R8 Ring time achived by Sport auto is...

[KresoF1]

...8.04min!!!(standard suspension, Ceramic Brakes, bucket seats, Corsa tires)

Just as a reference:

RS4 8.09min(SS+, Ceramics, Corsa's)
Aston V8 Vantaage 8.03min(Corsa's)
Porsche 997CS 8.05min(PCCBs, -20mm/LSD, Michelin Pilot2 N1)
Ferrari F430F1 7.55min(Ceramics, Corsa's)
Porsche 997 Turbo(manual, LSD, PCCBs, Michelin Cup's)
Corvette Z06 7.49min
Porsche 997 GT3 7.48min(PCCBs, Michelin Cup's)

I am very dissapointed...

Leadie,
You own me at least I bear... I am very sorry that I was right!

[Erik]

8.04 is not a bad time.

People expect too much these days.
The difference between the 996TT and the 997TT is 1 (ONE!) second!

Congratulations!

[Speedou]

The time is where it should be. No suprises.

[KresoF1]

8.04 is not a bad time.

People expect too much these days.
The difference between the 996TT and the 997TT is 1 (ONE!) second!

Congratulations!

Maybe Erik... But, it was Stephan Reil who said 7.55min, NOT ME!

[Erik]

Maybe Erik... But, it was Stephan Reil who said 7.55min, NOT ME!

It would be consistent with the rumored 7:59 time of the RS4 (reported by me).

Please remember that there is a difference between sport auto times and factory times set by proffessional race drivers.

How do you know the sport auto time and the factory time is set with the same distance? :vhmmm: And sometimes people confuse it with a BTG time.

IMO you can only compare sport auto times with sport auto times.
Otherwise you're comparing drivers, not cars.

[Erik]

Sport Auto

Audi R8
sport auto 06/2007
Hockenheim, kleiner Kurs 1.12,7 min
Pirelli P Zero Corsa
Ceramic

Porsche 997/911 Turbo
sport auto 05/2007
Hockenheim, kleiner Kurs 1.11,9 min
Michelin Pilot Sport Cup N0
Ceramic


EVO
Bedford West Circuit: 1.22,1min

For comparison...
F430F1 1.24,2min
Porsche 997 Turbo 1.23,55min
Porsche 997 GT3 1.23,1min
Ferrari 599GTB 1.23,1min
Lamborghini Gallardo(520hp) 1.22,8min

[Ruergard]

A little bit disappointed actually, I'd like it to do better than the AM V8 Vantage.. but still. It's a damn good time! :R8:

[Leadfoot]

...8.04min!!!(standard suspension, Ceramic Brakes, bucket seats, Corsa tires)

Just as a reference:

RS4 8.09min(SS+, Ceramics, Corsa's)
Aston V8 Vantaage 8.03min(Corsa's)
Porsche 997CS 8.05min(PCCBs, -20mm/LSD, Michelin Pilot2 N1)
Ferrari F430F1 7.55min(Ceramics, Corsa's)
Porsche 997 Turbo(manual, LSD, PCCBs, Michelin Cup's)
Corvette Z06 7.49min
Porsche 997 GT3 7.48min(PCCBs, Michelin Cup's)

I am very dissapointed...

Leadie,
You own me at least I bear... I am very sorry that I was right!

Not the time expected but like everything track conditions and temperature has to be taken in to consideration. This is not the first time the R8 has posted unexpected times in to hands of Sport Auto, their other time around Hockenheim is inconsistent with what has been achieved by many other magazines. Like Erik showed the times from EVO are much better than either the Lambo, Ferrari or Porsche.

Maybe they can't get the best from Audi cars because of the way they feel, who knows. After this I doubt the RS6 will perform as expected in their hands.:rolleyes:

I am surprised that Audi didn't supple a car with both R-Tronic and MagneticRide, both things which Stephan Reil reckoned were required for the track.

[KresoF1]

Leadie,
Stephan Reil personally delivered R8 to Sport Auto. Sport Auto requested the fastest version possible...
Regarding EVO track times... I am very, very sceptical about them...

[Leadfoot]

Leadie,
Stephan Reil personally delivered R8 to Sport Auto. Sport Auto requested the fastest version possible...
Regarding EVO track times... I am very, very sceptical about them...

Sceptical about EVO, they are the least bias magazine I have every read, unlike Autocar or some of the others.:eye:

I am a little disappointed with the time as I reckon many others, you find EVO's time sceptical but it is more consistent with other magazines than this one from Sport Auto, I am under to impression that the majority are always more right.:brag:


That is until it goes against my own personal beliefs.:D

[Kram]

And this is the video

http://www.sportauto-online.de/aktuell_U_sport/on-line/hxcms_article_504922_14652.hbs

[tazsura]

Leadie,
Stephan Reil personally delivered R8 to Sport Auto. Sport Auto requested the fastest version possible...
Regarding EVO track times... I am very, very sceptical about them...

As Leadie has suggested, EVO are the least bias motoring rag of all. And if they were to favour any car at all, it would be Porsche. So the fact that they achieved the time they did with the R8, would have been more of a shock to them, than it would to us i'm sure!:hihi:

Regarding the actual time, I find it hard to believe that an R8 WITHOUT magnetic ride would be the fastest possible verison?:confused:

Also waiting for the car to be put in the hands of a real driver...:D

Taran :applause:

[quattro Gmbh]

LOL 8:04 is just too slow:mech:

[roadrunner]

...
Regarding the actual time, I find it hard to believe that an R8 WITHOUT magnetic ride would be the fastest possible verison?:confused: ...
Taran :applause:

I do not. it was posted here already that the magnetic ride sport setting equals the non magnetic suspension setting.

A friend of mine, who has got the magnetic ride in his TT 3.2 S-tronic and has testdriven the R8 with the standard (non magnetic) suspension had the same impression.

greetings
seb.

[Leadfoot]

I do not. it was posted here already that the magnetic ride sport setting equals the non magnetic suspension setting.

A friend of mine, who has got the magnetic ride in his TT 3.2 S-tronic and has testdriven the R8 with the standard (non magnetic) suspension had the same impression.

greetings
seb.

No the MagneticRide in 'sport mode' is firmer than the standard suspension while the 'comfort/normal mode' is slightly softer. Regardless of whether it's a Porsche or an Audi, these types of suspension offer better grip especially on the track. The same will apply to the R-Tronic for track use, on the road I would chose a manual but on the track a semi-auto will always the better option.

Now don't get my wrong, 8:04 is still a good time when compared to the likes of the 997C4S but this is not a reflection of what other magazines have found when testing the R8 against cars that have posted much better times than it on the ring. It's lateral grip is better than all of the cars that post similar times on the ring and it also out performs them in both acceleration and braking. I just find the time posted by Sport Auto very unusual based on what other testers have found.

Maybe it's the ring effect that 7:53RS6 talks about. ;)

[Arslanoff]

I think it is a bit slow for R8! Just 5 sek faster then RS4, but compare weight and space, RS4 Clubsport won't be slower then R8, and for the same price, guys!!! + more space and comfort!

[KresoF1]

Leadie,
R8 is according to Sport Auto(and not only Sport Auto but, all German mags) marginally faster in acceleration then RS4. Difference in 0-200km/h is just 0.4s and IMHO this is nothing. Same thing about in gear acceleration(say 80km/h till 180km/h), difference is below 0.5s...

