Launch control class action? - AudiWorld Forums

Go Back   AudiWorld Forums > Audi Models > Audi A6 / S6 / RS 6 > S6 (C7 Platform) Discussion
Log In 


S6 (C7 Platform) Discussion Discussion forum for the C7 Audi S6 produced from 2012 - Present

Launch control class action?

Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-14-2013, 10:40 PM   #1
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: California
Posts: 131
Default Launch control class action?

Seems like a more legitimate complaint than many class action lawsuits.

Audi both brags in advertising about C&D's 3.7 0-60 which required the use of launch control and also describes the operation of it in the owners manual without ever disclosing that the use is limited to 200 times.

One of our group is Phknlwyr.

What say you? Haven't we received less than was promised and incurred damages in the process?
__________________
2013 Audi S6 Estoril/Lunar Silver
2007 BMW 335i Dinan-tuned Montego Blue/Tan
2000 BMW M5 Silverstone/Black
cagambler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 03:38 AM   #2
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 132
Default

There is no chance a stock s6 will do 3.7 0-60 and I would be hard pressed to think one could even get sub 4 seconds so I too am a little upset that Audi claimed that on commercials etc. I do also wish they would have disclosed in the owners manual that there is a LC limit, although I've only used 10% of my allotted LC
ecpChris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 03:45 AM   #3
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The NH
Posts: 383
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecpChris View Post
There is no chance a stock s6 will do 3.7 0-60 and I would be hard pressed to think one could even get sub 4 seconds so I too am a little upset that Audi claimed that on commercials etc.
Car and Driver posted that time. Are you claiming that AoA sent a ringer?
__________________
2015 Lapiz Blue Volkswagen Golf R

2014 Scuba Blue Q5

*Need VCDS Mods in Southern NH?*
Will mod for beer!
nobbyv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 03:47 AM   #4
Audiworld Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 48
Default

I guess if you want to experience a virtual unlimited number of launch control type performance you have to spend an additional $30,000 and spring for the RS7.
carnuts3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 03:51 AM   #5
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 132
Default

Well, could be that Audi sent a ringer. Could also be that C&D uses a 1 ft rollout. Could be both. To my knowledge, no one has been able to replicate the 1/4 mile ET and trap speed set by some magazines either.
If anyone follows other car platforms, the newest f10 BMW m5 has a "press tune" out that gives the car a slight power bump. I don't really have any doubt in my mind that car manufacturers all have "press tunes" that perform better than most real world cars. The majority of people who buy these cars are looking at these magazines to see how a car performs.
ecpChris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 04:25 AM   #6
AudiWorld Member
 
sciblades's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: North Salem/Palm Beach
Posts: 178
Send a message via AIM to sciblades Send a message via MSN to sciblades Send a message via Yahoo to sciblades Send a message via Skype™ to sciblades
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cagambler View Post
Seems like a more legitimate complaint than many class action lawsuits.

Audi both brags in advertising about C&D's 3.7 0-60 which required the use of launch control and also describes the operation of it in the owners manual without ever disclosing that the use is limited to 200 times.

One of our group is Phknlwyr.

What say you? Haven't we received less than was promised and incurred damages in the process?
I would join in on one..I feel lied to and betrayed and naturally I will take a rs7 as compensation for my pain and suffering
__________________
C7 s6 Unitronic tuned 483whp 570tq
11.4 @ 120

Last edited by sciblades; 11-15-2013 at 04:27 AM.
sciblades is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 07:07 AM   #7
AudiWorld Super User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nobbyv View Post
Car and Driver posted that time. Are you claiming that AoA sent a ringer?
Audi absolutely produced a commercial that boast 3.7 secs!! Even though in small print they fall back on Car & Driver's reference, AoA has a bigger responsibility than advertising hear say claims. Show me one person in the US that has launched a stock C7 S6 and got a 3.7 sec 0-60. As stated in this thread, even in the best conditions, it seems you'd be hard pressed to get sub 4.

