sport auto out today - RS4 Nürburgring time included

[Erik]

Who in Germany subscribes and can tell us the lap time???

Pleeeeeeeeaaassssse!!! Schnell bitte!



STOP PRESS!! UPDATED!!!

8.09 min - Audi RS4




BMW M3, BMW M5, BMW M6 (tie), E55, SL65 etc.


At the Nordschleife the Audi RS4 can full advantagee out of its powerful 4.2-lites V8 engine which also will power the Audi R8. Thanks to the permanent 4WD there is no under- or oversteer, it just gets a bit unstable when braking very hard. The sports suspension plus and the optional Pirelli P Zero Corsa sports tyres allow the Audi driver to go to the limits and to be neary as fast a Porsche Carrera S at its home track.

Also fited with the optional cermaic disk brakes the RS4 showed no fading even at the race track.

The RS4 is no drift king so loses at a short track like the Hockenheimring against the more powwrful Dodge Viper but also handles better than such a heavyweight like the much more powerful Mercedes SL 65 AMG.

0 - 200 - 0 km/h in 21.8 secs., quicker than the Corvette C6 and the SLK 55 AMG thanks to the better traction of the permananet 4WD and the better brakes.

aerodynamic balance:
The RS4 is no super sportscar but a limousine prodcing no downforce at 200 km/h. It gets lighter in front than in rear thanks to the rear spoiler changing the balance positively.

1.25 max. lateral acceleration on track is not bad for a car that weigh 1728 kg. The Pirelli P Zero Corsa tyres have benen modified and now offer a better wet handling than under dry conditions.

36m Salom:

the RS4 handles well, the adaptive damper control makes it as fast as the CLK DTM AMG, looks like the RS4 also is directly derived from the DTM race car.

At the wet handling track it even handles better than the Porsche Carreras and takes the provisional pole position for that test thanks to the 4WD and the new Pirelli P Zero Corsa tyres

[Alex]

I am actually VERY excited!! I hooope that the test-car has the sport-chassi + the optional R-tires!!!!! Just want to get it over with, give us the time so that our hopes can be rewarded!!

[Alex]

http://img130.imageshack.us/my.php?i...437651d1nv.jpg

[Fab]

It a very good time

great news

Thanks

[Alex]

M5 e60 -"eat dust"

M5

[KK265]

0-200 km/h = 16,9 sec, shows very little improvement versus the previous model.I expected 1 sec better at least.Anyway the lap time is good.

[Hawk]

BMW M3 (2003)
Hockenheim 1.16,3 (Michelin Pilot Sport and stock brake)

http://www.track-challenge.com/tracktest2_e.asp?Car=236

[QuattroFun]

M6 with Corsas 63 points vs. equally heavy and much less powerful and cheaper RS4 with Corsas 65 points...

[Benman]

8:09... great time! Well done


Ben

[M!]

Breat time....impressive.

[Leadfoot]

8:09, but what is the time for a standard RS4. This one has the sports suspension plus, the optional Pirelli P Zero Corsa sports tyres and the optional cermaic disk brakes.

There's no one more an Audi fan than me, but the old M3 CSL did a time of 7:52 and it didn't have cermaic disk brakes to help it along.

I don't know how much different the M6 is than the M5, but it's a handful around the twisty road and that is actually what the ring is a road course, so to equal the M6 was good, just not great. To equal the 997 S would have been better, to have beaten it would have been great.

The B6 S4v8 avant has done the ring in 8:27, the saloon might be a couple of seconds quicker and it had none of the above. Some on the forum have done times of 8:09 in a RS6 with the same tyres. Don't think that the new M3v8 will tie with this time, it will destroy it. The talk coming from Audi was a time of about 7:58 with the optional Pirelli P Zero Corsa sports tyres, so can someone tell me what when wrong?

[M!]

Indeed.The next M3 is gonna distroy the 8.09 time.
They have the experiens of the CSL so they know what to do for good time.
If the RS4 did it in 8.09 with the cheramic breaks and sport chassi, what time would the standard RS4 do?

Personaly i think Audi cars are to heavy to do really great times. Only the Quattro system waights about 150kg i think, even moore.
Even if the RS4 came with an "CSL" version it would be to heavy if you compere to the M3 CSL.

But 8.09 is a great time.

[Hawk]

Originally posted by Leadfoot
There's no one more an Audi fan than me, but the old M3 CSL did a time of 7:52 and it didn't have cermaic disk brakes to help it along.

7.50

[Leadfoot]

The CSL is unusual in that M3 did a time of 8:20 and somehow giving it 17bhp more, taking 100lbs off and giving it special tyres, it made up the best part of half a minute. I will never underdstand how.

Look at the M5 and then the M6, both basically the same car apart from the fact that the M6 weights about 100lbs less and has the same special tyres of the M3 CSL, but the difference between the two is only 4 seconds.

Now you see my difficulty, how come in one gains 4 seconds and other 30 secounds?

[njaudi1]

I thought Frank Stippler did it in 7:58 with the rs4

[M!]

Originally posted by Leadfoot
The CSL is unusual in that M3 did a time of 8:20 and somehow giving it 17bhp more, taking 100lbs off and giving it special tyres, it made up the best part of half a minute. I will never underdstand how.

Look at the M5 and then the M6, both basically the same car apart from the fact that the M6 weights about 100lbs less and has the same special tyres of the M3 CSL, but the difference between the two is only 4 seconds.

Now you see my difficulty, how come in one gains 4 seconds and other 30 secounds?

M6 has not the same tires as the CSL!
CSL runs on race slicks that you cant even use in wet conditions.
The other main difference is that CSL is so mutch lighter than the M6.
M6 is 1710kg and the CSL is 1385! thats almoust 330kg in favor for the CSL.

My point is that it doesn´t matter if you put 800bhp in a M6, its still to heavy round a track, a CSLwith less power is still gonna be faster, basicly because of the weight.

[Benman]

Originally posted by njaudi1
I thought Frank Stippler did it in 7:58 with the rs4

Yeah really, what ever happened to that?

Ben

[Leadfoot]

M6 has not the same tires as the CSL!
CSL runs on race slicks that you cant even use in wet conditions.
The other main difference is that CSL is so mutch lighter than the M6.
M6 is 1710kg and the CSL is 1385! thats almoust 330kg in favor for the CSL.

My point is that it doesn´t matter if you put 800bhp in a M6, its still to heavy round a track, a CSLwith less power is still gonna be faster, basicly because of the weight. [/QUOTE]

You're missing my point. Basically the weight difference is the same between the M3 v CSL and M5 v M6, my point being how can the CSL gain 26 seconds basically down to a small power increase and slightly better tyres. Remember BMW said if the tyres were changed it would be 8-10 seconds slower, that still would leave a difference of 16 seconds between what the M6 improved?