AUJ

Nobody cares.

quickersilver

...but for some of us, it is a disappointment. And there is no published 'ring data provided on the site I provided for a B6 S4. But I'll bet you that when there is, it will not be faster than an E46 M3, based upon the test results which are now trickling out. Which would be no big deal, except for all of the stupid media leaks, supplied by Audi, claiming the car would be an "M3 killer". It clearly is no such thing, and Audi once again has shown that they know nothing about marketing cars.

quickersilver

But I pegged you within a few days...pretty obvious it was you. Same posting style, minus the winkie faces at the end of every post, and same topics of interest. Duh...did you think you were fooling anyone?

AUJ

As long as I lay off the purveyors and stay positive, nobody cares. Thread untracked.

quickersilver

...which, based upon early test results, has turned out to be quite untrue. I'm really disappointed, but not entirely surprised. It'll still be a helluva car, though, although I sure hope it's significantly faster to 100 km/h in other tests than in this one!! (I suspect it will be, and that this test was a fluke, but time will tell..)

AUJ

The elasticity times are from your link.

quickersilver

...you might have a point. Yet the 5th gear 50-80km/h time of the *B5* S4 is faster than both the E46 M3 and Porsche 911, yet both of these cars manage to kill the B5 S4 at the ring, by nearly 20 seconds a lap. It also manages to beat the times obtained in the mag you're citing for the *new* S4. Here are the 80-100 km/h "elasticity times", as you call them, for the E46 M3, the 911, and the B5 S4, with their lap times for Nurburgring and Hockenheim (same driver):

CAR: 80-100km/h, 5th gear/Ring/Hockenheim
E46 M3: 3.4 sec/8.22 min/1.17,6 min
911: 3.5 sec/8.17 min/1.17,1 min
B5 (old) S4: 3.0 sec/8.42 min/1.21,1 min

There you have it: not one, but two cases where it is conclusively shown that "elasticity" doesn't mean jack at the track: the S4 beats both the M3 and the 911 in "elasticity" by about 1/2 second, yet both of them kill it at straightline through the gears acclearation, *and* at the 'ring and Hockenheim; similarly, the M3 beats the 911 in "elasticity" by 0.1 second, yet the 911 beats it by 1/2 sec at Hockenheim and 5 seconds at the Ring.

What counts at a track is <b>in gear acceleration</b>, as in "in the proper gear", and under these circumstances, the M3 is clearly faster. It is also nearly 300 pounds lighter, with better weight distribution and wider tires. The S4 will have a tough time against it, stock to stock, on a track.

<i>The elasticitiy is why the S4 is faster at The Ring</i>

My link had no Ring times for the new S4. Can you please provide a link to one? Didn't think so...and even if you did, you'd have to show that with the same driver, the new S4 was faster.

Why? Well, here's a quick lesson in racing for you: ever hear of IROC? It is a race where all drivers are put in mechanically identical cars, the idea being that all other factors being equal, the better driver will win. Yet for some reason, all drivers in these cars do not get the same lap times, and there is only one winner.

So, if you say that "driver x turned a time of yy'zz" at the ring in the S4", it is meaningless unless you can show that his times were better in the S4 than the M3; Micheal Schumacher could probably turn faster times at the 'ring in a milk truck than you or I, but that hardly proves that the milk truck is a more capable vehicle than an S4.

This is why the Sport Auto times are a decent yardstick: they use the same driver at the same two tracks for their tests. So, when this mag releases its S4 results, we'll see. Until then, unless you've got some results with the same driver at the same track with the same two cars, you've got meaningless data. Congratulations.

Mark.core

I said it is "roughly the same size" .. I'm not pulling graphs here, just giving my opinion.

PhoenixGTS

I have always understood that our B5s weighed just under 3,600. Not 3,3xx.