur viewers,
shit im sure several ppl would help including me im an autistic wealth of car knowledge
@dakotajones8010 you knew that if I used a JB4, I couldn't then tune with APR PLUS software? You'd be one of the few that knew that. I did ask around. People said it was fine because it wasn't a tune.
When is the next tune comparison?
Hopefully next week!!!
@VancityAudi looking forward to it!
Sorry mate how can it put out 246 WHEEL HP stock when they are 245hp at the flywheel stock?
No drivetrain loss? Or happy dyno?
As I explained in the video both my car and the APR stock Mk8 GTI on their in house dyno made virtually the exact same power. I also explained in this video: th-cam.com/video/csg_qukwA9A/w-d-xo.htmlsi=6TUnH_zi71VoRJaV at the 1:50 mark how stock Mk8 GTI's on 4 different company's dynos read from 223whp - 260whp in their completely stock form. These cars are very unrated for power from the factory as shown by multiple dyno results from multiple companies.
I have a 2024 gti to get the 87 low torque tune do we have to upgrade the intake or any hardware on the car
As shown in this video, the car doesn't require any additional hardware to run this software. I'm not sure APR has the software available for a 2024 yet though. I'd reach out to them to confirm.
Doesn't APR only do stage 1 now? They got rid of Stage 2 and up
Incorrect. There are Stage 2 options as well. This is shown on their website: www.goapr.com/products/software/ecu_upgrade/gasoline/4/20t_ea888_g4/parts/ECU-20T-EA888-4-LK2
does adding a catback exhaust count as stock? looking into stage 1 plus on my 23 mk8.
According to what I know, it would have to be an APR exhaust to be eligible to run their APR PLUS.
@@VancityAudi I read the terms and conditions and they mention downpipes but not catbacks.
@basslover352 nice! You should be in luck then! Catback exhausts just change the sound anyways. They don't change the performance.
Wait, this is without supporting mods?!?
Correct!
i thought there was no tune for 23-24 gti models
That's referring to a TCU tune.
@@VancityAudi so 2024 gti can get the 034 motorsport tune for ecu Van?
@Osli1388 email or call them. Provide them your VIN and ask.
Specs on the rpf1? And tires ?
235/45/17 Continental Viking Contact 7's w/ 17 x 8 ET35 RF1's
@@VancityAudi legend bro thank you I can’t wait to do that to my mk8
How is the gas mileage with the stage I 91 tune?
It was great!
I'm getting 36-37mpg on long drives and about 24-25mpg around town in stock form if I keep my foot out of it. I was just curious to know if mileage was the same, better, or worse. Thanks!
@@VancityAudiAlso, FWIW, mine is a 2023 40th AE with a manual, not a DSG like yours.
@@CaptainBackFat I was going to say that the gas mileage you are getting is insanely good, but knowing it's a manual is why. Expect your mileage to drop with the 91 octane tune.
Was all this done without a TCU tune?
I covered that in the video
@@VancityAudi Sorry I see that now. I am a guilty jump-arounder. Kinda shocked you saw these gains with no TCU tune. Everyone tells me I need it or I will make nothing over stock :/
@24Coup all good. Everyone you're talking to is a dumbass. You don't need a TCU to make more power. I made way more power than this in this video and I still don't have a TCU tune: th-cam.com/video/lTUH9yrH9SY/w-d-xo.html
@@VancityAudi I want to throw 87 high torque tune on but I'm scared to throw a rod. That's so much more power than stock it's scary!
@24Coup 😂😂😂 that's not a lot of torque. If you throw a larger turbo on these motors, you can safely make another 50wtq above what the 87 octane tune will make.
Bro i dont know about running 87 long term
You do realize these cars are tuned to run 87 octane from the factory?
@@VancityAudi the factory also states that 10k mile oil changes are fine, yet you can find tons of videos showing blown up VW/Audi engines and a lot of them have oil sludge in the valve train. VW/Audi's primary customers are affluent, middle aged white people who would rather lease a car than buy one outright. Tuning the car to run on 87 and 10k mile oil changes aren't much more than marketing for people who don't really care about their cars. Don't talk to me like I'm a fucking child, Bob.
