C&D comparison: S6 vs M5 vs AMG E63

[ArthurPE]

[sakimano]

I don't see that "cliff" that is supposed to be somewhere after 7K that you keep referencing...well running cars don't seem to have it.

There's insufficient data to go on, we can't see the gear or speed. Speed increases with RPM as well, so naturally more aerodynamic resistance and tire friction will make acceleration slow down the higher you go anyway (assuming power levels off or drops slightly)
That said, I can't make many statements about your particular car. Maybe it doesn't breathe as well at the very top as some others. I've seen some that definitely do not "slow down" dramatically above 7500... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzbBRoIhODY

Do you know every RS4 on earth?
Your ET doesn't prove much, except that you got a stellar launch. What was the trap speed?
Have any vids (speedo preferably, not too interested in 1/4 runs)

1. who said there's a cliff? I said the car goes flat. Those maha dyno'd cars look great. The first one goes flat. The second one is using such a ridiculous scale, the steepness in the curve is artificial.

2. i already told you the logs were all in 3rd gear. Ignoring my data is convenient, I understand that. Carry on. Do you do any testing on your own other than reading graphs. I'd love to see some of the data you've acquired on your own RS4.

3. lol are you serious? Why do I need to 'know' every RS4 on earth? What I do know is that I administer a quarter mile database for RS4s and of the data I've seen from Australia to Europe to the Americas on every Audi forum out there and including all automotive journals (many of whom don't even use proper dragstrips), my car was the fastest stock RS4 time, so it's not limping or impaired. 12.75 @ 108.36. What was your best time/trap? As for 'it only proves you had a stellar launch' that's cute. My 60' time was a decent, but not great 1.83-1.86 all day. I had a 12.75, 12.77, 12.79 the same day. Here's a video since you like them...

My 3 quickest runs (12.75, 12.77, 12.79)
http://youtu.be/Y2zYzRiNDnk

Me vs. a C63 same day (12.82 for me)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYhGs3NeaQk

Any other video requests? I have a bunch.

[ArthurPE]

my magazine came today
after scanning it (a good read will follow) I think it is a valid and interesting eval
the S6 beat the M5 in the performance catagories, better brake & steering feel, etc.
I'm guessing if the S6 had the same quality of tire and 19's in lieu of the 20's, it may have improved its performance a bit

[JCviggen]

1. who said there's a cliff? I said the car goes flat.

Based on those plots (and your own) you still need to shift near the limiter to get the most out of it. If you short shift it you'll drop to a part of the power band where you're much worse off than at 8K. That's obvious from all the plots I've seen so far. That was my point...you however seem to think shifting at 7500 is better, I can't see a reason for that in the material so far provided.

I'd love to see some of the data you've acquired on your own RS4.

I have an RS6, doesn't mean I can't read power graphs. I didn't see it was a third gear pull, anyway, you can't draw any conclusions from 1 car, or 1 review for that matter.
Yours may well not run as well as others at high revs, that doesn't mean it's supposed to be like that. I've posted quite a few now including a vid of a very fast one that exhibit no such behavior.

Why do I need to 'know' every RS4 on earth?

Well you claimed yours was the fastest of the planet didn't you? If you meant "every RS4 I've seen a timeslip for" that's a small difference (less than 1% of the ones out there I guess)
ETs are worthless to compare, especially european dragstrips never get near the ET's of the American ones, but trap speeds are similar. You'll always see differences from one track to the next anyway, it's not entirely scientific.
A <beep> driver or a poor track can be a second slower ET but still show the same trap speed, because it's almost entirely based on power (well to be fair you do need to be able to shift quick as well)
I didn't look too hard but I did find one test that had 12.8 @ 108.5 which for all intents and purposes is identical to yours, it's not a freak result.
http://www.insideline.com/audi/rs4/2007 ... -is-f.html

Any other video requests? I have a bunch.

Speedo please!