Obviously, it takes some accurate and calibrated equipment to measure exact start to 60 times and most consumers don't have that easily afforded to them like Car & Driver. That said, I sure would like to know the sub 4 sec times of those stock owners who had the proper equipment to measure down to the 10ths... on a strip or otherwise - please post the times in this thread and state the place, environment conditions and method of measurement (100% stock only).

I could have opted for/afforded the RS7... just saying AoA...



Last edited by Shredster; 11-15-2013 at 07:48 AM.
Shredster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 07:23 AM   #8
AudiWorld Super User
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Duluth, GA
Posts: 2,824
Default

I believe C&D uses Vbox which is available to the public.

Click the image to open in full size.

http://tothefloor.com/vbox-sale-the-...ce-on-the-net/
http://www.velocitybox.co.uk/
__________________
Robert Cheng
2014 Q5 TDI, Phantom Black, S-Line, B&O, Nav, Side Assist
2013 S6, Estoril Blue, B&O, LED, cold weather, comfort seats, rear shade, BBS CH-R 20x9 ET25, Stasis 25.4mm RSB
2010 S4, 6-spd, Meteor Gray, Prestige, Sport Diff, Strat shifter, H&R Rear Sway -- SOLD
2000 S4, 6-spd, Brilliant Black, Stg3 & other goodies -- SOLD

OEM Audi Wheel Page

RobC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 07:38 AM   #9
AudiWorld Super User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobC View Post
I believe C&D uses Vbox which is available to the public.

Click the image to open in full size.

http://tothefloor.com/vbox-sale-the-...ce-on-the-net/
http://www.velocitybox.co.uk/
At approximately $600, I'm not going to buy one to measure my stock S6 times but I'm sure people with stock S6s know people or tuners that have them. Let's have it folks... if you've got one or have access to one, post your stock C7 S6 0-60 times in the best conditions you find... no wind, lower altitudes, flat ground, cool'ish outside air temps, low-moderate humidity, good gas...
Shredster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 07:45 AM   #10
Audiworld Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 81
Default

I have never used launch control (yet) but it really bothers me that a feature included by the manufacturer and described in the manual has a HIDDEN limit. I would have been more understanding if they stated the 200 limit in the manual. The owner who reached the limit already should have a solid legal case against Audi.
turbonator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 09:14 AM   #11
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredster View Post
At approximately $600, I'm not going to buy one to measure my stock S6 times but I'm sure people with stock S6s know people or tuners that have them. Let's have it folks... if you've got one or have access to one, post your stock C7 S6 0-60 times in the best conditions you find... no wind, lower altitudes, flat ground, cool'ish outside air temps, low-moderate humidity, good gas...
I have the Performance box. The best 0-60 I could get was 4.2 stock. It wasn't the best conditions but it wasn't hot and humid either. I tried doing tuned 0-60 at the track but it launched so violently that the times didn't register. I need to figure out a way to absorb some of the impact so that doesn't happen anymore. Pretty sure although there is 3 suction mounts, it moved and hit the windshield
ecpChris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 09:26 AM   #12
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The NH
Posts: 383
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredster View Post
Audi absolutely produced a commercial that boast 3.7 secs!!
Did someone say they didn't? They referenced the C&D test; C&D DID get a 3.7sec 0-60 result UNDER THE PARAMETERS OF THEIR TEST.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecpChris View Post
I have the Performance box. The best 0-60 I could get was 4.2 stock. It wasn't the best conditions but it wasn't hot and humid either.
So...knowing that you yourself ran a 4.2 stock under not the "best conditions": is it possible there's another 2-3 tenths that someone COULD get under ideal conditions? Let's say 55deg, 30% humidity, sea level, nice launch surface, decently worn tires.

And your launch: did you use the 1ft roll-out that C&D takes pains to mention they use when calculating their 0-60 times? If not, wouldn't you agree that another 2-3 tenths is possible using a 1ft roll-out?

Take 2/10ths here, 3/10th there off the time you yourself have seen, and you're at 3.7 seconds. Is this really so hard to believe?

So in summary: you want to start a class action lawsuit against AoA for citing a review by a car publication that stated they achieved a specific time under a specific set of conditions. Despite, by your own admission, never having tried to recreate their results under the same set of conditions.

