[Biturbos4] Turbos Reliability & Replacement Cost (was: 2000 S4
b5quattro at shaw.ca
Fri Sep 2 00:16:25 EDT 2005
You're definitely right about the performance figures (acceleration) not liner with power. Because if that's the case, a tuned K04ed S4 with say 500hp (there're several on the AW forum) at the crank would do 0-60 in 2.75 sec!!
A few notes about these "other cars" you're comparing to:
1. Most of them are automatic sush as the 3.2TL Type-S and Accord V6 sedans, you loose quite a bit through the torque converter.
2. A lot of them are fwd, if you launch hard, they'll spin their wheels, thus slowing them down.
3. Hp doesn't mean a whole lot when it comes to acceleration, torque is all that matters. Acura's 3.2L may get 270hp, but it's torque figure is lower than the S4, not to mention peakier, such is the characteristic of naturally aspriated engines, which most of these are have. What that means is we can likely get the jump on them early on due to the massive torque just off idle, but then given a long enough straight and time, a similarly size and weight car with similar hp will slowly catch up or at least stop the gap from growing. In normal driving where speed is usually limited to 140 kph at most, turbocharged engines will maintain their advantage all the way through.
I understand that Volvo's I5 20vt engines with similar power figures should do better, especially when mated to a manual tranny. But I can tell you that when I drove the S60R (300hp), it honestly did not feel any faster than my stock S4, in fact my S4 felt stronger all the way through the rev range. So perhaps Volvo's ponies aren't as strong as Audi's ponies.
Lastly, having seen many dyno charts from the AW S4 crowd, a stock S4 make ~188 whp fairly consistently, that's ~250 bhp with a driveline loss of ~26%. So there, 265 hp is belieable, but any more than that is a bit far fetch.
----- Original Message -----
From: Henry Nisiewicz <hjn0316 at earthlink.net>
Date: Thursday, September 1, 2005 5:40 pm
Subject: Re: [Biturbos4] Turbos Reliability & Replacement Cost (was: 2000 S4
> Besides the B5 RS4 had 380 hp.
> Looking at the 2000-1 Audi comparisons:
> 1999 B5 A4 sedan 2.8l V-6 Quattro, 190hp, 5-spd manual, 3220#, 0-
> 60 = 7.1
> sec, QM = 15.5s @ 90.5mph. Source: Road & Track Feb, 1999.
> 2000 B5 S4 sedab 2.7l bt V-6, "250" hp, 6-spd manual, 3585#, 0-60
> = 5.5
> sec, QM = 14.1s @ 98.3 mph. Source: Road and Track Oct 1999.
> This with
> 'only' 60 hp more.
> 2000 B5 RS4 avant, 2.7l bt V-6, 380hp, 6-spd manual, 3435#, 0-60 =
> 4.9 sec.
> QM = n/a. Source S-Cars.org Audi RS-4 Avant technical
> specifications. 130
> hp more and such small improvement in acceleration?
> I recognize the performance/hp curves will not be linear.
> You can talk about dyno reading, torque curves etc. all you want,
> and they
> certainly have their validity. But explain the above.
> Then look at the performances of other 2000-2003 sport sedans with
> lessweight and more hp, and slower accelerations.
> Some examples:
> 2001 Acura 3.2 Cl Type S, 260 hp, about 3200#, 0-60 = 6.7 sec (R
> & T
> 2001 Volvo S60 T5, 247 hp, about 3200#, 0-60 = 6.6 sec, (same
> source)., and
> so on.
> Remember, I did not say definitively the B-5 S4 has 300 hp, but I
> certainlyhave reason to either suspect it has considerably more
> than 250 (or 265),
> or many other numbers are very suspect.
> > [Original Message]
> > From: <steadi at comcast.net>
> > To: <hjn0316 at earthlink.net>
> > Cc: ti at amb.org (Ti Kan) <ti at amb.org (Ti Kan)>;
> <biturbos4 at audifans.com>> Date: 8/31/2005 11:04:38 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Biturbos4] Turbos Reliability & Replacement Cost
> (was: 2000
> > No way, it would be a nice thought but nope not in the least. at
> > a stock B5 S4 has 265 HP and this has been verified with several
> > stock S4's on the same type of chasis dyno that Audi uses. (A Maha)
> > Now you might be confusing the 360hp RS4 with the S4.
> > On Aug 31, 2005, at 6:27 AM, Henry Nisiewicz wrote:
> > > All of which assumes that the B5 S4 has just 250 hp.
> > >
> > > Making comparisons in performance between the B5 A4 with the
> 2.8 l
> > > V-6, and
> > > the B5 RS-4, along with comparisons of other early 2000-1 cars
> with> > comparable horsepower and weight, leads me to believe that
> > > understated
> > > the horsepower at 250. It probably is closer to 300 or 300+.
> > > also
> > > gotten some unofficial agreement from people within Audi on
> > > issue over
> > > the past several years.
> > >
> > >
> > Eric Fletcher
> > '00 S4tt
> > RS4 K04 Turbo Conversion
> > RS4 Intake and Fuel
> > RS4 intercoolers
> > RS4 Downpipes/modded for flow
> > Miltek Exhaust
> > RS4 Flywheel/Clutch and Pressure plate
> > Penske Suspension
> > Stoptech 332 fronts Stasis 298 rear Brakes
> > Abt Z6 18x8 Wheels
> > Euro Headlights
> > and all sorts of other toys...
> Biturbos4 mailing list
> Biturbos4 at www.audifans.com
More information about the Biturbos4