B8 s4 vs. 2012 A7: How are 0-60 times so simular?

[Stone126]

Recently I have been reading about the 2012 A7 and all of the aesthetic and performance accolades that have been bestowed upon it by reviews of the vehicle ranging from Car and Driver to the Wall Street Journal. Personally the car does not really appeal to me, although I am proud of Audi for making such a more attractive car in this segment in relation to Porsche and BMW. However, my questoin is about the engine and the 0-60 times reported of each car. B8 0-60 times are right around 5.0-5.2 where as Car and Driver reported a 0-60 time for the 2012 A7 of 5.1 seconds. Although each car as the same engine, the A7 weighs nearly 400 pounds more than the S4. How is this possible????

[riegeraudi]

the S4 0-60 time is more like 4.9-5.1 and the A7 is more like 5.4-5.5 and the A6 is 5.1-5.2 from most of the reports I have read. You are taking the higher S4 times with the lowest A7 time. It was also possible that the A7 time from C&D was a rolling start. You really need to take the times from the same source for it to be more accurate because each magazine has it's own way of launching the car.

[Stubek]

Simple, gears.
AudiUSA website gives 5.4 0-60 for the A7 and with the 8 speed, you get the following gears
1st 4.714
2nd 3.143
You won't use third getting to 60mph, so that is some pretty tall gearing.

They give the S4 a 0-60 time of 4.9 on the website with the following first two gears
S tronic® Manual
Gear Ratios:
1st 3.692 3.667
2nd 2.238 2.158

They both have the same torque (325 lb ft), but the S4 has about 23 more HP. That torque is what is amazing though, that in first gear will get you to 30mph real damn quick.

[NWS4Guy]

Not to mention the A7 is bigger, heavier, and has a slushbox, not a manual.

[Stubek]

That slushbox is nothing to laugh at, not like the slushboxes of the old days

[Psalm40]

InsideLine generated their own numbers for both cars. S4 was 4.9 and the A7 was 5.4. Both off the line with no roll-out.

[burrito007]

lets analyze here

OP is mag draggin
OP is quoting 0-60 times
OP doesn't like the A7's style

... simular

[GSS5]

I remember reading a recent CLS vs. A7 comparison somewhere, forgot which magazine it was. The A7 did standstill to 60 in 4.7 and the writer actually questioned how it was a couple tenths of a second faster than an A7 they'd tested a couple months before that.

[GSS5]

That slushbox is nothing to laugh at, not like the slushboxes of the old days

this.

i drove a tiptronic s5 a couple of times and the shifts are very quick and smooth. even blips the throttle on downshifts. definitely not your typical slushbox.

[Kandiru]

This with 4 doors would make the ultimate crazy daddy family sedan, Panamera beater LMFAO:

Shown here with the correct number of pedals.

[MeteorS4Ti]

I've done 4.5s 0-60 in my S4 (only mod is intake).

[riegeraudi]

Not to mention the A7 is bigger, heavier, and has a slushbox, not a manual.

I got to agree the time difference is most likely due to the extra 200-250lbs plus the slushbox is a little slower than the DSG.

[Brick Oven]

This with 4 doors would make the ultimate crazy daddy family sedan, Panamera beater LMFAO:

Shown here with the correct number of pedals.

The engine WOULD make a nice buffer between yourself and screaming kids in the back row...

[cyberS4]

The S4's 4.9 seconds 0-60 manufacturer's number is conservative. Road & Track recorded the S4 at 4.4 seconds ... and going head-to-head with the fastest Porsche Spider (see link below). So, the A7s fastest at 5.1 seconds vs. the S4's fastest at 4.4 seconds is a 0.7 seconds gap. That leaves the A7 in the dust for sure. If you see an S4 number around 5.1, that's the S4's slowest. The A7's slowest test is I think at around 5.7 seconds, which I read somewhere.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...564774ca35.pdf

Recently I have been reading about the 2012 A7 and all of the aesthetic and performance accolades that have been bestowed upon it by reviews of the vehicle ranging from Car and Driver to the Wall Street Journal. Personally the car does not really appeal to me, although I am proud of Audi for making such a more attractive car in this segment in relation to Porsche and BMW. However, my questoin is about the engine and the 0-60 times reported of each car. B8 0-60 times are right around 5.0-5.2 where as Car and Driver reported a 0-60 time for the 2012 A7 of 5.1 seconds. Although each car as the same engine, the A7 weighs nearly 400 pounds more than the S4. How is this possible????

[cyberS4]

The S4's 4.9 seconds 0-60 manufacturer's number is conservative. Road & Track recorded the S4 at 4.4 seconds ... and going head-to-head with the fastest Porsche Spider (see link below). So, the A7s fastest at 5.1 seconds vs. the S4's fastest at 4.4 seconds is a 0.7 seconds gap. That leaves the A7 in the dust for sure. If you see an S4 number around 5.1, that's the S4's slowest. The A7's slowest test is I think at around 5.7 seconds, which I read somewhere.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...564774ca35.pdf

Recently I have been reading about the 2012 A7 and all of the aesthetic and performance accolades that have been bestowed upon it by reviews of the vehicle ranging from Car and Driver to the Wall Street Journal. Personally the car does not really appeal to me, although I am proud of Audi for making such a more attractive car in this segment in relation to Porsche and BMW. However, my questoin is about the engine and the 0-60 times reported of each car. B8 0-60 times are right around 5.0-5.2 where as Car and Driver reported a 0-60 time for the 2012 A7 of 5.1 seconds. Although each car as the same engine, the A7 weighs nearly 400 pounds more than the S4. How is this possible????

[adbender]

I've done 4.5s 0-60 in my S4 (only mod is intake).

very believable...R&T has consistently achieved 0-60 times of 4.4-4.5 (with 1 ft roll-out) on stock setup

definitely quicker than an A7 if you were really worried about it...

[GSS5]

From MotorTrend

The "little" engine in the A7 had us scratching our heads. It's down on cylinders and way down on power compared with the other two. Rated at just 310 ponies and 325 pound-feet of torque, the five-door four-ringer's supercharged V-6 bested the Jag by virtue of hitting 60 mph in a startling 4.7 seconds and flying down the quarter mile in a very quick 13.3 seconds at 103.5 mph. The slightly lighter and much more powerful Jaguar (385 horses, 380 pound-feet of torque) needed 13.4 seconds, though its trap speed was 106.3 mph.

Like most other Audis, the A7 is AWD, but something smells slightly fishy in Ingolstadt, and here's why: Last month, we tested another A7 with the same engine and transmission (Audi's very nice eight-speed automatic) and recorded a 60-mph run in 5.3 seconds and a quarter-mile time of 13.8 at 100.9 mph. True, because of options or lack thereof, this A7 is nearly 100 pounds lighter than the car we previously tested (4140 pounds versus 4232), but 92 pounds does not explain away six-tenths of a second. Our testing crew complained about the A7's violent shifts, and we asked Audi if the transmission (or anything else) had been reprogrammed. They had no explanation.

Read more: http://motortrend.automotive.com/164...#ixzz1W0c3OEfE

i don't understand all the underrating bs that manufacturers do these days. if they're that afraid of stealing sales from the low volume top tier models then make those that much better too.