I'm not trying to call you out, but to start talking lawsuits just sounds ridiculous to me.
__________________
2015 Lapiz Blue Volkswagen Golf R

2014 Scuba Blue Q5

*Need VCDS Mods in Southern NH?*
Will mod for beer!
nobbyv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 09:37 AM   #13
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nobbyv View Post
Did someone say they didn't? They referenced the C&D test; C&D DID get a 3.7sec 0-60 result UNDER THE PARAMETERS OF THEIR TEST.



So...knowing that you yourself ran a 4.2 stock under not the "best conditions": is it possible there's another 2-3 tenths that someone COULD get under ideal conditions? Let's say 55deg, 30% humidity, sea level, nice launch surface, decently worn tires.

And your launch: did you use the 1ft roll-out that C&D takes pains to mention they use when calculating their 0-60 times? If not, wouldn't you agree that another 2-3 tenths is possible using a 1ft roll-out?

Take 2/10ths here, 3/10th there off the time you yourself have seen, and you're at 3.7 seconds. Is this really so hard to believe?

So in summary: you want to start a class action lawsuit against AoA for citing a review by a car publication that stated they achieved a specific time under a specific set of conditions. Despite, by your own admission, never having tried to recreate their results under the same set of conditions.

I'm not trying to call you out, but to start talking lawsuits just sounds ridiculous to me.
What is your deal? Can you please tell me where in this thread I said I was going to start or join a lawsuit? All I brought to this thread, or any other thread on this forum, was facts from my experiences with this car. The 4.2 was not poor conditions, but it was not -1500 DA with sticky tires on a prepped track either. It was the best 0-60 out of about 15 attempts in which several were 4.4. No 1ft rollout was used.
A 1/2 second in 0-60 would be the equivalent of adding a tune to the stock car. Not sure if you realize that.
ecpChris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 09:53 AM   #14
AudiWorld Super User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,573
Default

Easy there nobyyv... down boy.
Shredster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 09:54 AM   #15
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The NH
Posts: 383
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecpChris View Post
What is your deal? Can you please tell me where in this thread I said I was going to start or join a lawsuit? All I brought to this thread, or any other thread on this forum, was facts from my experiences with this car. The 4.2 was not poor conditions, but it was not -1500 DA with sticky tires on a prepped track either. It was the best 0-60 out of about 15 attempts in which several were 4.4. No 1ft rollout was used.
A 1/2 second in 0-60 would be the equivalent of adding a tune to the stock car. Not sure if you realize that.
My "deal" is that I read the title of this thread, which specifically mentions class action lawsuits. Yours was the first reply, and I inferred that when you said "so I too am a little upset that Audi claimed that on commercials" you also felt that this was class-action worthy. A leap? Maybe, but a small one, I'd say. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

I also realize just fine what subtracting .5 seconds would entail UNDER THE SAME TEST CONDITIONS. I also realize that a 1ft rollout would be the equivalent of subtracting 3/10ths from a standing 0-60 time. Here's C&D themselves pointing this out:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...nce-of-rollout

All of the US automotive magazines use the 1ft rollout. All agree that this is the equivalent of subtracting 3/10ths. Subtracting 3/10s from the best time you posted would get down to 3.9secs. I don't think it's too much of a leap to think that ideal test conditions could shave another 2/10ths.

I am an engineer. I design controlled experiements for a living. Recreating the exact test environment is one of the biggest struggles in recreating test results. But pains must be taken to eliminate whatever variables can be eliminated. You haven't done that, and instead have elected to post in a thread with "Class Action" in the title because you haven't been able to recreate test results that by your own admission were not the same as those that C&D ran their test under.

