A6 1.8T 150bhp Is not enough!!

Nice circular reasoning.

You were an asshole to post the stuff without asking. On top of being an idiot for suggesting that a 150 motor could be made a 225 with a "bigger turbo and head gasket."

Sorry, but you are wrong on this - quoting without attribution is rude. But anything to divert attention away from yourself is a good play. Keep it up.

Nice weasel. You have zero knowledge as to the differences between the two. Being pedantic doesn't help you make your point.

You offered a technical solution that was incorrect. There is no escaping the fact that you spouted some blather for some unknown reason.

Uhhh, sure.

That's a very nice recasting of the words you wrote. I'll bet it makes you feel all squishy inside knowing that you were just trying to be helpful.

Sure - it only makes you look like a stupid asshole. Why on earth you would want to expose your foolishness even more than you already have just boggles my mind.

Because I'm teaching you a lesson. You may not like it, but you have learned something. Maybe even more than one thing.

Besides, it's my time to waste. I suggest that if you want to offer help, at least offer something of value.

Spider

Reply to
Spider
Loading thread data ...

Hardly. Point out where I am ignoring anything but rhetorical questions.

You accused me of putting words into your posts, and I did not.

The question was: Do you think a lack of courtesy from all USENET comers is good and acceptable?

So far, I have not seen anything to contravene this opinion. I must, therefore, accept is as fact.

In technical matters, yes, I do not only believe you to be wrong, you are indeed wrong.

Brake pad life is dependent on so many other factors that the data points generated may have very little value from person to person. That does not render them "opinion," but makes them into facts with limited value.

Yes, I'm sure the science of physics concurs. LOL!

What are the other factors? That "fact" is correct, but the other part "that's all there is to it" [assuming typo there] is baseless opinion, and in fact 100% INcorrect.

I am not talking about that post, and we both know it. I realize that a nice red herring is necessary to help you feel better about engaging in a losing argument, but let's just see "a bigger turbo and a head gasket." Hilariously wrong.

Of course there isn't. Would like to stick to the subject we are discussing, or would you like to start a new thread about green balloons?

Or just blowing smoke because they really don't know. After all, if it's just hypothetical, we can assign knowledge as we see fit.

The factors leading to wear on a cam belt and the factors relating to brake wear are parallel in what way?

All by itself? Probably not.

And of course, your vast technical knowledge would tell you that the last 15 HP is easy to find, with a headgasket? Interesting.

Show me how this might be possible, with URLs, if you don't mind.

And what has this to do with making the hilariously ignorant suggestion that 225HP can be had from the 150HP motor with a "turbo and a head gasket?"

Not one damn thing, of course. One of the attractions to the 1.8T is the tunability. Going from 150

-> 210 is cheap and easy (relatively.)

Going from 210 -> 300 is not easy.

Well, it's been fun playing with you.

As long as it takes.

Odd, I'm at work during the day, and DO have access to USENET. Good for me, hmmm?

Spider

Reply to
Spider

Wrong. It was wrong of me to post the sender's email address as part of the post - nothing wrong at all with sharing the contents of that email. And regarding my suggestion of the possibility that a 150 motor could be made a

225 with a bigger turbo and uprated head gasket wasn't too far off the mark, as you yourself said that basic mods like this could get it up to 210.

Astravanman > > Thank you. Now if you could kindly snip the headers a bit more, that'd be a Astravanman > > bit less bandwidth wasted.

Spider > Sorry, but you are wrong on this - quoting without attribution is Spider > rude. But anything to divert attention away from yourself is a good Spider > play. Keep it up.

Yes, but just a big load of headers at the top only serves to confuse matters, neccessitating the need to scroll up and down to keep on reminding oneself of who posted what. The ideal way is to do what I've done above, but most of the time it isn't neccessary, as a lot of the time replies are just between two posters, and even if not, it's not always important who exactly posted each comment - it's mainly the comment itself (and the replies to it) that are of more importance.

It does actually. I like to help people.

Jeez.......pot, kettle, black. There's nothing like making an issue out of something so bloody minor.

Ah, thanks - it's nice to know you care so much.