So, only excellent suspension setup, better aerodynamics and little bit lowe weight is responsible for 5s better time on the Ring.

EVO will very soon publish road test between R8, 997 Turbo and some other sporscars... Just a hint-you definitely will not be pleased with the R8 results and their final conclusion...

[Ruergard]

EVO will very soon publish road test between R8, 997 Turbo and some other sporscars... Just a hint-you definitely will not be pleased with the R8 results and their final conclusion...

What happened with "A new dawn starts today."

In the last test the loved it on the roads and now it's dislike? I don't get it.. when will the next magazine be out?

[buyalemon]

9 sec behind F430 with 490 hp ...quite expected with the same tires!

[Damienr8]

I think with the perfect temperature, tires, etc, the R8 can achieve a 7:55 time, which would be absolutely fantastic for the car. The time for the AMv8 must have been achieved with PERFECT conditions because I do not think the AM is more capable than the audi in respect to acceleration, handling, balance....:stick:

[Leadfoot]

Leadie,
R8 is according to Sport Auto(and not only Sport Auto but, all German mags) marginally faster in acceleration then RS4. Difference in 0-200km/h is just 0.4s and IMHO this is nothing. Same thing about in gear acceleration(say 80km/h till 180km/h), difference is below 0.5s...

So, only excellent suspension setup, better aerodynamics and little bit lowe weight is responsible for 5s better time on the Ring.

EVO will very soon publish road test between R8, 997 Turbo and some other sporscars... Just a hint-you definitely will not be pleased with the R8 results and their final conclusion...

When I said cars posting similar times I meant the likes of the Vantage and the 997C4S, both cars which haven't as high a lateral cornering speed as the R8 and both are slightly slower in acceleration and braking. Basically the R8 should have posted a time closer to that of the 997tt instead of the standard Carrera 4S. To say it's only slightly quicker than a RS4 is plain silly, check the difference in cornering speeds and lateral Gs, the R8 is in a different league to the RS4.

I will wait for this test from EVO and will post my opinion after reading it.

As for the R8 only being slightly quicker than a RS4 in acceleration, what did you expect, it has the same engine and power output, it's slightly lighter but has a less efficient awd system. EVO got the R8 to lap the track 6 seconds faster than a RS4, now that sounds like the improvement was a lot more than just weight and aerodynamics don't you think. ;)

[KresoF1]

September issue, not August one AFAIK...

And they still love R8 but, they start to love 997 Turbo as much...

[KresoF1]

When I said cars posting similar times I meant the likes of the Vantage and the 997C4S, both cars which haven't as high a lateral cornering speed as the R8 and both are slightly slower in acceleration and braking. Basically the R8 should have posted a time closer to that of the 997tt instead of the standard Carrera 4S. To say it's only slightly quicker than a RS4 is plain silly, check the difference in cornering speeds and lateral Gs, the R8 is in a different league to the RS4.

I will wait for this test from EVO and will post my opinion after reading it.

As for the R8 only being slightly quicker than a RS4 in acceleration, what did you expect, it has the same engine and power output, it's slightly lighter but has a less efficient awd system. EVO got the R8 to lap the track 6 seconds faster than a RS4, now that sounds like the improvement was a lot more than just weight and aerodynamics don't you think. ;)

Leadie,
Since you are from UK you really need to read EVO more carefully...

RS4 tested by EVO(same car that is under long-term test) is with standard suspension, standard brakes and Michelin Pilot Sport 2 tires...

On the other hand RS4 tested by Sport Auto in their Supertest features Sport Suspension Plus, Ceramic Brakes and Pirelli Corsa tires...

Do you see the difference? EVO tested normal(slowest) version and Sport Auto tested most sporty(fastest) version.
BTW, Sport Auto alwasy request the fastest version form each car they test in their Supertest.

Regarding lateral Gs... In Sport Auto Supertest both RS4 and R8 achived same result 1.3g...

Just watch R8, 997TT and Z06 video from:
http://www.sportauto-online.de/multimedia/videos/

You can clearly see that von Saurma is working much harder to be fast in 997TT then in R8. R8 is very, very driver friendly IMHO. And my conclusion is based on my R8 test drive.
I still love R8 a lot and will keep it as I will my also forthcoming 997TT.

[Leadfoot]

Leadie,
Since you are from UK you really need to read EVO more carefully...

RS4 tested by EVO(same car that is under long-term test) is with standard suspension, standard brakes and Michelin Pilot Sport 2 tires...

On the other hand RS4 tested by Sport Auto in their Supertest features Sport Suspension Plus, Ceramic Brakes and Pirelli Corsa tires...

Do you see the difference? EVO tested normal(slowest) version and Sport Auto tested most sporty(fastest) version.
BTW, Sport Auto alwasy request the fastest version form each car they test in their Supertest.

Regarding lateral Gs... In Sport Auto Supertest both RS4 and R8 achived same result 1.3g...


Fair point and this was something I was aware of that in the UK all RS4s come with standard tyres, but that doesn't explain why the R8 was quicker than the GT3RS, the F430 and the Gallardo which all had the same tyres and why in the US tests the same results were found.

How can you say every other tests is wrong and the only one that contradicts them is right, it doesn't make sense to me.

[KresoF1]

I am sorry that you are not fluent in German since there is a lot explanation in the Sport Auto Supertest why are the results the way they are!

For example von Saurma said that R8 has a very bad drag coefficient that makes it slower on the straights than its four-door counterpart, the RS4. What it gains in and at the exit of the corners it loses on the straights. Plain simple.

They measured R8 aerodynamics in Mercedes Benz wind tunnel(as they do with every other car!) and results were pretty bad for high speed acceleration...

Second, what other tests? C&D or Popular Mechanics? Sorry, but re-read them again-they are pure joke IMHO.

One Italian magazine measured R8 and its competiton in Monza track with similar results as their German counterparts...

So, you belive in EVO results and me not? True...
I belive completely in Sport Auto results and you not? True...

Only this time EVO results are pretty much overoptimistic IMHO... On some German Car TV show someone asked Stephan Reil about this amazing Bedford R8 time... "Is it possible that R8 is faster then Gallardo(520hp version)?" S.Reil answer was:"Something was clearly wrong with that Gallardo!"

I think this says it all...

[Damienr8]

I am sorry that you are not fluent in German since there is a lot explanation in the Sport Auto Supertest why are the results the way they are!

For example von Saurma said that R8 has a very bad drag coefficient that makes it slower on the straights than its four-door counterpart, the RS4. What it gains in and at the exit of the corners it loses on the straights. Plain simple.

They measured R8 aerodynamics in Mercedes Benz wind tunnel(as they do with every other car!) and results were pretty bad for high speed acceleration...

Second, what other tests? C&D or Popular Mechanics? Sorry, but re-read them again-they are pure joke IMHO.

One Italian magazine measured R8 and its competiton in Monza track with similar results as their German counterparts...

So, you belive in EVO results and me not? True...
I belive completely in Sport Auto results and you not? True...