@@VancityAudi must have been right lol. Thanks.
@@VancityAudi since you deleted my other comment, just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
@le_potate3861 I've logged these cars extensively on 87 octane. The cars run as intended from the factory on 87 octane fuel. There is zero point in running a higher octane fuel.
Lastly, I'm not sure what comment that you're referring to that I would have deleted. I rarely delete comments unless they're super rude.
93 tune is best
A 93 octane tune doesn't come with APR PLUS as an option. I highly encourage everyone to use their 91 octane option to keep a powertrain warranty if they're worried about losing their warranty from the factory.
Did you just say DynoJet numbers are more believable?
Than what the Mustang numbers read on this dyno, yes.
@@VancityAudi interesting, because Mustand Dyno’s are widely acknowledged as being the more reasonable reading dyno however, there are are several other factors that people almost never talk about such as corrected or uncorrected and the correction factor used. I can make a dyno say anything I want really. Sit on the weather station while doing a run and see what happens! Considering the factory Crank HP rating of the Mk8 GTi is 241 would it not stand to reason that perhaps making more WHP than the factory CHP rating would be a bit unreasonable? Yes, I know they’re “underrated” like EVERYTHING these days apparently. The reality of it is, they’re not underrated, they’ve fallen victim to the aftermarket’s desire to sell products by showing a big numbers. I see it all too often of people putting down insane numbers, so insane that they put down more power than the turbo is even capable of flowing, 450WHP from 300g/s of air mass, lol. What people should take away from this video is the percentage of power gain. That’s it. And I’m not saying that’s not impressive.
@@JordieG8 As much as I agree with you that people should be simply taking away the gains and not looking at the peak numbers being what they are (which is why I highlight the gains in the video), I disagree with almost everything else, lol. These numbers are uncorrected and that is why I mentioned the ambient conditions enabling the car to make massive power figures. I'll make sure to highlight that I showcase uncorrected numbers in the next dyno video on this Mk8 GTI. As I show in the video my car made virtually identical power figures when the car was stock, as APR did on their dyno with their stock Mk8 GTI. Not only that, I showed how much 4 different companies make on their own in-house dyno's on all their stock Mk8 GTI's to set their baselines power figures in this video at the 1:50 mark: th-cam.com/video/csg_qukwA9A/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=VancityAudi
They vary from 223whp to 260whp, a 37WHP DIFFERENCE! LOL. Those are STOCK Mk8 GTI numbers on a variety of different dynos from multiple different companies, in different environmental conditions, with different qualities of fuel and so on. As I'm sure you can agree, it would be to the companies advantages to claim their baseline numbers as lower numbers so that their tunes appear to make more power in terms of what they gain. As you can clearly see though they are all extremely high power figures when comparing what VW claims they make from the factory. This proves that this particular engine/transmission combo does make more than advertised by VW especially in the really cold air at sea level.
Lastly, this dyno reads extremely low. If I showed the numbers I made via the standard Mustang calibration the general public wouldn't understand and be able to compare my power figures to anything else on the market (seeing as all of the companies out there show significantly higher baselines numbers) which then in turn throws everything out of whack for my comparisons.
That is honestly insane. GTI are nothing to sleep on these days 😈💥
As long as I can put the power down! Lol
@@VancityAudi Yea from a dig you need some good radials for sure. I think you got upper 11s in it as is with a good hook
@@mqbr22 radials aren't even close to enough. I'll need slicks
Fake yep here's why stock is advertised at 241 HP's and 273 TQ AT THE CRANK! How did you START with more than factory ratings on 91 octane at the CRANK, vs your gains on 87 octane at the wheels? You're gains are skewed sorry friend you're busted, period!
😂😂😂 Helps to actually watch the video before making ignorant comments.