Peter

Reply to
AstraVanMan

Note: follow-up set to alt.autos.audi

So you're saying that putting a bigger turbocharger, with a higher boost pressure, and an uprated head gasket, will *not* increase the power output of an engine?

The mind boggles......

Peter

Reply to
AstraVanMan

So, to save face, you've stooped to putting words in my mouth. It's a lovely straw man, but of course I never said any such thing.

"In addition to my other post, there surely must be a way to uprate the engine to 225bhp, as it's the same basic engineas the Audi TT, isn't it. I'd have thought a chip, and an uprated head gasket would be all that's needed, but I may be wrong."

You haven't the faintest idea of how to get to 225 from 150. No, a turbo and head gasket alone WILL NOT SUFFICE.

Maybe you should just own up to the last five words of your statement above, and just call it good, hmm?

Indeed. It's been a long time since I have seen someone make such a big fool of themselves in USENET.

Spider

Reply to
Spider

[snipped]

I see you're having difficulty answering this very simple question. In your hurry to appear witty and morally superior, I guess it must have "slipped your mind."

Do I need to post those netiquette URLs for you? The ones that say posting private e-mail is quite rude?

That is quite true. You have insisted on making it an argument about who can post what where. My focus has been, and will continue to be, Peter's shoddy attempt at a technical answer.

Nice try at a subject change, and very nicely avoided on the meat of the subject, BTW.

Another nice non sequitur. You can't dispute the facts, I see.

Throttle opening (hard acceleration) etc., etc.

The factors regarding brake life are still increased an order of magnitude.

Reading comprehension?

I am having difficulty understanding what you mean. Could you be more explicit?

LOL. I guess when you've run out of things to say, an ad hominem argument is your last solace. Bravo.

Since you are trying to take a stance of moral superiority, this surprises you why?

You are nothing if not ironic. LOL!

Irony upon irony. I suppose you are not trying to "put me in my place?" Hilarious, your hypocrisy.

[snip]

So you have no concrete answer. Yet above, you're whining about lack of technical discussion. Tsk, tsk.

Ah, the losing side must always turn pedantic in the end. Notice I never accused you of saying "just." Just to be clear.

More irony. My favorite part of USENET.

It might, if that's all it took. But it requires *more than that.* Twist and turn at your leisure, but a "chip and a headgasket" (the original claim made by Peter,) or a "turbo and a headgasket" will not get you from 150 to 225. I'm sorry if those facts are uncomfortable. Next time, maybe you should defend someone with a little more solid footing? Just a "suggestion." LOL!

A chip, a new turbo and a headgasket might, together, get you close. The stock exhaust, I think, might cause problems. Heat increases in the intake due to insufficient charge cooling might make it impossible.

Indeed. The A4 is more suited to 1.8T tuning, and even then, by the time you can get S4 numbers, you have probably spent S4 money. All the better to just get the S4, hmmm?

BTW, it's a nice avoidance of the issue. I *do* notice these things, as you might have guessed by now.

Humorous, in your puerile way...

You are de facto defending it. Now you are going to wash your hands of the whole mess?

LOL!

You have yet to show how. Please, enlighten me, O Learned One.

Agreed.

Agreed, again. A 1.8T with 300HP would be a driveability nightmare. But that's not really what I have been posting about, now is it?

My issue has never been with the premise of the thread. You and I both know it. Your side-issues aside, the desireability of this is not of any issue, and has nothing at all to do with the technical issue of getting the 150HP motor to 225HP. I realize that you wish to focus on the desireability part, but that argument disappears quickly because I happen to agree with you.

Any more red herrings you wish me to dismiss while we're here? ;)

Why else does one come to USENET, if not for discussion? I remember someone said that to me once, but I just can't remember who it was...

I find your petty moralizing plenty tedious.

I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that this is all I do. Too bad that isn't true, hmmm?

Oddly enough, I am productive at work, and this is not really a distraction. But if you wish to imagine otherwise, I will certainly not attempt to stop you.

Spider

Reply to
Spider

I thought it was a reworked head and turbo, possibly a different turbo and a different ecu/chip? Assumadly the head gasket will have to be changed as well to take the strain of the extra power?

