Kia Owners Club Forum banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
666 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Very interested in a GTI Line S, great looking car and looks like it will be fun.
I grow more tired of big cars every day.
Haven't driven one yet for obvious reasons, but already interested in a remap.
It's 99bhp per tonne, which is 'ok' but not great
It's less than the likes of a Peugeot 106 Rallye from years ago, that was around 130bhp per tonne.
I've heard 140bhp is possible, but wouldn't want to stress it.
Around 115-120bhp would be cool.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
666 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Yeah 118bhp would be nice.
I suppose there might be some hardware changes between the two.
For some reason Alpina BMW changed quite a few items on my D3 to take it from the standard 170bhp to 200bhp.
They changed the turbo, injectors and intercooler.
Seems excessive for a 30bhp increase that could have been done with a remap!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
I presume when (or if) you get the power upped by approx 20% or more you will be upgrading the brakes and informing your insurers of the changes?

When we bought the wifes Fabia TSi there were 2 engine specs to chose from at he time in the TSi, a 95 PS and a 110 PS. There was a £600 price difference between the 2 which seemed one hell of a lot for another 15 PS (16%) but on a test drive the extra 30 torques that the 110 version had really did make a difference. When you looked at the specs there was more than simply a map change, the 110 PS had a 6 speed box and bigger brakes which made £600 look like a bargain. A quote form our insurer showed that there was no difference in cost either.

So why not buy a car with the power you desire rather than modding and possibly ruining your new car. Mods would almost certainly make your warranty void if they caused engine and transmission issues in the future and despite what the vendor will tell you Kia will know what you have done when the read the ECU.

I have tuned cars in the past but that was back in the days when they had one year warranties and pretty much everything was clockwork making life very easy. Take an 1100 Escort and the oily bits from one or more written off 1600's and you could have the car of your dreams for peanuts and a day on the drive with a couple of mates.

Would not do it these days to a modern car.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
666 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
I presume when (or if) you get the power upped by approx 20% or more you will be upgrading the brakes and informing your insurers of the changes?

When we bought the wifes Fabia TSi there were 2 engine specs to chose from at he time in the TSi, a 95 PS and a 110 PS. There was a £600 price difference between the 2 which seemed one hell of a lot for another 15 PS (16%) but on a test drive the extra 30 torques that the 110 version had really did make a difference. When you looked at the specs there was more than simply a map change, the 110 PS had a 6 speed box and bigger brakes which made £600 look like a bargain. A quote form our insurer showed that there was no difference in cost either.

So why not buy a car with the power you desire rather than modding and possibly ruining your new car. Mods would almost certainly make your warranty void if they caused engine and transmission issues in the future and despite what the vendor will tell you Kia will know what you have done when the read the ECU.

I have tuned cars in the past but that was back in the days when they had one year warranties and pretty much everything was clockwork making life very easy. Take an 1100 Escort and the oily bits from one or more written off 1600's and you could have the car of your dreams for peanuts and a day on the drive with a couple of mates.

