New Road & Track Performance Results

[LAT]

Just in the Jan 2011 issue of R&T

These new results are more consistent with Euro magazine and compare more favorably with my results from a previous post. Although with the MTM tune I expected better and will look further into this next spring.

60-100; Mine 4.9 (R&T 4.7)
60-120; Mine 9.2 (R&T 8.4)

80-120; Mine 6.7 (R&T 6.1)

The more interesting point is that although the Porsche Turbo S that was also tested was faster in acceleration there was only .09 sec difference on the track. R8 1.40.20 (997TS 1.40.11). This difference can be attributed to the turbo lag and how much easier the R8 is to drive fast.

0-60 R8 3.7 (997TS 2.6)
0-120 R8 12.1 (997TTS 9.2)
1/4 mile R8 11.9@118.7 (997TS 10.7@128.9)

Well done Audi

[RXBG]

and that was one of the slowest 1/4 mile times i've seen for an R8 V10. they are usually in the mid to low 11's.

[LAT]

and that was one of the slowest 1/4 mile times i've seen for an R8 V10. they are usually in the mid to low 11's.

I agree that there are a wide range of performance figures for our cars published. Is it the drivers or is Audi not putting out a consistent product.

The following were all published results for the 1/4 mile with 6MT

R&T 11.5@123.1
MT 11.6@122.1
MT 11.7@120.7
C&D 11.7@122.0
R&T 11.9@118.7
C&D 12.0@@118.0
EVO 12.1@122.0
Autocar 12.4@117.2

I have been to the Porsche factory in Stuttgart a few times. I learned that every engine goes on an engine dyno and if the engine is not performing to published spec or better it gets torn down and inspected.

Is Audi as vigilant in Gyor, or is it something else?

[SebringSilver]

Don't forget that differences in track surface, tire condition, temperature, altitude, not to mention driver skill/familiarity with the car, all play a huge part in the numbers that various magazines record for their road tests. Can't really compare numbers from one magazine to the next, or even if conducted by the same magazine but at different venues or different times of the year.

[RXBG]

LAT- without a doubt it is the driver and conditions. metal will not vary as much as ankle movement, tire conditions, track surface, etc.... in the latest gtr 0-60 fiasco nissan kicks itself in the nuts by filming 6-9 minutes of the car getting its tires hand rubbed to get them as smooth as possible- not to mention various tries over and over and over again- in order to get the 3.1 second time for the 2012 model. if each car mag went to those lengths for every 0-60 time you'd see honda civic 0-60 times of 5 seconds.

[dailydriver]

Don't forget that differences in track surface, tire condition, temperature, altitude, not to mention driver skill/familiarity with the car, all play a huge part in the numbers that various magazines record for their road tests. Can't really compare numbers from one magazine to the next, or even if conducted by the same magazine but at different venues or different times of the year.

All important variables that account for how significantly different times can be. I did get several runs in at our local drag strip back in September and most runs were in the high 11s and my best time was 11.7 at 119 mph. Here is a video of one run although it was not the best since I was experimenting with trying to not shift into 4th at the end and bumped the rev limiter:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6Ww9xslwuo"]YouTube - Audi R8 V10 quarter mile at Route 66 Raceway[/ame]