Only this time EVO results are pretty much overoptimistic IMHO... On some German Car TV show someone asked Stephan Reil about this amazing Bedford R8 time... "Is it possible that R8 is faster then Gallardo(520hp version)?" S.Reil answer was:"Something was clearly wrong with that Gallardo!"

I think this says it all...

Good answer. Good read.

[artur777]

KresoF1 - agree with your post completely.

Gallardo is for sure faster than R8. 520 hp is more than 420 hp.
R8 is slightly faster than RS4, because RS4 is a great car.

I expect that coming RS6 will be a hell of a car and it will "do" RS4 and R8 at the Ring. 580 hp is much more than 420 hp.

RS4 and R8 do 0-200 at 16-17 sec.
RS6 will do 0-200 at 13 sec. It's a great difference and cornering speed will also be very high due to magnetic ride, ceramic brakes, torque distribution.

RS6 is as fast as M5 on the straights and as good as RS4 at the cornering.
RS6 should break down 8 min barrier for sure.

[Leadfoot]

I am sorry that you are not fluent in German since there is a lot explanation in the Sport Auto Supertest why are the results the way they are!

For example von Saurma said that R8 has a very bad drag coefficient that makes it slower on the straights than its four-door counterpart, the RS4. What it gains in and at the exit of the corners it loses on the straights. Plain simple.

They measured R8 aerodynamics in Mercedes Benz wind tunnel(as they do with every other car!) and results were pretty bad for high speed acceleration...

Second, what other tests? C&D or Popular Mechanics? Sorry, but re-read them again-they are pure joke IMHO.

One Italian magazine measured R8 and its competiton in Monza track with similar results as their German counterparts...

So, you belive in EVO results and me not? True...
I belive completely in Sport Auto results and you not? True...

Only this time EVO results are pretty much overoptimistic IMHO... On some German Car TV show someone asked Stephan Reil about this amazing Bedford R8 time... "Is it possible that R8 is faster then Gallardo(520hp version)?" S.Reil answer was:"Something was clearly wrong with that Gallardo!"

I think this says it all...

I has seen different tests involving both the RS4 and the R8 and up to 150mph the R8 is always in front, so I am at a lose as to why the aerodynamic are a problem for high speed acceleration. But then what do I know, I only drive the bloody things.

If there was something wrong with the Gallardo then surely there had to be something wrong with the Ferrari F430, the Porsche 997Turbo, the Porsche GT3 and the Vette Z06. That is a heck of a lot of cars what seemed to have something wrong with them don't you think. :brag:

And before you think the R8 was something special, they posted acceleration times and they were roughly the same as every other magazine has posted, include Sport Auto. I was also at a lose as to why the R8 beat all of these other cars in such a convincing manner, because I would have thought all would have been slightly quicker but this was until I saw some of the other tests being posted which showed similar results.

With regards to Stephan Reil answer, well would you have expected him to say anything different, especially as they own Lamborghini and the Gallardo is the best part of £50K more expensive. Some people inside Quattro GmbH have said the R8 is a much better handling car than the Gallardo, now does this mean it's easier to control near the limit or does it mean it grips better I don't know. But there is some results out there (EVO etc.) that lead me to believe it's the latter.

But hey, there is no reason to fall out over results from differing magazines, as long as we both like the car is that not what is important.:cheers:

[Leadfoot]

KresoF1 - agree with your post completely.

Gallardo is for sure faster than R8. 520 hp is more than 420 hp.
R8 is slightly faster than RS4, because RS4 is a great car.

I expect that coming RS6 will be a hell of a car and it will "do" RS4 and R8 at the Ring. 580 hp is much more than 420 hp.

RS4 and R8 do 0-200 at 16-17 sec.
RS6 will do 0-200 at 13 sec. It's a great difference and cornering speed will also be very high due to magnetic ride, ceramic brakes, torque distribution.

RS6 is as fast as M5 on the straights and as good as RS4 at the cornering.
RS6 should break down 8 min barrier for sure.

Well I know what I have been told about the time the RS6 has achieved on the ring during testing and I would expect a time of round 8 minutes dead, but the same was true of the R8, great thing were expected of it's time and clearly this has not been the case for one reason or another.

One thing is for sure, high speed acceleration won't be one of it's problems. ;)

[KresoF1]

Leadie,
I agree with you on this-R8 is a great car!:cheers:

BTW, let me give you some hint about forthcoming Gallardo Superleggera Supertest in German Sport Auto(September issue):

7.46min Ring time!

[Leadfoot]

Leadie,
I agree with you on this-R8 is a great car!:cheers:

BTW, let me give you some hint about forthcoming Gallardo Superleggera Supertest in German Sport Auto(September issue):

7.46min Ring time!

Now that's a time for the R8v10 to aim at. ;)

[QuattroFun]

Well, the R8 delivers on more complex tracks like HH and is more fun to drive, but in more road-like conditions like NBR the gain over RS4 is really minimal (5s in nearly 21km is nothing) - as was to be be expected all along. Where is the surprise?

Hyping the RS6 in the wrong places does it no favours - it will surely deliver as an all-round road going package like the RS4 and I will get one if and when it does. However, ceramic brakes will not be standard and they will not save a 2 tonne monster with 60% upfront on the track anyway and you can forget 0-200 km/h in 13s when you do the power-to-weight math and account for the likely 20% transmission loss...

[Iceman]

With "Magnetic Ride" the R8 would be 10-15 sec faster.

Hans.

[Leadfoot]

Well, the R8 delivers on more complex tracks like HH and is more fun to drive, but in more road-like conditions like NBR the gain over RS4 is really minimal (5s in nearly 21km is nothing) - as was to be be expected all along. Where is the surprise?

Hyping the RS6 in the wrong places does it no favours - it will surely deliver as an all-round road going package like the RS4 and I will get one if and when it does. However, ceramic brakes will not be standard and they will not save a 2 tonne monster with 60% upfront on the track anyway and you can forget 0-200 km/h in 13s when you do the power-to-weight math and account for the likely 20% transmission loss...

Power to weight matters in acceleration when you are talking about torque and not horsepower. If an M6 can do 0~200km/h in 13.4s with only 383ft/lbs of torque, I reckon the RS6 will be able to match of possibly better this with an estimated 550ft/lbs of torque.

I am not hyping to RS6, I am only relaying what I have been told about the car. It is meant to be an animal and it's handling is like-wise meant to be very impressive for such a large car.

[KresoF1]

With "Magnetic Ride" the R8 would be 10-15 sec faster.

Hans.

According to Stephan Reil you are WRONG.

[Iceman]

According to Stephan Reil you are WRONG.

Stephan Reil. ???

Hans.

[artur777]

Leadfoot,

but why don't we take into consideration HP when talking about acceleration? What is the role of torque? Where is the truth lies?

[KresoF1]

Yes, Stephan Reil and Dirk Isgen....

You do not have a clue who these to guys are, don't you?

BUT, you know more about R8 suspension then these two, specially about Magnetic Ride...

For ME you lost all your credibility...

[Iceman]

Yes, Stephan Reil and Dirk Isgen....

You do not have a clue who these to guys are, don't you?

BUT, you know more about R8 suspension then these two, specially about Magnetic Ride...

