Scotty Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 Dispite your insightful post I still struggle to understand The Audi site quotes 5.6 (Saloon) and 5.8 (Avant). Are Audi being conservative or did they manage to shave half a sec off by some other means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sven Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 I also found the figures tend to vary (slightly) from site to site. Depends how they measure, if they measure themselves or just copy the figures from elsewhere I guess. I could imagine Audi would be on the conservative side though, to avoid any possible complaints? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woppum Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 [ QUOTE ] And Woppum, even with 280 you'd still be a spec in my mirror [/ QUOTE ] But quite possibly the best looking spec, you have ever seen -o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loddrik Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 Out of interest, what are the costs and what is needed to get an R32 from standard to 280bhp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riz Posted January 25, 2004 Report Share Posted January 25, 2004 Remap and exhaust i think. Having sports cams pushes it to 300bhp Riz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brabus Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] According to 1/4 Mile Rivals Make, Model, 0-30, 0-60, 0-100, 1/4 mile, Terminal Speed Audi RS4, 1.7, 4.7, 11.2, 13.2, 108 Audi RS2, 1.5, 4.8, , 13.5, Audi S4 Avant(New), 1.7, 5.2, 13.3, 13.6, 103 Audi S4, 1.9, 5.5, 14.8, 14.3, 99 Audi S3, 1.9. 6.4, 16.4, 14.7, 94 Golf R32, 1.9, 6.5, 15.6, 14.7, 97 BMW E46 M3, 2.0, 4.8, 11.5, 13.4, 107 BMW M5, , 5.4, 13.6, 14.0, McLaren F1, 1.8, 3.2, 6.3, 11.1, 138 Put that in as its the RS2's claim to fame, the RS2 and the RS4 are quicker than a McLaren F1 (to 30 anyway) Shows how good the RS2 was though, still one of the quickest cars over 1/4 mile [/ QUOTE ] Sorry, but these figures look well dodgy. I know that a "standard" S3 for example would no way in hell do a 1/4 time like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botang Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 What would you expect a satndard S3 to do it in then, is there anybody on here that has took their S3 up the Pod? I bet its not far off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 I tend to agree - most of the S3's I've seen were pulling high 14's and low 15's - standard. Also, the RS4 figure is about bang on. RobK got a 13.1 in his (then standard) and I think my best was about 12.5 when running about 465BHP. They don't look dodgy to me apart from 14s for the M5. That looks a bit odd - only .7 off an S3 sounds like crap I'd have thought it would have been around the rs4's range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brabus Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 Well according to that site the M5 does; [ QUOTE ] BMW M5 2.1 4.6 10.6 13.0 111 [/ QUOTE ] So there was something dodgy about the figures...a bit optimistic copying and pasting maybe? Cant be arsed to check the others right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 I have never seen an M5 beat an RS4 up the stip and I must have seen them race the best part of 10 times. It seems to be the take off where the M5 always loses ground, then its neck & neck But then again an M3 and an RS4 are pretty matched on the road, but most would say the M5 was faster. Personally I think its all crap and down to the driver. Too bloody close to make the dammdest difference in most circumstances. Unless its wet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 Totally agree with Mac, When we were out (me in my Rs6 and Mac in his Rs4).. there was so little in it it was amazing.. Actaully, because Mac is so small he was maybe just a tad quicker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 Fastest tape-tape dump I've ever done anyhows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Well according to that site the M5 does; [ QUOTE ] BMW M5 2.1 4.6 10.6 13.0 111 [/ QUOTE ] So there was something dodgy about the figures...a bit optimistic copying and pasting maybe? Cant be arsed to check the others right now. [/ QUOTE ] Oh I don't believe an M5 can regularly do 4.6 0-60 either. Like I said I've never seen an M5 beat an RS4 at Santa Pod - and certainly not to 60 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Fastest tape-tape dump I've ever done anyhows [/ QUOTE ] LOL.. looking back that was funny.. burning away from a police car at 120 is not reccommended Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 He was probably pretending not to see or hear cos of the way we took off. Scene from the Last Starfighter springs to mind Lol what was it an escort or something? Trying to keep up with an RS4 & an RS6 at full chat, wouldn't have fancied his chances somehow. Saying that doubt we could have outran his radio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woppum Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Out of interest, what are the costs and what is needed to get an R32 from standard to 280bhp? [/ QUOTE ] The remap brings the power up to 260nhp/lbs, then the miltek will give you 270-80bhp/lbs depending on how warn in your car is. When speakimng to AMD the other day they told me a woman who had ragged their car to begin with, who had 20k miles on the clock was getting a 250bhp reading on the RR. In future, rag your cars to crap from the start!!! Also a guy with 50k on the clock with a 210 S3 had a start reding of 250BHP, then 279.1 after the remap!!! Cant feckin believe it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigR Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Also a guy with 50k on the clock with a 210 S3 had a start reding of 250BHP, then 279.1 after the remap!!! [/ QUOTE ] 40bhp over standard ?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Saying that doubt we could have outran his radio [/ QUOTE ] Dunno mate, I was approaching Mach3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woppum Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 It may have been 240bhp, but i was there and saw the figures... i know unbelevable... just shows what wearing in can do!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidicks Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] O yeah... and faster than Chris P's Car to 30 [/ QUOTE ] Woppum Any chance you could add <font color="red"> "But considerably slower between 30mph and 60mph where it really matters" </font> to your Signature ? Thanks Sidicks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woppum Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 Sorry siddicks, i tried but the sig would be too long. Just deleted the 0-30 thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mollox Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] It may have been 240bhp, but i was there and saw the figures... i know unbelevable... just shows what wearing in can do!!! [/ QUOTE ] Mine was a year old and had 10k on the clock when it posted 212 bhp and 211 lb/ft. There must have been something 'wrong' with that rolling road as the highest I have heard a standard AWK S3 to hit is 230 and certainly not 240 or even 250! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidicks Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] Just deleted the 0-30 thing [/ QUOTE ] Shame, that bit was funny !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woppum Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It may have been 240bhp, but i was there and saw the figures... i know unbelevable... just shows what wearing in can do!!! [/ QUOTE ] Mine was a year old and had 10k on the clock when it posted 212 bhp and 211 lb/ft. There must have been something 'wrong' with that rolling road as the highest I have heard a standard AWK S3 to hit is 230 and certainly not 240 or even 250! [/ QUOTE ] I dunno, i thought it was suprising aswell, but i saw the figs, and i doubt AMD are wrong??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woppum Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Just deleted the 0-30 thing [/ QUOTE ] Shame, that bit was funny !! [/ QUOTE ] I know me and Ricky Gervais go way back, he gave me a coupe of pointers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now