Something like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgBpgoIWUtM
Or my (way quicker I should add) home tuned Volvo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N_Pe6lG-sI

[sakimano]

So you don't own an rs4 (thus haven't tested anything you're ranting about), make bold statements and invent quotes that I never made ...and are confused.about the quarter mile but are going to lecture me on it...

Let's agree to disagree

[JCviggen]

So you don't own an rs4 (thus haven't tested anything you're ranting about)

I have very nearly as much information now compared to actually owning one. I would say data from multiple cars is more relevant than that from 1 car anyway.
You're dismissing the data I came up with for no good reason (me not owning the cars is not one)
You say they go flat above xxxx and that shifting earlier works better, I showed you video, and data, that a good running one simply doesn't. Multiple dyno plots disagree with your statement. I haven't commented on how your particular car behaves, you're the only expert on your own car. It would have to drop off a hell of a lot to be worth putting up with sub-6000rpm power which is where you end up when you shift early.
It's possible. But either it's not supposed to be that way, or RS4's magically dyno better than they drive IRL. I know which one is more likely.

invent quotes that I never made

What? like

faster than any other stock RS4 on earth

Car starts to fall flat on its face at about 7500

I'm not in the game of putting words in other people's mouths, if you feel wronged please be specific.

Let's agree to disagree

That much is obvious
Would still like to see speedo/tach vids if I'm not on your ignore list yet.

[sakimano]

as I said, you have nothing to go by but other people's dyno charts. I have my own acceleration testing, which I value far higher than other people's dyno charts. I could post a boat load of dyno charts showing RS4 who don't just go flat, but go negative. Again...I'd rather drive my car.

If you want to see a speedo video of someone doubling or tripling the speed limit, go buy an RS4. Here all along I was listening to you thinking you'd actually driven and tested this on an RS4. Guess that was silly of me.

My comment about fastest RS4 on earth was relating to quarter mile times. Editing that part out of my quote is funny but makes you look silly since everything is in writing in this thread. As for the quarter mile, yes you showed you're not very well versed. Comments like this...

ETs are worthless to compare, especially european dragstrips never get near the ET's of the American ones, but trap speeds are similar.

That shows you just don't know what you're talking about. NHRA/IHRA tracks ALL calculate trap speed the same way. In fact the US based speeds are an average over the final section of the track, while the European 'dragstrips' use terminal speed, thus are HIGHER than US trap speeds. I use the term dragstrip lightly regarding European results...almost none are NHRA/IHRA certified other than Santa Pod...they are mostly runways with some temporary timing equipment setup. I wish there were more certified tracks because it's fun to compare the data. When you compare an NHRA/IHRA certified track's result to a non-certified track, you may as well compare to a guy holding a stopwatch and eyeballing the result. This gap between a European 'dragstrip and a proper certified dragstrip may also explain your perception of ETs being slower over there (although I don't see that) as comparing a prepared dragstrip to a random paved runway that has been abandoned is not going to yield the same traction/consistency. Again...those times 'don't count' other than to compare each other at that particular track. The NHRA/IHRA tracks can at least benefit from consistency and the certification standards that earn them that stamp. So compare Santa Pod times to US based times and you'll find things line up well.

When you reference an insideline test by edmunds, again, you're showing that you are talking about something entirely different and your definition of 1/4 mile is far different to mine. I'm talking about times at actual dragstrips. You're talking about casually instrumented times. Car and Driver, Road and Track and edmunds all use portable timing equipment on what they hope are 'flat' surfaces, however they're usually on the straight away section of a racetrack, or in a large parking lot. Rarely do they go to a proper, instrumented, certified, level dragstrip. Motor Trend does sometimes however.

these are NOT equal

edmunds testing


dragstrip

[JCviggen]

as I said, you have nothing to go by but other people's dyno charts. I have my own acceleration testing, which I value far higher than other people's dyno charts. I could post a boat load of dyno charts showing RS4 who don't just go flat, but go negative. Again...I'd rather drive my car.