To me, that's like saying "Audi claims a 155MPH top speed. But I drove my car underwater and the best I saw before the engine quit was 22."
__________________
2015 Lapiz Blue Volkswagen Golf R

2014 Scuba Blue Q5

*Need VCDS Mods in Southern NH?*
Will mod for beer!
nobbyv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 10:15 AM   #16
AudiWorld Member
 
MalibuCANE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: SoCal
Posts: 226
Default

I'm waiting until 1000 miles to launch and I doubt I will even hit 200 here in LA where I spend most of my time in bumper to bumper traffic. That said, the shouldn't limit it without a disclaimer.
__________________
2014 S6 - Phantom Black - Black Optics - Carbon Inlays - Driver's Assistance - Full LED
MalibuCANE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 10:42 AM   #17
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nobbyv View Post
My "deal" is that I read the title of this thread, which specifically mentions class action lawsuits. Yours was the first reply, and I inferred that when you said "so I too am a little upset that Audi claimed that on commercials" you also felt that this was class-action worthy. A leap? Maybe, but a small one, I'd say. If I'm wrong, I apologize.
You are wrong. There isn't much action on the s6 forum so naturally when I have free time, I look at the unread threads. I did try to replicate Audi's claim of 3.7 0-60 (by way of C&D) and was not happy (aka upset) that I could not come close to those results. Fact. You don't know me and put an abrasive post accusing me of being the one starting a class action lawsuit. Opinion and a lie.. For being an engineer, that is more than a small leap.

I also realize just fine what subtracting .5 seconds would entail UNDER THE SAME TEST CONDITIONS. I also realize that a 1ft rollout would be the equivalent of subtracting 3/10ths from a standing 0-60 time. Here's C&D themselves pointing this out:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...nce-of-rollout
Ok, I understand what you are trying to say. I would still love to see an s6, that wasn't supplied by AoA to the press, do 3.7 0-60 even with a 1 ft rollout. Bmw supplies press vehicles with slightly higher outputs so would it be a "small leap" to think AoA would do the same?

All of the US automotive magazines use the 1ft rollout. All agree that this is the equivalent of subtracting 3/10ths. Subtracting 3/10s from the best time you posted would get down to 3.9secs. I don't think it's too much of a leap to think that ideal test conditions could shave another 2/10ths. Not a huge leap from the 1 4.2 I was able to put down, no. A huge leap from the series of 4.4, maybe. I understand what you are trying to say though. I just disagree.

I am an engineer. I design controlled experiements for a living. Recreating the exact test environment is one of the biggest struggles in recreating test results. But pains must be taken to eliminate whatever variables can be eliminated. You haven't done that, and instead have elected to post in a thread with "Class Action" in the title because you haven't been able to recreate test results that by your own admission were not the same as those that C&D ran their test under. I have not tried to recreate C&D's temperature, DA, track surface - No. That info is not posted anywhere to my knowledge. C&D used a vehicle with 20" OEM wheels while I used 19". In my testing, in the same exact day that yielded .1 on both 0-60 and 1/4 mile. When doing testing on any vehicle (car or watercraft) and trying to measure gains/losses then yes I try my best to compensate for variables. I could explain the process (adding fuel after runs, monitoring several temperatures and engine parameters, logging, recording data via Vbox etc). In addition, would you believe C&D had the most optimum conditions in the universe? You would see people getting better than 3.7 0-60 as well if that were the case. I have yet to see anyone even match it. To prove my point, I bested APR's time/trap for their tune in less favorable conditions. You will probably say that not many people have accurately measured the 0-60 on their stock s6. Probably true but there has been a handful. If anyone in NJ would like use my Vbox on their stock s6 to prove me wrong, pm me.
I elected to post in this thread because it hasn't been brought up anywhere else that no one has been able to replicate the 3.7 0-60. I also feel that Audi should have had small print that LC is limited to 200 times. Nothing more, nothing less.


To me, that's like saying "Audi claims a 155MPH top speed. But I drove my car underwater and the best I saw before the engine quit was 22." No, it isn't so let's be realistic.
.....
ecpChris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 10:49 AM   #18
AudiWorld Super User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nobbyv View Post
I also realize that a 1ft rollout would be the equivalent of subtracting 3/10ths from a standing 0-60 time. Here's C&D themselves pointing this out:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...nce-of-rollout

All of the US automotive magazines use the 1ft rollout.
Good info to post in this thread. I was not aware of the rollout factor that Car and Driver uses. This indeed changes the scope of the discussion. This said, ecpChris has a solid rebuttal and anyone can elect to post and comment in any thread... doesn't mean they are in support of a lawsuit and none the less can express their opinions regardless.