-- Dan

Reply to
Dan405

Then why posit an attempt at a technical answer? You can shout and moan and whine that it wasn't, but you were offering (incorrect) concrete steps to solve a problem. What is that, if not technical? That's right, you want to re-cast it as a "suggestion." LOL.

[snip attempt to redefine "technical"]

If it makes you happy to believe that, don't let me stop you.

I see. You speak for "everyone", now? Mighty presumptuous of you.

And arrogant. Do you really think that anyone but the three of us give a rat's ass about this thread? Most intelligent folk have already marked "thread as read."

Keep backpeddaling. I like it.

Spider

Reply to
Spider

As far as I am aware you can chip it straight off to about 190BHP which will cost you about £400 ish. or you can spend around (I think) 2.5k and get it to 225 or even up to 250-260bhp. 40bhp for 400 is certainly better value, but I imagine 250bhp in a A3 would be pretty quick.

Reply to
Andy R

You are hilariously mistaken, as with most of the rest of the unmitigated BS you've spewed here. From:

formatting link
"Keep in mind that all private email is considered to be copyrighted by the original author. If you post private email to a public list or board, or forward it to an outside party in whole or in part, you must include the author's permission to post the material publicly. Not doing so can get you into some deep doo-doo legally or with your friends and associates. Think of it this way... how would you feel if a personal private email that you had written for a specific purpose/person is then plastered across the Internet or forwarded to folks you don't know? Ask permission before forwarding/posting any private emails!"

Obviously, you have mis-read my postings. Re-read (for comprehension this time.)

The fact of the matter is that you are grasping at straws in order to divert attention from your own misdeeds. Nowhere is it written that attribution lines should be trimmed - in fact, it is suggested that they be *included*, your misguided opinion aside. Wish to try again?

That's good. Maybe if you actually offered REAL information, then it would actually be helpful. Odd, the correlation, don't you think? :)

LOL. Hardly.

Quite. Which is why you've been rambling on for days over it, hypocrite.

I care about other Audi owners, sure. So much so, that I like to upbraid those who give dumb, incorrect, or just plain idiotic info in USENET.

Have you learned anything yet? (I'm sure your answer will be pithy, and only part of the truth, but I asked, LOL.)

Spider

Reply to
Spider

Ho hum. Have we not just left this party?

Well you can do, but is there not a more relevant newsgroup for this sort of behaviour?

Thank you.

It takes two to argue.

Shullbit it has been! Now you're trying to ram home your own beliefs, opinions, facts, whatever you decide to call them.

And there are more bits, too, but we could debate that for a long while. And this would get very boring.

But you cannot disupte the point I made, yes?

Reading comprehension?

/okay, okay, so that's a cheap jibe/

Run out of things to say?

Not any more. Indeedy, I think you know your place.

No, no, I was being lazy; if you don't drive the car, both will deterioate over time. If you do drive the car, both will deterioate, but the rate of wear will depend on how the car is driven.

Well, you see, here's the rub, in that I don't believe you. And you're all for laughing at the suggestion, but you know, I remain unconvinced as to your own technical knowledge.

They're not uncomfortable. I'm sure that many people appreciate that there are several ways to up the power from any given production turbocharged donk. The above suggestion is one alternative. Unfortunately, I don't have the money to go out and buy a 1.8T engine and pay for somebody to do just a turbocharger to up the power, although I'm quite certain that it can be done.

No, not impossible, just not really sensible, heh.

Spot on.

But it's not avoiding the issue, though.

Thanks! :)

Yeah, Usenet wouldn't be usenet without the arguments, heh.

No, I'm sure it doesn't.

You're lucky, then, in that respect. I've deliberately turned off my usenet and private email access, because I find it a big distraction. So I'm kinda envious if you can do it; I can't.

/the above isn't a distraction, it's an observation, and it's not intended otherwise/

Reply to
DervMan

Take it outside

Reply to
The Incredible Swearing Man©

I'd like to see some legal documentation to support this, as opposed to it just being the opinion of the people who run that site. As I see it, if someone sends me something unsolicited, without my foreknowledge or permission, it's mine to do with as I see fit. Don't like it? Then don't send me email.

How could it be otherwise? I mean, if the sender retains ownership, then someone could send me an unsolicited email, then sue me for possession of copyrighted material!