Would not do it these days to a modern car.
Inform insurance, of course, many won't even charge extra.
Upgrade the brakes, no need.
You're not changing the weight of the car, or asking it to stop from a higher top speed, so if the brakes are good now they will continue to be good.
As for the 95bhp and 110bhp Tsi VAG engines, funnily enough I have the 95bhp Polo (and have a tuning box waiting to be fitted to take it to 120bhp)
The 110bhp version gets a 6 speed gear box and disc rear brakes, the front brakes are the same.
The differences are nothing to do with the extra performance, they're more marketing ploys to justify the extra price.
I mean, we have to think about this, what would it say about the brakes on the 95bhp version if adding a measly 15bhp suddenly made them inadequate?
But if all VAG did was add 15bhp and nothing else people would just save money and go for the 95bhp (as I did).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
826 Posts
Upgrade the brakes, no need.
You're not changing the weight of the car, or asking it to stop from a higher top speed, so if the brakes are good now they will continue to be good.
Alas your theory is flawed PicantoABZ. The more energy provided by the engine when accelerating means more latent energy the car has to absorb, and this has to absorbed by the brakes when stopping. My Fabia 1.2 htp (70bhp) is not much lighter than the Fabia Vrs (130bhp) but the 0-60 times are vastly different as are the size of the brakes needed to absorb that extra 60bhp. That's why the Escort Mexico had upgraded brakes over the bog standard 1100. :geek: :)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
666 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Alas your theory is flawed PicantoABZ. The more energy provided by the engine when accelerating means more latent energy the car has to absorb, and this has to absorbed by the brakes when stopping. My Fabia 1.2 htp (70bhp) is not much lighter than the Fabia Vrs (130bhp) but the 0-60 times are vastly different as are the size of the brakes needed to absorb that extra 60bhp. That's why the Escort Mexico had upgraded brakes over the bog standard 1100. :geek: :)
Extreme comparisons are pointless.
Of course a 130bhp Fabia VRS uses different brakes from a 70bhp Fabia, as it's potentially being expected to haul the car down from a far higher top speed.
Which is an example of when I said upgraded brakes ARE required.
Same as how the Picanto GT uses bigger brakes than the 65bhp one.
But when mildly tuning the GT, you're not altering the weight or the top speed - so the standard brakes will be fine.
By all means don't believe me, but there are plenty of examples of this in the car world.
For example, when Alpina turn a normal BMW320 into a D3, they add 30bhp and loads of other stuff, but they deem the standard brakes fine.
It's not automatic that adding performance needs bigger brakes. (y)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
351 Posts
Nice to see some contribution, even if it from non-turbo Picanto owners preaching their point.:sneaky:

Out of interest, has anyone reviewed the difference in brakes from you NA 3Cyl Picanto to the Turbo version? Clearly that would put some holes in the preaching above! We only get the 1.25 and 1.0T here and the brakes are the same as I have both in the driveway!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
826 Posts
Nice to see some contribution, even if it from non-turbo Picanto owners preaching their point.:sneaky:
Sorry, sometimes I should have a cup of tea before I press the 'Post' button. :unsure: On a Picanto note I'm already looking at them (pre owned) as I like the look and size and the Fabia has now passed 1,000k miles. The VW 3 cyl 1.2 non turbo engine is a fantastic unit really and reaches its max torque and power at 3k rpm which is perfect for most situations, so if the Picanto 3 cylinder is similar I will definitely be interested.
Edit, also the VW unit is chain not belt which is a big plus for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
351 Posts
Sorry, sometimes I should have a cup of tea before I press the 'Post' button. :unsure: On a Picanto note I'm already looking at them (pre owned) as I like the look and size and the Fabia has now passed 1,000k miles. The VW 3 cyl 1.2 non turbo engine is a fantastic unit really and reaches its max torque and power at 3k rpm which is perfect for most situations, so if the Picanto 3 cylinder is similar I will definitely be interested.
Edit, also the VW unit is chain not belt which is a big plus for me.
The pull of the Picanto is very good which is why I purchased. We already had the 1.25 and the 1.0T is twice the car!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
666 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
If you can put up with the 1.25 NA engine, there are some GT-line bargains out there, it’s substantially cheaper than the 1.0T.
I don’t have to drive it to know it’s not for me though, my turbocharged 95bhp 1.0T Polo is as slow as I’m prepared to go.
I just need to decide between Picanto 1.0T and going back to an electric car (Leaf).
Both have pros and cons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,870 Posts
Inform insurance, of course, many won't even charge extra.
Upgrade the brakes, no need.
You're not changing the weight of the car, or asking it to stop from a higher top speed, so if the brakes are good now they will continue to be good.

As for the 95bhp and 110bhp Tsi VAG engines, funnily enough I have the 95bhp Polo (and have a tuning box waiting to be fitted to take it to 120bhp)
The 110bhp version gets a 6 speed gear box and disc rear brakes, the front brakes are the same.
The differences are nothing to do with the extra performance, they're more marketing ploys to justify the extra price.
I mean, we have to think about this, what would it say about the brakes on the 95bhp version if adding a measly 15bhp suddenly made them inadequate?
But if all VAG did was add 15bhp and nothing else people would just save money and go for the 95bhp (as I did).
So an engine that produces more power does not need the brakes to absorb more energy? The extra power will mean better acceleration, which will mean going faster which will mean using the brakes more often which will mean they will get hotter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
351 Posts
You guys are not taking into account some important information in your preaching!