What would be really useful is a dyno plot of your car, but I do consider dyno's to be a waste of money generally if all you're after is the numbers so I don't blame you if you didn't bother with that.
But you have to admit, either the dyno numbers are somehow R4s get inflated at high rpm or your car performs worse at (very) high rpm than others.
That earlier video also shows no high rpm slowdown whatsoever, so it's not just plots on paper.

About power going negative, sure, i think most of them will be well below peak power when they get to the limiter. If the drop isn't too much you're still better off shifting late, it's plain to see how much less power there is below 6K. Shifting AT peak power is almost never ideal unless peak power happens to be at the limiter and you have no other choice. To maximize the power band (if it's not extraordinarily flat) most cars are shifted past peak power.

If you want to see a speedo video of someone doubling or tripling the speed limit, go buy an RS4

How am I supposed to know that you never filmed any 1/4 runs in the car or something like that?
For the record, my videos were all done on roads without speed limit. Living close to Germany has its benefits.

I'll agree with you on the drag strips, we just don't have many in europe. I know one in the UK and one in Sweden which are somewhat similar to US but all the others are usually temporary and offer nowhere near the level of grip of a prepared drag strip (I never quite understood the relevance of racing on a surface that is way more grippy than any real road out there but that's another discussion)

The main thing I wanted to get across is that the same car could run 13.0 at 100.x and 14.0 at 100.x if he messes up the launch. Trap speed doesn't budge much but ETs do.
If you want to compare power you'd be comparing the trap speeds not the ETs.

At this point I'm not entirely certain what we started arguing about, it was the C7 S6 IIRC. I stand by my comment that it had more than 420bhp to reach those figures.

[sakimano]

lol we both said it has more than 420 hp. I said 450 hp/435 torque stock, but with a killer curve.

with respect to ET vs. trap speeds, again, I'm well aware of the intricacies. As I mentioned I probably have 150 dragstrip passes in my B7 S4 and B7 RS4. I also adminster the largest dragstrip time database (all Audis included) on any Audi forum.

Anyway, I'll make a speedo video for you at the strip. Just for you.

[JCviggen]

Much appreciated!

Anyway we'll have to wait for actual owners (and a few more magazines) to test the new S6 before we can draw any semi definite conclusions. Good to see it's not looking like a dog so far anyway!

[sakimano]

want to bet on wheel horsepower the S6 makes?

I say 375

[JCviggen]

On what dyno?

It'll probably make a drop over 300 on a MAHA and closer to 400 on the "right" dynojet...(subtract 50hp if the dyno has a hairdryer for a cooling fan)
Then you could have a muppet doing a run in 3rd or 5th instead of 4th which all gives different wheel numbers.

We'd really have to buy one

[sakimano]

On what dyno?

It'll probably make a drop over 300 on a MAHA and closer to 400 on the "right" dynojet...(subtract 50hp if the dyno has a hairdryer for a cooling fan)
Then you could have a muppet doing a run in 3rd or 5th instead of 4th which all gives different wheel numbers.

We'd really have to buy one

mustang dyno or dynojet. We could make it the first 3 that are done, then average the numbers.

p.s. I'm under the impression the mustang is far easier to rig/manipulate. So are a few people. Dynojets get a bad name. I've never dyno'd (and likely never will) so I don't care much. Just interesting.

[JCviggen]

Could be true, I've seen large swings between mustang dyno's but then again I haven't seen that many, not even one in europe.

Dynojets are fairly consistent, just consistently (too) high. Not a problem if comparison is all we're after I suppose.

Thing is, I'd also guess somewhere between 370 and 380 then lol. Doesn't leave much of a gap between our guesses, I'll go for 380 if they're actually trapping 115mph (i'm expecting more in the 112 range personally)

The 400hp 550i with a very similar setup gets 380-385 stock (but oddly traps 110mph in the quarter....) but that only counts inertia losses from 2 wheels where the S6 will have all 4 wheels measured plus a bit of loss from the extra diffs but minus the automatic (TC) box...I think both our guesses should be close to spot on.