-- Mike Smith

Reply to
Mike Smith

If you think it's legal, then roll the dice.

Easy. It's the *republication* that matters.

Possession republication.

Spider

Reply to
Spider
[100 lines snipped]

Learn how to use your newsreader.

Spider

Reply to
Spider
[snip]

Cheaper on this side of the Pond, but that's about right.

Yup. For that 2.5k, you get quite a bit of extra kit, including intake and exhaust, I would imagine. Bigger turbo, etc.

Spider

Reply to
Spider

I guess you have. So, since you refuse to answer the question, I will continue to assume that you do indeed.

Which makes your whining about my demeanor quite ironic.

I don't know. Since the offense was committed in a.a.audi, it seems reasonable to discuss it there.

Perhaps your whining about my "net-nanny"ness belongs more properly in alt. asshole?

More unintended irony. LOL.

You can attempt to recast it as you wish, but any other interpretation is wishful thinking.

Hardly.

You're already there, I'm afraid.

Sure I can. Brake pad life is highly variable, contingent on a very large number of different factors. Timing belt life is not. Whether of not the stealership says that they last 200k km, they should actually be replaced at 100k km. It is very unlikely to get life shorter than this. Possible, but unlikely. The life span of brakes has such a large discrepancy between high and low as to be unpredictable as to life span. And we haven't even brought into play whether it's stock or aftermarket.

You picked a poor analogy. Sorry. [snip]

Just more of a piss-take. If you were as interested in discussion as you claim, well, cheap jibes wouldn't be on the menu. Hypocrite.

Yes - are you having difficulty with the English language?

[rolls eyes]

Sure.

Each relatively independent of one another.

It seems unlikely that brake pads would wear out after having sat for some indeterminate time.

That's fine. You don't have to take my word for it - go and find the kit that makes the HP, and I'll admit I was wrong.

That's fine too - but you have done not one thing to show I am wrong in any way. I'll wait breathlessly for confirmation, LOL.

Since you seem to be in a state of disbelief, I would say that they are indeed uncomfortable.

Except with this motor, it isn't really an alternative. A chip and a headgasket aren't going to do it, no matter how much you wish them to. A turbo and a headgasket MIGHT, if you are willing to sacrifice drivability and durability. Frankly, I do not see how, without remapping the chip, that the car would actually make 225 before high-rev lean-out would grenade the motor.

You're quite certainly a fool, then. You obviously have no idea the steps it takes to make a drivable turbo motor.

Unless, of course, all you want is 225. But that would seem to lie outside of the spirit of the original poster, now wouldn't it? Terrible how those glib remarks come back to bite, huh?

The more you squeeze it, the more air heats, and the less dense it becomes, requiring more squeeze, etc. It's not a linear relationship.

Besides - you were carping on what the original poster said - now you are just being pedantic in order to save face.

I absolutely love it.

It certainly is. You focus on the original post when it suits your fancy, then change later in likewise fashion. I do notice these things.

Just a chip and a headgasket will not get you to 225. Just a turbo and a headgasket will not get you to 225 either. Until you can find evidence otherwise, you're just pissing into the wind.

I thought you said it was here for discussion? Hmmm.

Spider

Reply to
Spider

/reminder to self/

Get a test drive of an A6 2.5TDi-140 SE Avant and ensure that I like the way it drives before setting my heart on getting one.

Peter

Reply to
AstraVanMan

[more snippage]

:)

Thank you.

You think?

Nothing else was discussed, so yes, all we want is that magic 225.

Heh heh, I think that all of this discussion hits that spot.

Yup.

Errrrrr, no. Saving face isn't a bother of mine.

And I notice that you keep on noticing it.

You said above that it might, now you're telling me that it won't, eh?

Reply to
DervMan

It's nice that you want to ignore the qualifier. Notice what I say below...

Again, you ignore what is inconvenient.

No, I *know.*

You haven't been paying attention, then.

For *you* it does. Being a pedantic asshole is easy on USENET, where you're a whole continent and ocean away.

Then you agree with the implication that getting to 225 in this fashion might actually be impossible, due to the limitations of the system?

It must be, since you continue to drone on....

A droll non-response.

Reading comprehension, or just reading what you want to read? Spider

Reply to
Spider

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.