Last edited by Shredster; 11-15-2013 at 10:54 AM.
Shredster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 11:22 AM   #19
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The NH
Posts: 383
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecpChris
You are wrong. There isn't much action on the s6 forum so naturally when I have free time, I look at the unread threads. I did try to replicate Audi's claim of 3.7 0-60 (by way of C&D) and was not happy (aka upset) that I could not come close to those results. Fact. You don't know me and put an abrasive post accusing me of being the one starting a class action lawsuit. Opinion and a lie.. For being an engineer, that is more than a small leap.
As I said, if I was wrong in my inference, I apologize.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecpChris
Ok, I understand what you are trying to say. I would still love to see an s6, that wasn't supplied by AoA to the press, do 3.7 0-60 even with a 1 ft rollout.
I understand. I would like to see this as well. I am just less skeptical in thinking that it can and will happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecpChris
Bmw supplies press vehicles with slightly higher outputs so would it be a "small leap" to think AoA would do the same?
As a former BMW owner, I keep up with what is going on there and have heard rumors about the "press tune" that BMW supposedly flashes/enables in the cars the give to the press. I have not, however, seen data that shows that this tune actually exists, or that it causes a bump in power. A test that showed a dyno plot before/after would make me a believer. It certainly isn't beyond the realm of possibility that this exists. But it's beside the point, because as I said I fully believe recreating C&D's test results under the same conditions is possible with ANY stock C7 S6 (obviously, barring a car with mechanical problems).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecpChris
In addition, would you believe C&D had the most optimum conditions in the universe?
Not only would I believe it, I would almost guarantee it (OK, not "the universe", but "on Earth"): C&D (as do the other mags) apply proprietary correction factors to all of their quoted 0-60 times to get an "ideal" result, as if the test were run under ideal conditions. They also take the average of tests run in two directions to eliminate the effect of a head or tailwind. Note that these corrections don't account for the launch pad surface, nor can I find any info on what prep they may/may not do to the surface ahead of time, so that remains an unknown.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...p-speed-page-2

These steps effectively guarantee that C&D is able to reliably recreate their testing environment, no matter the actual conditions. I'm going to go ahead and make another assumption that you didn't apply any such correction factors to your runs. If I'm mistaken, please correct me. And I still believe that a test done under literally *perfect* conditions could easily account for cutting several tenths of a second off of a 0-60 time.

Further, I would submit that potentially the largest factor playing into testing like this is the driver. Clearly, you are quite experienced at ripping off 0-60 runs. But are you as experienced as a C&D driver who does this kind of testing day in, day out as a career? I myself have only been to the track a handful of times. I'd have no confidence in my ability to get the best possible results from any of my cars compared to a professional driver.
__________________
2015 Lapiz Blue Volkswagen Golf R

2014 Scuba Blue Q5

*Need VCDS Mods in Southern NH?*
Will mod for beer!

Last edited by nobbyv; 11-15-2013 at 11:29 AM.
nobbyv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 11:28 AM   #20
AudiWorld Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The NH
Posts: 383
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredster View Post
ecpChris has a solid rebuttal and anyone can elect to post and comment in any thread... doesn't mean they are in support of a lawsuit and none the less can express their opinions regardless.
Of course anyone can post in any thread they like. But I'm sure you can see how when there's a post entitled "Shouldn't We Start a Lawsuit Because of X" and someone replies, "What about Y, I'm not happy with that, either" it wouldn't be coming from left field in thinking that they supported the original post. I know now that was not the case, stand corrected, and apologized.
__________________
2015 Lapiz Blue Volkswagen Golf R

2014 Scuba Blue Q5

*Need VCDS Mods in Southern NH?*
Will mod for beer!
nobbyv is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Tags
200, 2014, a7, allroad, audi, control, launch, lawsuit, limit, s6, s7, sq5

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:08 PM.


Copyright 2014 AudiWorld.com Audi Enthusiast Community