1. We are not talking about a 1960s UK sports car with drum brakes and now that we are suffering through 2020, braking systems far exceed their daily use with the use of improved materials and cooling technologies. Effectively we have budget race car brakes as standard.
2. in an age where most cars are speed limited, the final momentum is not going to change (some of that Physics stuff from school) and the effort to slow that momentum will still be the same.

If we continue with your train of thought, it should be illegal to carry 4 passengers weighing 500kg (total) as you have increase the total weight by 50% (or in your theory reduced the braking efficiency by 50% but you will continue to bang on about a 30% increase in power.

However, as this is a Forum it makes for interesting reading:unsure:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,870 Posts
You think the brakes are spec'd to work prooperly only with no passengers or luggage in the car? You think that 3 passengers and luggage and 30% more power will not put more heat into the brakes? You think that cars which are built to a price will have brakes which have a 30% excess performance margin?. Of course stopping from <pick a speed> will create no more heat regardless of the engine power and this will be fine provided that you only plan to stop once. More power means getting to <pick a speed> more quickly (there is no poinit in having more power if you don;t plan to use it) and that means needing to use the brakes more frequently so they need to be able to lose that energy (heat) more quickly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
I presume you know as much about vehicle design as some of the worlds leading manufacturers. But lets test your points.

But when mildly tuning the GT, you're not altering the weight or the top speed - so the standard brakes will be fine.
I agree you will not be changing the weight but any increase in power will without doubt increase the top speed (unless the car is fitted with a speed limiter. Lest be honest, what would be the point of tuning a car if you did not improve its performance.

For example, when Alpina turn a normal BMW320 into a D3, they add 30bhp and loads of other stuff, but they deem the standard brakes fine.
As I said above since Alpina is a reputable tuner (part of BMW if I remember correctly) and will know a thing or 2 about brakes. Calculations will have been carried out that prove this is the case. But just because they are the same dimensions does not mean that Alpina have not changed the rotors for a set made of a superior material and the same applies to the pads. A change of friction material is well known to be of benefit, its what track day regulars do as a first upgrade (those that want to live anyway) and some companies make sets that still comply with ECE Reg 90 meaning that the car is still road legal with no need to inform your insurers.

But since you are clearly a leading brake expert who are we to argue.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
666 Posts
Discussion Starter #18 (Edited)
I presume you know as much about vehicle design as some of the worlds leading manufacturers. But lets test your points.



I agree you will not be changing the weight but any increase in power will without doubt increase the top speed (unless the car is fitted with a speed limiter. Lest be honest, what would be the point of tuning a car if you did not improve its performance.



As I said above since Alpina is a reputable tuner (part of BMW if I remember correctly) and will know a thing or 2 about brakes. Calculations will have been carried out that prove this is the case. But just because they are the same dimensions does not mean that Alpina have not changed the rotors for a set made of a superior material and the same applies to the pads. A change of friction material is well known to be of benefit, its what track day regulars do as a first upgrade (those that want to live anyway) and some companies make sets that still comply with ECE Reg 90 meaning that the car is still road legal with no need to inform your insurers.

But since you are clearly a leading brake expert who are we to argue.
A increasing power doesn’t necessarily increase top speed, you’re not taking into account things like gearing, where the car physically can’t go any faster (this is different from limiting the top speed artificially)
B The Alpina brakes are, as I said, standard 320 fare.
I wouldn't have used the term ‘standard’ if they changed the pad material or ‘Rotors’ (don’t like Americanisms, sorry) material.

i don’t have to be a ‘leading brake expert‘ to be interested in them.
You ever had to slow a bike or car from +180mph for hundreds of laps?
I have, you tend to experiment with brakes and learn a bit.
While that may not make me a world expert (grow up) I’m confident I know more than you.

Honestly, it really is just silly and ignorance of the subject for people on here to assume a small increase in power ‘needs’ new brakes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
351 Posts
There seems to be so much ignorance about power as Power Not Used = Economy and not really my issue if you don't have the required discipline to extract it!:eek:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
666 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
If we continue with (this) train of thought, it should be illegal to carry 4 passengers weighing 500kg (total) as you have increase the total weight by 50% (or in your theory reduced the braking efficiency by 50% but you will continue to bang on about a 30% increase in power.
A good point I missed on my phone.
99% of the time, there will only be me in the car.
For a given driving style, a Picanto that regularly carries passengers is more demanding on its brakes, yet I doubt the cynics on here worry about that.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top