For ME you lost all your credibility...
Of course i know, Stephan Reil Technikchef der Audi-Tochter Quattro GmbH and Dirk Isgen, Der Audi R8 projektleiter.
But why not according to Stephan Reil.
I thought "Magnetic Ride" was the better suspension.

Hans.

[Leadfoot]

Yes, Stephan Reil and Dirk Isgen....

You do not have a clue who these to guys are, don't you?

BUT, you know more about R8 suspension then these two, specially about Magnetic Ride...

For ME you lost all your credibility...

Forgetting about the who's who.

The merits of standard suspension over MagneticRide don't hold water. Normal springs and dampers are tuned to be a compromise between comfort and control, too much comfort and the handling is shot, too much control and the ride is destroyed. With MagneticRide there isn't the same compromise, with the press of a button you have either comfort or control but the real difference is that even in comfort mode the control from the dampers is still better than with standard suspension. In sport mode the control is total and after sampling both systems back to back in a TT I would always chose the MagneticRide every single time.

Hans reckons an improvement of between 10~15 seconds, personally I doubt that for if this was indeed the case there wouldn't have been a standard suspension option at all. I know that in the TT there is a marked difference in lap times, but this is with a car which has a compromised design what with it being 60/40% nose heavy, I doubt the same could be true with the weight balance reversed but I wouldn't doubt there could be a 3~5 second improvement.

[Leadfoot]

I believe there is politics being played out with the R8 and the Gallardo. This is the reason why it wasn't launched with a V10 to start with and why the V10 when it comes will be less power than Gallardo by as much as 50hp when the Gallardo Mk2 arrives.

I have no doubt that the R8 would be the quicker car if both had the same amount of power, there is over 5years difference in technology between them, but when Lambo get the R8 toys the Gallardo will regain it's superiority.

I can't understand why there can be as much as 12~14s between what Audi achieved on the ring with the R8 during testing and what Sport Auto achieved in it supertest.

[Arslanoff]

12~14s between what Audi achieved on the ring with the R8 during testing and what Sport Auto achieved in it supertest.

Bad driver? :lovl:

[KresoF1]

Forgetting about the who's who.

The merits of standard suspension over MagneticRide don't hold water. Normal springs and dampers are tuned to be a compromise between comfort and control, too much comfort and the handling is shot, too much control and the ride is destroyed. With MagneticRide there isn't the same compromise, with the press of a button you have either comfort or control but the real difference is that even in comfort mode the control from the dampers is still better than with standard suspension. In sport mode the control is total and after sampling both systems back to back in a TT I would always chose the MagneticRide every single time.

Hans reckons an improvement of between 10~15 seconds, personally I doubt that for if this was indeed the case there wouldn't have been a standard suspension option at all. I know that in the TT there is a marked difference in lap times, but this is with a car which has a compromised design what with it being 60/40% nose heavy, I doubt the same could be true with the weight balance reversed but I wouldn't doubt there could be a 3~5 second improvement.

Leadie,

Magnetic Ride is just Audi's marketing hype...

Regarding TT(I asume that you order one) and R8 suspension options here is a chart:
TT R8
Standard suspension No such option on R8
Magnetic Ride Magnetic Ride
Sport Suspension Sport Suspension(standard on R8)


So, let's take TT... The fastest TT is the one with Sport Suspension, NOT the one with Magnetic Ride. Simple truth.

Magnetic Ride on R8 is a compromise, it is softer then standard Sport suspension in normal mode and little bit stiffer in Sport mode. BUT, since it is stiffer only benefites would be in perfectly flat track! Not on the Nordschleife that is far from flat or smooth.

My very good friend works for Motor Presse(company that own both Sport Auto and AMS) and he said to me that Audi delivered two R8s-one with Magnetic Ride, standard brakes and seats, second one with Sport suspension(standard one!), Ceramic brakes, Bucket seats and Corsa tires. Both cars were manuals...
First weight-car with Magnetic Ride was 35kg heavier. Second-that same car was also little bit slower in acceleration. Third-in Hockenheim car with Magnetic Ride was 1s slower then the the one with Sport suspension. Of course since tires were different they changed them as well. Difference between Pirelli Zero the Hero's and Corsa's are on R8 only 0.2s in Hockenheim! BUT, differene between Magnetic Ride and Sport suspension(standard one) is 1s...

[KresoF1]

I believe there is politics being played out with the R8 and the Gallardo. This is the reason why it wasn't launched with a V10 to start with and why the V10 when it comes will be less power than Gallardo by as much as 50hp when the Gallardo Mk2 arrives.

I have no doubt that the R8 would be the quicker car if both had the same amount of power, there is over 5years difference in technology between them, but when Lambo get the R8 toys the Gallardo will regain it's superiority.

I can't understand why there can be as much as 12~14s between what Audi achieved on the ring with the R8 during testing and what Sport Auto achieved in it supertest.

Regarding politics... Audi owns Lamborghini...

Difference between Audi R8 factory Ring time and Sport Auto time is 9s... 7.55min is the time that Tom Kristenssen achieved with the same R8(manual, Sport suspension, Ceramics, Buckets and Corsas). BUT, T.Kristenssen had more then 30 laps on the Ring to achieve that results. On the other hand Horst von Saurma usually have only three laps...

Are you forgetting Audi unofficial RS4(SS+,Ceramics, Corsas) Ring time? 7.59min...

So, what about that??

[Leadfoot]

So you are basically saying that not only Audi are wrong in offering MagneticRide suspension but Ferrari are too with the 599 and in their case they don't even give their customers an option.

I haven't tried to R8 so my comments or solely based on the TT and yes it was standard suspension vs MagneticRide and not the sport suspension that is also offered. I have being lucky enough to sample both standard and SS+ on the RS4 (I know different car and suspension set-up) and didn't really find any improvement from the latter, in case if anything the standard suited the roads I drove much better.

I still can't understand how a suspension which can adapted to the road surface and conditions in a millisecond can be classed as the compromise, from what I understand of normal coils and dampers are you have to work inside a set of parameters based about what is suitable for every road surface. The scope is too wide to offer a set-up that can be as accurate.

Now if you said to me that the SS+ on the R8 was design for the ring then I might agree that it would offer the best set-up and achieve the best result.

Is this the case?

[Leadfoot]

My very good friend works for Motor Presse(company that own both Sport Auto and AMS).

Well this explains why you are fighting they side so passionately and if this was me I reckon I too would be doing the same, but to argue that EVO don't conduct their tests as well as Sport Auto is a little unfair. I recently met one of the Stigs (yes there is more than one) and he personally rates EVO as the most unbiased magazines in the industry, if a car is a dog they say as much and with the same token, as the car is good they praise it. They reviews and opinions of Audi cars are more in tune with German magazines than any of the other UK rags.

If one magazine showed a result totally at odds with every other than I would be the first to stand up and say it was wrong but in EVO's test of the R8 that isn't the case, other mags found similar results, regardless if they are stateside or not.

[KresoF1]

Leadie,
I spoke today with my friend from Motorpresse and here is an update...

Something was clearly wrong with Sport Auto R8 test car since other(ice silver) example achived better metrics when measured by sister AMS mag...

