38 replies to this topic

[Hark]

This isn't a thread about wanting to jump straight to stage 3, after I've only owned the stage 2 a short time. But I've seen a few posts on here from people now running 300bhp ish S/C setups that say that they felt the car was at it's best when they were at stage 2. Is this simply from a reliability point of view? Presuming stage 3 eats clutches, more heat + boost inevitabally causes issues. Is there much of a reliability issue with stuff above 250bhp? Or is it more drivability in terms of traction? Or something else, like driver enjoyment? Just interested really. I'm hoping to get a reliable stage 2 up and running on track in Spring. Almost there now.

[rob999]

And cost

[Hark]

And cost

People know that before they go in to it though.

I guess value for money starts to become more of an argument past stage 2...

[leevx2.2]

Stage 2 value for money is spot on stage 3 does bump the cost up quiet allot pistons ,rods, cams, springs, clutch, exhaust don't come cheap all for that extra 50 bhp but I do think it is worth doing as the car is a completely different beast

[smiley]

as the car is a completely different beast

What's the torque on a 300bhp one lee?

[leevx2.2]

as the car is a completely different beast

What's the torque on a 300bhp one lee?

It's only about 250 -260

[Hark]

Stage 2 value for money is spot on stage 3 does bump the cost up quiet allot pistons ,rods, cams, springs, clutch, exhaust don't come cheap all for that extra 50 bhp but I do think it is worth doing as the car is a completely different beast

Can you run a stage 3 on a 2.5" system? Thought 2.5" was ok up to 300bhp?

[ArticMonkey]

Someone wants more power.......

[leevx2.2]

Stage 2 value for money is spot on stage 3 does bump the cost up quiet allot pistons ,rods, cams, springs, clutch, exhaust don't come cheap all for that extra 50 bhp but I do think it is worth doing as the car is a completely different beast

Can you run a stage 3 on a 2.5" system? Thought 2.5" was ok up to 300bhp?

Yes you can Chris Uk does and with no problem

[Phear]

Personally I find the mapping on Stage 3 nicer because the boost comes in a little earlier and makes the dodgy mapping around 2k rpm less pronounced. The only disadvantages I've noticed are cost and rough idle. You do have to be slightly more careful with your right foot, but less so than going from N/A to Stage 2 All in all though, its no where near the value for money that Stage 2 is, unless you really really must have the power its probably not worth it.

[Hark]

Someone wants more power.......

lol

[MAXR]

All in all though, its no where near the value for money that Stage 2 is, unless you really really must have the power its probably not worth it.

...I also agree with the above. Also, If your car is setup well & your brakes are good you'll be on the heels of any VX on track.

[smiley]

It's only about 250 -260

In what value type is that?

[MartinS]

Simplest way of answering this would be to ask, how many stage 2 people get to drive there car all the time, and how many stage 3 people dont. Sorry, but that seems the case. It always sounds nice having more power but if like me, you want to always just have the car raedy to go, no matter how many track days, road miles etc, then going past stage 2 does seem to hinder all that, and you end up with a car with horsepower that that gets talked about more than used. Martin s

[Hark]

Off the back of that then, what are the main reliability issues??

[NickB787]

Personally I find the mapping on Stage 3 nicer because the boost comes in a little earlier and makes the dodgy mapping around 2k rpm less pronounced. The only disadvantages I've noticed are cost and rough idle. You do have to be slightly more careful with your right foot, but less so than going from N/A to Stage 2

All in all though, its no where near the value for money that Stage 2 is, unless you really really must have the power its probably not worth it.

rough idle seems to be due to the fact comp cams need to be setup with adjustable gears as I have found out they are not plug and play.

[techieboy]

No reliability issues with my Stage whateverthefcuk, on this second engine (I killed the previous one). Yet.

But, personally I think the car as a Stage 2 was nicer and better balanced to drive. Given the choice again, I wouldn't have spent the £3k+ extra.

+ve
40bhp more than my Stage 2
24lbft more than my Stage 2

-ve
Lumpy cams and idle (really needs an extra 150rpm on the idle speed but can't be adjusted with our ECU)
Annoyingly loud supercharger whine when on boost (fun at first but novelty wears off)
Stupidly loud exhaust noise
Extra heat
Piston slap
Oil consumption paranoia from the rebore
Fuel consumption - can barely get 200miles to a long range tank (though a lot of that is probably the way I drive it)
Feels like I'm slower through a corner now on track. Whereas with 260bhp you could almost floor the throttle at the apex and ride it out with a tiny bit of correction. Now I often need to be a lot more judicious with the throttle as it'll happily spin up a wheel and flick you round, if you're not careful.

Been through a couple of CV boots as well since the change to Stage 3 but can't honestly attribute that to the step up, as I also killed one at Stage 2.

[Hark]

I think this is the first forum I've been on where people are really honest about the down sides of higher level tuning. So many seem to see new gearboxes/clutch, running issues as routine servicing! When people have spent £000s they rarely criticse their own chosen path, unless you reallt get to know them. I appreciate people's unbiased point of view.

[siztenboots]

not sure if its a major -ve , but having to run super unleaded whereas Stage 2 you are probably at the limit of the original fuel system on 95ron

[The Batman]

You don't have to run super it'd up to you what fuel you map the ecu on