AxelS4

Let us view this objectively. 1. The B6 is heavier. 2. Despite the fact that the engine is not a lot heavier, it is further forward and therefore impacts turn in. 3. The torque curve is different by means of having less area under the curve, so of course the acceleration is worse because the force available to accelerate the mass is less. The NA engine therefore cannot keep up with the twin turbo B5 that had a flat plateau instead of a peak.

Mark.core

I don't know what Audi was thinking. It's a powerful car, but sometimes cars go the way of the Nova.

RCS 2

Audi's turbocharged cars always seem to perform better than factory estimates or than one would expect for power ratings. The B5 S4 actually gave consistent magazine tests of 0 -60 at 5.5 seconds and 1/4 mille at around 14.1 - 14.2 seconds. I was always surrprised how consistent these numbers were from different magazines and different years. Most cars show amuch wider fluctuation in result betwen different publications.

Audi's normally aspirated cars sometimes seem to struggle to meet factory estimates or performance projections based on power. The Audi V8 for some reason has never seemed to perform up to levels of similar sized and even lower power rated rivals from BMW and Mercedes in acceleration tests. It is a great engine in the mid and high end, but has always seemed to lack off the line grunt.

AUJ

Umm. Research factory vs. published times on the S8.

RCS 2

OK, just did a quick search. Had some difficulty finding the factory performance rating since the car has been taken off most web sites, but it looks like the factory claimed 0 - 100 kph (62 mph) as 6.3 sec. I found 0 - 60 tests ranging from 5.8 to 6.5 sec (the wide ranges of these tests always amazes me). Dropping the best and worst extremes left most centered around 6.1 to 6.2 sec. 0 - 60 or right at the factory rating, but certainly not shattering it.

b-thumper

The B6 platform is a completely new chassis and has different body panels, different electronics, and different interior accoutraments.

Saying that it will weigh the same is just not logical along your lines of reasoning.

AUJ

something supportive on the S6 claims vs. publications.

quickersilver

Hey, that's Auto Union Jack's signature you're using!! Gee, I never suspected you were him...lol.

quickersilver

...which is why it does so well when it's in the proper gear.

Look at Audi's published acceleration figures: they list 5.6 seconds to 100 km/h, and 20.6 to 200. This gives 15 flat from 100-200km/h: the M3 does it in 12.9 per the test below. Unless these figures are *very* conservative, the M3 will still beat it handily, both from a roll and from a start, provided the driver uses the proper gear of course.

However, I'm still waiting to see more road tests before I decide one way of the other, but I will say this: what I've seen till now is not encouraging.<ul><li><a href="http://www.track-challenge.com/main_e.asp?useframe=singletest1_e.asp?Car=2">http://www.track-challenge.com/main_e.asp?useframe=singletest1_e.asp?Car=2</a</li></ul>

AUJ

at The Ring. The data used in my post is straight from your link. Audi hit the mark, IMHO.