Example No.1 in Sport Auto test R8(brilliant red) achieved only 132km/h in Auswecihtest 110m and silver R8 example at AMS achieved on ISO-Wedelgasse(very similar test to Ausweichtest 110m) 149,4km/h!! Difference is very big indeed since silver car was with Magnetic Ride and normal Pirelli Hero tires...

Example No.2 On the Ring RS4 achieved top speed on Doettinger Hoehe(top speed check point on the Ring) of 262km/h, R8 achieved only 254km/h!! I made some calculation on sector times and if R8 top speed were the same 262km/h final lap time would be around 8.00-7.59min.... Much close to what we all expected!

Apparently this red R8 did not delivered all 420hp... But, blame is on Audi only, not on Sport Auto stuff.

[Leadfoot]

Leadie,
I spoke today with my friend from Motorpresse and here is an update...

Something was clearly wrong with Sport Auto R8 test car since other(ice silver) example achived better metrics when measured by sister AMS mag...

Example No.1 in Sport Auto test R8(brilliant red) achieved only 132km/h in Auswecihtest 110m and silver R8 example at AMS achieved on ISO-Wedelgasse(very similar test to Ausweichtest 110m) 149,4km/h!! Difference is very big indeed since silver car was with Magnetic Ride and normal Pirelli Hero tires...

Example No.2 On the Ring RS4 achieved top speed on Doettinger Hoehe(top speed check point on the Ring) of 262km/h, R8 achieved only 254km/h!! I made some calculation on sector times and if R8 top speed were the same 262km/h final lap time would be around 8.00-7.59min.... Much close to what we all expected!

Apparently this red R8 did not delivered all 420hp... But, blame is on Audi only, not on Sport Auto stuff.

Thanks for the info, it does explain a lot and you are more of a man than most for even sharing this info which in a way vindicates EVO and some of the other magazine's results.

Did he say if Sport Auto was going to re-run the test to see if the time improves or are there leave the result as it stands.

[KresoF1]

Leadie,
According to my info we could see an update in autumn issues(September or October)...
Also very interesting thing is that Pirelli Corsa's did not work as good as expected. R8 is far better with normal new Pirelli P Zero The Hero's but, this is normal since Hero's were developed mostly on R8s...
We will see...

BUT, I still have a small doubt over EVO Bedford time.

[Ruergard]

Very, very interesting! Keep us updated please! :thumb:

[QuattroFun]

Power to weight matters in acceleration when you are talking about torque and not horsepower. If an M6 can do 0~200km/h in 13.4s with only 383ft/lbs of torque, I reckon the RS6 will be able to match of possibly better this with an estimated 550ft/lbs of torque.

I am not hyping to RS6, I am only relaying what I have been told about the car. It is meant to be an animal and it's handling is like-wise meant to be very impressive for such a large car.

Leadie, these comments are in no way aimed at you personally, but are really much more general - we all hope the RS6 will be great, but all the expectations on the RS6 popping up on this forum are simply not realistic given what we know about the car as well as its intended role and physical limitations. We have seen this hype movie before - first with the RS4, then the S6 and finally with the R8. Of course Ingolstadt will try to hype its current and forthcoming offerings, but there is no reason to take their word for it too literally...

Torque plays a role in acceleration only if gearing is strange/very long, the powerband is very narrow or the driver (or the auto) is too lazy/sub-optimal - otherwise bhp is what counts in straightline acceleration with optimal gearchanges. Acceleration (i.e. against clock) and in-gear acceleration (i.e. real world) are two very different things as we all know. The fact remains: in 0-200, the RS6 will not beat the M6, which has seven tightly packed gears, relatively low weight and a highly potent engine with only 7% transmission loss - but it does not have to really and distance will not be too big and it will for now be the fastest road going Audi. This is realistic and should be good enough.

Btw, KresoF1's: I really appreciate and enjoy your in-depth analysis and there may well some truth to it - but is not trying to explain away/downplay the R8's very good - albeit not spectacular - NBR time essentially clutching a straw? Maybe the test car was flawed somehow, who knows - but as we all now, standards allow for a 5% tolerance from the quoted power for one thing and maybe the standard suspension and Corsas are better suited for HH and than NBR or EVO's Bedford. The same test car delivered big time in HH, which of course is a less flowing and lower average/peak speed track - is that not enough? Another test car, another day and the NBR time in HvS's hands might dip to 8 min dead from 8.04 - so what? It will not hit 7.46 in any circumstance...

[Leadfoot]

Leadie, these comments are in no way aimed at you personally, but are really much more general - we all hope the RS6 will be great, but all the expectations on the RS6 popping up on this forum are simply not realistic given what we know about the car as well as its intended role and physical limitations. We have seen this hype movie before - first with the RS4, then the S6 and finally with the R8. Of course Ingolstadt will try to hype its current and forthcoming offerings, but there is no reason to take their word for it too literally...

I know it wasn't a personally dig at me, it was more a wake-up call to say that reality doesn't live up to expectations. I disagree that the RS4, S6 and R8 haven't done this though, RS4 was a revelation when it hit the streets and even with it's 6yrs old chassis design and poor weight balance it will still keep even the soon to be launched M3v8 on it's toes. The S6 has also beat the mighty M5 to overall honours in more than one or two reviews and even matched the M5 to within half a second around a twisty track, all this with more weight and less power. As for the R8, well how many times have we not hear things like 'a new dawn in supercar standards' being used to describe it.

The only area where they haven't performed is our own expectations, no where else.


Torque plays a role in acceleration only if gearing is strange/very long, the powerband is very narrow or the driver (or the auto) is too lazy/sub-optimal - otherwise bhp is what counts in straightline acceleration with optimal gearchanges. Acceleration (i.e. against clock) and in-gear acceleration (i.e. real world) are two very different things as we all know. The fact remains: in 0-200, the RS6 will not beat the M6, which has seven tightly packed gears, relatively low weight and a highly potent engine with only 7% transmission loss - but it does not have to really and distance will not be too big and it will for now be the fastest road going Audi. This is realistic and should be good enough.

Sorry but torque plays a much bigger role than HP in acceleration, just look no further than the 130i and the S3, both has the same HP but the S3 walks the 130i because of it's broad torque band and all this with an inefficient awd system. The RS6 will have an equally broad torque band but more than twice as much and more than twice as much power as well, we are also assuming that it's a 6sp auto but to date no one knows this for sure, it might be a 7sp auto.

I don't disagree that it might not beat the M6 up to 200km/h but I reckon it will be pretty close and as for the M6 only having a 7% tranny lose, come on that impossible, the only way this could happen is the BMW quoted figures were less than was really the case. The same was found when EVO tested the 599 and found it's power was much greater than quoted. But in any case it's not the M6 which is the RS6's real rival, that's the M5 and I do believe it will out gun it, out handling it and better it overall.


Btw, KresoF1's: I really appreciate and enjoy your in-depth analysis and there may well some truth to it - but is not trying to explain away/downplay the R8's very good - albeit not spectacular - NBR time essentially clutching a straw? Maybe the test car was flawed somehow, who knows - but as we all now, standards allow for a 5% tolerance from the quoted power for one thing and maybe the standard suspension and Corsas are better suited for HH and than NBR or EVO's Bedford. The same test car delivered big time in HH, which of course is a less flowing and lower average/peak speed track - is that not enough? Another test car, another day and the NBR time in HvS's hands might dip to 8 min dead from 8.04 - so what? It will not hit 7.46 in any circumstance...

