GOLFMK8
GOLFMK7
GOLFMK6
GOLFMKV

APR Stage 1 Low Torque (91) or Stage 1 (91) Tune?

COMK7GTI

New member
Location
Denver, CO
What are your thoughts on choosing between the tunes? What are your experiences with them? I have a 6MT


APR Stage 1 Low Torque (91)
APR Stage 1 (91)
 

Jarbear

Ready to race!
Location
SF Bay Area
Both will cause clutch slip. It's inevitable, even with the low torque tune. You may prolong clutch life by driving easy, but will end up replacing the clutch eventually.

Long story short, save up for a clutch upgrade then skip Stage 1 all together.
 

GTI-Jay

Ready to race!
Location
USA
i did 30k on a npm. WOT everyday / lots of highway pulls and didn't have a problem with the clutch. May started slipping at 31k who knows after i sold it? i don't know. Just saying that it wasn't an instant death.

5k on my jb4 and new gti and clutch fine there too.
 

Rafiki76

Ready to race!
Location
Los Angeles
Car(s)
MKVII GTI
For stage I I would advise regular 91. Stage II is when you could more properly consider LO just for traction and less immediate stress in 1st. But that's just my opinion. I'm gonna flash Stage I then Stage II LO
 

ucfquattroguy

Ready to race!
Location
Florida USA
In before the "ALL THE HORSEPOWERS! LOW-OUTPUT SUCKS" crowd comes running...

Depends what you're after. I'll be pulling the trigger on their Low-Output file the next time a sale rolls around. Being able to have 290-295hp with a "mild" tune with a less aggressive torque onset is very attractive to me. If the graphs on APR's website are representative, it seems a bit more OEM+ in nature. It's Golf R power with a bit more torque.
 

ILoveButter

Ready to race!
Location
Worshington
In before the "ALL THE HORSEPOWERS! LOW-OUTPUT SUCKS" crowd comes running...

Depends what you're after. I'll be pulling the trigger on their Low-Output file the next time a sale rolls around. Being able to have 290-295hp with a "mild" tune with a less aggressive torque onset is very attractive to me. If the graphs on APR's website are representative, it seems a bit more OEM+ in nature. It's Golf R power with a bit more torque.

Yeah, but when all the torques kick in so low it's very nice to have
 

Crudulous

Ready to race!
Location
US
Being able to have 290-295hp with a "mild" tune with a less aggressive torque onset is very attractive to me. If the graphs on APR's website are representative, it seems a bit more OEM+ in nature. It's Golf R power with a bit more torque.
Yes, that was my experience. Had stage 1 HO for a few months and now settled with LO on a GTI DSG. The LO more than sheds the ignition delay and throttle lag that plague our cars and top end power almost equals HO.

One thing noteworthy is APR limits torque by gear for increased traction and limits torque from lugging cruising gears. I've also gone through a few revisions of the LO file (12k miles tuned now). Early on I experienced some WOT spool up knock - that's gone. Last I spoke with APR, the latest revision can do more than just pulling timing for bad gas, it detunes power outright. Novel concept, right?! All in all it drives like something worthy of a warranty.
 

Revolver66

Go Kart Champion
Location
Mid-South
In before the "ALL THE HORSEPOWERS! LOW-OUTPUT SUCKS" crowd comes running...

Depends what you're after. I'll be pulling the trigger on their Low-Output file the next time a sale rolls around. Being able to have 290-295hp with a "mild" tune with a less aggressive torque onset is very attractive to me. If the graphs on APR's website are representative, it seems a bit more OEM+ in nature. It's Golf R power with a bit more torque.
Old topic but
100% - LO puts the car up to roughly Clubsport/Cupra 290 levels. It's VERY linear...
That's good enough for me. 380 ft/lb just seems a bit, well, much?
 

eurospek

Just finished watching Fast&Fu
Location
Chicago
Subscribing as I too have been looking at Stage 1 on my 6 speed. No interest in Stage 2.
 

Revolver66

Go Kart Champion
Location
Mid-South
I'm torn between the APR low output or Unitronic stage 1 for a mild OEM+ tune.

The LO tune has a VERY progressive power band. It feels completely stock. No big power burst in the mid-range. It ends up in the same place as HO once you're at 6K+ RPM.
Heck: If I could get a tune that was less powerful, like 295 HP/310 TQ, I would probably take that. Seems like it would be less wear on the components.
May go JB4 because it's easily removable but my friend has been telling me all about his 335is JB4 for years. It does have a "personality" that requires getting used to/involved with and isnt a simple "here's more power, move along".
 

GroceryGTIer

Drag Racing Champion
Location
Tri-state
The LO tune has a VERY progressive power band. It feels completely stock. No big power burst in the mid-range. It ends up in the same place as HO once you're at 6K+ RPM.
Heck: If I could get a tune that was less powerful, like 295 HP/310 TQ, I would probably take that. Seems like it would be less wear on the components.
May go JB4 because it's easily removable but my friend has been telling me all about his 335is JB4 for years. It does have a "personality" that requires getting used to/involved with and isnt a simple "here's more power, move along".

I think that’s why a lot of people go with uni or GIAC, not that the LO file isn’t good.
 

ucfquattroguy

Ready to race!
Location
Florida USA
The LO doesn't "feel" impressive because of how the torque curve is shaped. But I assure you, the car friggin' scoots. All other things held equal, I'll bet the only place you would really appreciate the HO file is if you're doing long pulls on the highway. Short little squirts around non-highway roads that are less than a few seconds there will be little to no difference between the two with respect to actual performance.

I went with it for multiple reasons: Better drivability for putting power down (no peaky torque delivery), long-term wear on DSG clutches should be improved, and I didn't want to be swapping plugs every 10-15k miles.
 
Top