I don't know about other manufacturers but all Porsche have to equal or better their quoted output, I doubt Audi follow such a practice but who knows. I expected the R8 to beat the 8.00 barrier if only by a tenth or two but the time in Sport Auto did seem to be at odds with other reviews and like everyone here I hope it's re-run proves this to be true. But in no way could the R8 ever approach the Z06 or GT3RS times around the ring, it is after all just a everyday sportscar for the road, not a trackday special which has been civilised for road use which in the GT3RS case has been done extremely well.

[Leadfoot]

Example No.1 in Sport Auto test R8(brilliant red) achieved only 132km/h in Auswecihtest 110m and silver R8 example at AMS achieved on ISO-Wedelgasse(very similar test to Ausweichtest 110m) 149,4km/h!! Difference is very big indeed since silver car was with Magnetic Ride and normal Pirelli Hero tires...


I must also say that 17km/h is nearly 11mph difference which is huge. Is this all down to the fact of down on power or is it a combination of the power, the tyres and the MagneticRide suspension.

[RXBG]

i'd say to reserve and wait till we see what the RS6 final published figures are before we conclude it won't be faster to 200 than the M6. and further, to await a comparison test. i would be personally very disappointed if the RS6 wasn't faster than the M6/M5 in every way. the car will be very expensive. and i assume that means it'll be packing a hell of a punch. my gut hopes and believes it will be faster.

[3x5PSI]

What time did the CSL do a 5 years ago?

[Leadfoot]

What time did the CSL do a 5 years ago?

Yep, a truly amazing time and set so long ago that you BMW fans have to keep reminding yourselves that at one time you were the :king: of the ring. :incar:

:vhmmm: But it does get me to thinking, will there ever be another BMW able to post such a time in the near future. As Mr Clarkson says 'a Concorde moment' in BMW's history, everything since has been down hill. :cry:

[3x5PSI]

Yeah until the next M3 & CSL beat that time. It's called progress. Tyre & suspension technology at BMW go forward, & the E92 has a lot more power. There is no secret in the CSL's time. The Schnitzer CSL with a stock engine did 7:40.

[Leadfoot]

Yeah until the next M3 & CSL beat that time. It's called progress. Tyre & suspension technology at BMW go forward, & the E92 has a lot more power. There is no secret in the CSL's time. The Schnitzer CSL with a stock engine did 7:40.

But what will you say if the next M3 doesn't equal or beat this time which I very much doubt it will. Will you then say 'Oh but it only had to beat the time of the old M3 and the RS4' in which case it will, sorry but there is no way on God's earth that the standard M3v8 will post a 7:52 lap.

Now the CSL will be a different story, all of BMW's know how will go in to achieving this goal but in creating such a beast they will be leaving themselves wide open for ridicule if it doesn't achieve it's goal of beating the old car.

Regardless of what you feel about Audi RS cars, they have always upped their game with each new version and no doubt the new RS5 will move the game forward from where the RS4 left off. I doubt it too will get close to the CSL's time but then it's doesn't have to, to be classed a success, now does it. ;)

[Toto89]

CSL was a fast car around the ring, that's true, but we should not forget that it was one car with BMW badge on it which could do something around the ring in the last few years. But if we compare them to Audis: ok, last years Audis are slower in straight line but these slower cars can beat easily the 'faster' BMWs around every ring and every corners. Not the CSL but every M series except CSL.

[Erik]

To assume that the Magnetic Rid would do 15 seconds is a bit optimistic I think :)

First of all, do we know that it really improves the performance on the 'Ring?
Remember it add weight as well and I'm sure Audi knows which car and setting that has the optimal performance.

If I remember correct, the BMW M5 set its best time in its softest setting (I think there's about 255 different options altogether).

Getting back where I started. People expect too much, it isn't possible to delete 15-30 seconds each time there is a new version.

But if you like to look for excuses I think KresoF1 is in on one, I haven't seen the test R8 vs. RS4 side by side so I can't compare the speed in different corners.

[Leadfoot]

To assume that the Magnetic Rid would do 15 seconds is a bit optimistic I think :)

First of all, do we know that it really improves the performance on the 'Ring?
Remember it add weight as well and I'm sure Audi knows which car and setting that has the optimal performance.

Totally agree and said as much myself, but my opinion of the benefits of the MagneticRide option over standard/SS+ are correct, normal suspension has to work in a much narrower tolerances then the other, if it's set up for ultimate control it's will ride destroyed and if set or comfort it's the handling that's shot. Regardless if MagnetRide is softer on normal setting than SS+ because of the technology it will still control the chassis better than the SS+. Whether this is equal to a quicker time in the hand of a professional, I don't know but for the rest of us I reckon it will.


If I remember correct, the BMW M5 set its best time in its softest setting (I think there's about 255 different options altogether).

Getting back where I started. People expect too much, it isn't possible to delete 15-30 seconds each time there is a new version.

But if you like to look for excuses I think KresoF1 is in on one, I haven't seen the test R8 vs. RS4 side by side so I can't compare the speed in different corners.

Thanks for agreeing with me of this, for ages people have brought up the CSL every time an Audi or something else posts a good time on the ring. Sure the CSL was an amazing machine but to think that the same will apply to the new standard M3 would be very optimistic, the old model posted a time of 8:22 will the equivalent Audi which would have been the S4v8 posted in Avant form a time of 8:29. Based on the improvement the RS4 made one can expect the new M3 to achieve a time around 8:03~8:05 which will be amazing for what it is and the price it commands.

I would be surprised if a RS4 would match a R8 in corner speed given the fact that the R8 has a better weight balance and more surface area of grip and when you check out the differences in time around the Bedford circuit by EVO magazine you will see that this is indeed not possible. But then again KersoF1 disagrees with their findings anyway.

[Erik]

Regarding the CLS time I think the tires it used are not available anymore. Maybe by name but not by product.

That's what I've heard, not sure iof right or wrong and we don't need a(nother) big debate about it but it would be nice with a "yes/no."

[Leadfoot]

Regarding the CLS time I think the tires it used are not available anymore. Maybe by name but not by product.

That's what I've heard, not sure iof right or wrong and we don't need a(nother) big debate about it but it would be nice with a "yes/no."

If possible can you explain the importance of whether the tyres are still available or not.

I would love to know if anyone has equalled or even better the Sport Auto time achieve all those years ago. Surely with the latest tyre technology this should be now even easier than before.

Here is another thing that has always bugged me, when posting these times for the ring or another track, is the car checked to see if they are indeed bog standard or not. After that test carried out by EVO or was it Autocar on the Ferrari 599 I have become a little sceptical.

[Kram]

IVerified and it seems that had being removed, may be for trying an improvement, but in this link the new M3 is supposed to do the Ring in 8:12. Great improvement but nt enough to take of the :R8kiss:

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=98379

[Leadfoot]

IVerified and it seems that had being removed, may be for trying an improvement, but in this link the new M3 is supposed to do the Ring in 8:12. Great improvement but nt enough to take of the :R8kiss:

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=98379

I doubt that this is genuine, I reckon it's someone trying to get an argument started on the m5board in much the same way a some come on here and do the same. I will be greatly surprised if the M3 doesn't better the RS4's time if only be a few tenths.

I must admit when you consider that a Z4M Roadster posted an official time of 8:15, the time of 8:12 does sound terrible especially with the extra power, chassis stiffness and aerodynamic aids, no wonder these guys are miffed if true.

[KresoF1]

Hey Leadie,
Here is something that you will like...

AUTOMOVIL (Spanish magazine)
INTA circuit:
Audi R8----------------------1'11'47
Porsche 911 Turbo -----------1'12'08 (tested in feb 07)
Porsche 911 Carrera 4S------1'13'18
Dodge Viper SRT10 -----------1'13'19 (tested in feb 07)
Aston Martin V8--------------1'14'19
Jaguar XKR--------------------1'15'16 (tested in feb 07)

[Erik]

If possible can you explain the importance of whether the tyres are still available or not.


It is hard to repeat that time if you can't buy those tires today. They were quite good...

[Leadfoot]

It is hard to repeat that time if you can't buy those tires today. They were quite good...

So you are basically saying that the tyres that came on the M3CSL were actually better than the current equivalents, amazing if true.:bigeyes:

[KresoF1]

So you are basically saying that the tyres that came on the M3CSL were actually better than the current equivalents, amazing if true.:bigeyes:

I belive that Erik is saying to you that previous generation of Michelin Cups was better on dry track then current one. This is the fact. These Cups on M3CSL generate huge amount of grip(on right temperature!) on dry track but, they are almost useless on wet track. New generation is much more compromise since they are pretty good on wet track as well...

BTW, tires on R8 on Spanish test were Michelin Pilot Sport 2.

[Leadfoot]

I belive that Erik is saying to you that previous generation of Michelin Cups was better on dry track then current one. This is the fact. These Cups on M3CSL generate huge amount of grip(on right temperature!) on dry track but, they are almost useless on wet track. New generation is much more compromise since they are pretty good on wet track as well...

BTW, tires on R8 on Spanish test were Michelin Pilot Sport 2.

Well this explains the exclaimer that you had to sign when buying the car as was the case in the UK. Regardless of the tyres, it's still an amazing car.

[quattro Gmbh]

IVerified and it seems that had being removed, may be for trying an improvement, but in this link the new M3 is supposed to do the Ring in 8:12. Great improvement but nt enough to take of the :R8kiss:

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=98379



"The sub 8 minute RS4 time was done on R compounds with Frank Stipler (race driver)....even Audi doesn't use this time officially."


is that true?

[Erik]

"The sub 8 minute RS4 time was done on R compounds with Frank Stipler (race driver)....even Audi doesn't use this time officially."
is that true?

I met Frank Stipler at the Ring and that's what he told me. However I don't think it means much as it is a factory driver and inofficial time, not compareable with others as we do not know any facts.

[Leadfoot]

KresoF1,

Since you are the man in the know with regards to all things Sport Auto related have you heard anything about the new M3 only being able to lap the ring in 8:12.

The more I think about it the less I believe this report, even it they give the old M3 a power hike to 420hp and fitted the same size of tyres it would more than likely be able to lap it in around 8:12 or something close.

[KresoF1]

Leadie,
Actually I belive that 8.12min is pretty legit for new M3. Why? It is official time with Michelin street tires...
Old M3 achieved 8.22min in Sport Auto Supertest so, 10s more faster seems OK for me.

Regarding R8... It could even in von Saurma's hands go around 8.00-7.58min with some adjustments... Magnetic Ride and Pirelli P Zero The Hero are key elements IMHO.

BTW, new S5 Ring time is around 8.25min...

[Leadfoot]

Leadie,
Actually I belive that 8.12min is pretty legit for new M3. Why? It is official time with Michelin street tires...
Old M3 achieved 8.22min in Sport Auto Supertest so, 10s more faster seems OK for me.

Regarding R8... It could even in von Saurma's hands go around 8.00-7.58min with some adjustments... Magnetic Ride and Pirelli P Zero The Hero are key elements IMHO.

BTW, new S5 Ring time is around 8.25min...

The S5 time is that official, was this do by Sport Auto because unofficially I was told in testing it went around in something close to 8:17.

The S5's time is a little disappointing based on what has been said about the grip from the new chassis, to quote AUTOCAR's test against the 335Ci
'But on the tight, Alpine passes north of Verona, the S5 comprehensively blitzes the 335i on A-to-B pace. We’re talking of a difference that would equate to several seconds a stage mile here.'

Now do that sound like the kind of car that would post an identical time to a BMW335i and Alpine passes sound just like the sort of roads that would possibly make up the ring.

[KresoF1]

S5 time is what my friend(who is regional Director of Sales for Audi) told me.
I heard news about Gallardo facelift as well and some other Audi news...

[Leadfoot]

Then in my opinion the new chassis has not move the game forward for Audi one little bit, think about it, the old S4 Avant did it in 8:29 and we can allow a couple of seconds off this for the saloon. Too improve this again by only a couple of seconds based on the fact that it have an improved chassis, better weight balance, more power and torque, one would have to say that disappointed would be an understatement don't you think. :noshake:

[KresoF1]

I agree with you.
Personally(do not kill me!) I would rather go for 335i Coupe then for S5. All A5/S5 looks pretty strange to me. It is also pretty big car, I saw it side by side with 335i Coupe and could not belive how much bigger Audi is!

BUT, let get back OT.

[Leadfoot]

Well I will be seeing it for the first this weekend and getting to drive as well, after having a S4 for over two years I will possibly be one of a handful of people on this site to give a valid opinion on whether the new S5 is indeed an improvement.

So will keep you all posted.

[3x5PSI]

BMW tend to be conservative with the claims. The official claim for the CSL was 8:00 & it did 7:50. The Z4 M Roaster did 8:15 as tested by Sport Auto, & it's not much lighter than an M3. Autocar also got 8:15 for an E46 M3 SMG.

[Leadfoot]

BMW tend to be conservative with the claims. The official claim for the CSL was 8:00 & it did 7:50. The Z4 M Roaster did 8:15 as tested by Sport Auto, & it's not much lighter than an M3. Autocar also got 8:15 for an E46 M3 SMG.

I don't agree with what you are saying, I know of report that the M5 was lapping the ring in 7:5? but it's official time is 8:12, word always leaks out what times all these car are doing during testing. I know that in a higher state of tune the TT/S have lapped the ring in 8:14 (how much higher I will keep to myself ;) ) but it's not that far from the up-grade's amount, like-wise the S5 has done something like 8:17, we know the RS4 do it in 7:58 and I have heard what the RS6 has allegedly lapped the ring in.

But back to the CSL, if it done the ring in 7:50 then what did it not do during testing.:bigeyes:

P.S. KresoF1, when was the S5 lap time carried out, was this very recent and if so when will the results be put in to print?

[3x5PSI]

LEadie 8:15 was the Z4 M Roadster as tested by Sport Auto officially. The roadster is not very rigid & doesn't have as precise handling as a coupe. And its quite heavy as well. I think it weighs 1480kg as tested by Sport Auto. Surely an E92 M3 will blow away Sport Auto's time for the Z4?

[Erik]

Maybe we can have some more information soon.

My "friend with the CSL" is down at Nordschleife Hardcore with Sport Auto and was in the R8 with Frank Stipler and is now going with Horst von Saurma in the GT3 RS.

I asked him for the inside information stuff ;)

[Leadfoot]

Erik,

Are you meaning the times for the R8 and possibly the new M3.

P.S.

I hope he can get the times of the S5 as well.

[Leadfoot]

LEadie 8:15 was the Z4 M Roadster as tested by Sport Auto officially. The roadster is not very rigid & doesn't have as precise handling as a coupe. And its quite heavy as well. I think it weighs 1480kg as tested by Sport Auto. Surely an E92 M3 will blow away Sport Auto's time for the Z4?

I know the roadster isn't as good as the Coupe, but the MCoupe is that great a drive on the road regardless of what time it would achieve on the track. The brother-in-law owns one and it a scary thing to hustle down a bump/twisty road I will tell you.

I totally agree with you, I can believe the M3 will only be able to post a time of 8:12 in much the same way as I reckon the S5's time of 8:25 a plain silly as well.

[KresoF1]

Guys, you may find this interesting... My discussion about R8 Ring time on other forum...
Comment to my post form other member:
"Sportauto conducts this test with ESP off, AMS tests with ESP on (HvS actually mentions this in the Supertest article). It is mentioned that R8 is faster to drive with ESP "on" due to a nervous rear at the limit which only can be mastered by very fast counter-steering (which may be fun, but doesn't make you fast of course).

As for your assumption that the Sportauto R8 may have suffered from a lack of horses: do the accelaration tests / topspeed tests (Sportauto vs. AMS) vary significantly ? (I don't have the AMS test at hand).

As per my understanding (after reading the Supertest) the somewhat unexpected NoS-Laptime is due to aerodynamics and damping. "

My resonse:
"The difference of 17.4km/h in speed between ESP on and off(BTW, there is so called ESP sport mode but, von Saurma did not mentioned it...?) is IMHO way tooo big!

Other thing-aerodynamics... Yes, the Cw is 0.35 for R8 and 0.31 for RS4 but, in windchannel aerodynamic balance of R8 is far, far better then of RS4(just look at test results).
So, IMHO aerodynamics is not responsible for not so good Ring time.
What I can not except is that von Saurma is implying that RS4 is actually faster in 0-250km/h then R8(again, according to von Saurma aerodynamics is responsible for bad Doettinger Hoehe top speed. I expected more from him since I talked with one Ring freak and in his opinion engine power is the key element here...)!

Let me explain this:
-Hockenheim time R8 1.12,7min
-Hockenheim Zielgerade top speed R8 191km/h
-Hockenheim time RS4 1.15,4min
-Hockenheim Zielgerade top speed RS4 187km/h

So, since we know that R8 acceleration in 0-200km/h is 16.2s and RS4 16.9s these Hockenheim results are expected...

-Ring time R8 8.04min
-Ring Doettinger Hoehe top speed R8 254km/h
-Ring Schwedenkreuz top speed R8 238km/h
-Ring time RS4 8.09min
-Ring Doettinger Hoehe top speed RS4 262km/h
-Ring Schwedenkreuz top speed RS4 240km/h

This results clearly show you that R8 example that was used by Sport Auto is slower above 200km/h then RS4.Since I do not think that difference in ambiente temperature played major role here(R8-20 degree C, RS4-13 degree C) not so good engine power of that R8 example must be a case here...

BUT, according to Auto Bild Sportscars, EVO and one Swedish magazine R8 is actually faster then RS4 in 0-250km/h!

Let me give you just one example:
-R8 0-250km/h: 29.3s
-RS4 0-250km/h: 31.9s


Last thing that also puts benefite of the doubt on your ESP on/off discussion is the fact that EVO's amazing R8 Bedford time was also achived with ESP off. "

Comments?

[Leadfoot]

KresoF1,

Like I said before, the majority of tests have shown the R8 to be very quick indeed on the track, check the times on the VIR track compared to the GT3RS and the Z06. There is no way that this 'Supertest' conducted by Sport Auto is a reflection of the rest of the tests, it's at odds with the others.

I will not believe any result conducted on the ring that doesn't produce a time less than 8:00.

[7:53 RS6]

Its all about the driver. Ok guys dont go thru the roof now, Frank Stippler drove the R8 full lap in about 7.50min. Let me tell you that even the CSL will go faster than Horst 7.50 whit the right driver.
Heck even me drive my CSL at more or less the same time as Horst do, i gained some speed these days. Lets say im 6-10 seconds slower.

Remember that on all Sport auto laps one must add about 4-6 seconds to get a compleate FULL lap(depending on car) due to they dont drive section T13, wich is around 200m.

Stippler did the compleate full lap:revs: :hihi:
Still whats intressting is what Horst drive, as he drive all cars, just a pointer.

[Kram]

ok, we are ready. Tell us what he drives :confused: :rolleyes:


At least it is great to know for sure that the car is capable of much more than the test showed. :R8kiss: Do you have any news from the other cars that Erik said?

A bit OT, but 7:53RS6, what tire was you using on the ring to do those great lap times in your own car?

[OfftheHeZie]

What was the mileage of the Sport Autos R8 in comparison to the RS4. It is not a myth that the RS4/R8 engine produces more power after mileage - max around 10k miles. And we have all seen the dyno test results of the R8 engine vs the RS4, they are different in torque curve, but I cannot remember exactly how it looks or if this answers any questions about speed differences at a certain km/h.

~Mason

[OfftheHeZie]

http://www.rs6.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12429

Here is the post made by one of our members, but I thought I recalled a previous test showed more variation in torque figures. Anyhow, all this really shows is the RS4 having more of a volcanic increase in its torque versus the R8s gradual increase. It also seems as if the R8s torque holds on better at higher engine RPM, but there is too little variation in this graph to be 100% on that.

~Mason

[elliot]

I heard news about Gallardo facelift as well and some other Audi news...

You cant leave us hanging like that!! Can you let us know what nes on gallardo facelift and R8 V10???

Thanks in advance!

[cazorp]

BMW now claims 8:10 around Nordschleife "12 seconds faster than the previous M3" all according to their M Gmbh CEO..

[7:53 RS6]

Regarding the CLS time I think the tires it used are not available anymore. Maybe by name but not by product.

That's what I've heard, not sure iof right or wrong and we don't need a(nother) big debate about it but it would be nice with a "yes/no."

I buy those same cup tiers in batches(plenty) as a have done for the last 3 years.
There are the same compound as ever for the CSL.

[7:53 RS6]

ok, we are ready. Tell us what he drives :confused: :rolleyes:


At least it is great to know for sure that the car is capable of much more than the test showed. :R8kiss: Do you have any news from the other cars that Erik said?

A bit OT, but 7:53RS6, what tire was you using on the ring to do those great lap times in your own car?


Same cup tiers that was on the CSL when SA and HvS did test it, cup tiers Michelin.

[Erik]

Does anyone know the temperature when the R8 was tested?

The M3 = +22C.

[cazorp]

whats the official time for the M3 then??

[EKaru]

whats the official time for the M3 then??


Link:
http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=186742