RS5 0 to 60 times...

[woodranch]

The stated 0 to 60 time is recorded at 4.6 seconds for the new RS5.Does anyone other the I think that is a little soft for such a car.I would think it would be closer to 4 seconds to compete with other cars in its category.I know the car handles like a go-kart and the exhaust is great but 4.6 seems slow.Am I wrong.Please give me your opinion...Thanks in advance!

[Get Low]

Audi is notorious for sandbagging. I can't wait to see some test times. Wouldn't be surprised to see the an RS launch time in the 4.0 range.

[SantoDomingoS5]

4.6 to 62mph (100km/h) according to European magazines so it should be 4.1-4.3 to 60mph in US which is pretty quick. It also says that can reach 120mph in 12.5 seconds although I think this may be a little too aggressive.

[mantena]

I just hope it is faster and I notice a difference from my 2010 s4!!!!!!!!!!

[DOCEVG]

I just hope it is faster and I notice a difference from my 2010 s4!!!!!!!!!!

Agreed. I hope its faster than my stock '11 S4, which is plenty quick. My concern is the relatively low torque numbers for the RS5.

[GotRS?]

Just concern yourself with power and weight if you're calling "fast" a drag race type of fast. Don't worry about the torque unless you're in the wrong gear, it's what gears are for, to multiply the torque, up to 8500rpm in this case

[B45H1R]

Agreed. I hope its faster than my stock '11 S4, which is plenty quick. My concern is the relatively low torque numbers for the RS5.

The rs4 was officially 4.8 but with a good launch would go 4.2 (even car and driver and autoweek did it)
I suspect with launch control, the RS5 will do 4.0, maybe sniff at 3.9.

[GotRS?]

The rs4 was officially 4.8 but with a good launch would go 4.2 (even car and driver and autoweek did it)
I suspect with launch control, the RS5 will do 4.0, maybe sniff at 3.9.

When I first did the prescribed RS4 launch method I was completely blown away for such a heavy car. Wouldn't the DSG have a bit softer approach or are those little clutches real beasts?

[DinB]

Are you guys sure about that? I have a feeling that the RS5 really is around 4.5-4.6 The issue is not that the RS5 has an ovverated engine, it is more that the S5 has an underrated engine. I would put the V6T at around 380HP so the extra 70HP in the RS5 really do only give it a 0.3 to 0.4 sec advantage. :/ Obviously, it is not all about the 0-60 times so not all decisions can be based on that. Oh, and I hope that I am wrong. :P

[SantoDomingoS5]

I just read an Automobile Magazine and they compare the M5, C63AMG and S6 and somehow the S6 and M5 do 60mph in 3.7seconds while AMG takes 4.1seconds!!! Someone mentioned it in another thread a couple of weeks ago and most couldn't believe it. It seems he/she was right in the money. I just don't understand how a 580hp M5 can do 3.7s to 60mph and Audi S6 with only 420hp matches that time.

[MacRS5]

I just read an Automobile Magazine and they compare the M5, C63AMG and S6 and somehow the S6 and M5 do 60mph in 3.7seconds while AMG takes 4.1seconds!!! Someone mentioned it in another thread a couple of weeks ago and most couldn't believe it. It seems he/she was right in the money. I just don't understand how a 580hp M5 can do 3.7s to 60mph and Audi S6 with only 420hp matches that time.

I saw this to and was wondering about the explanation. Interested if anyone can fill this in for me.

[B45H1R]

I just read an Automobile Magazine and they compare the M5, C63AMG and S6 and somehow the S6 and M5 do 60mph in 3.7seconds while AMG takes 4.1seconds!!! Someone mentioned it in another thread a couple of weeks ago and most couldn't believe it. It seems he/she was right in the money. I just don't understand how a 580hp M5 can do 3.7s to 60mph and Audi S6 with only 420hp matches that time.

4 wheels clawing at the earth > 2 wheels clawing at earth.
Great for acceleration, less good for top speed and turning.

[B45H1R]

When I first did the prescribed RS4 launch method I was completely blown away for such a heavy car. Wouldn't the DSG have a bit softer approach or are those little clutches real beasts?

Those little clutches are really beastly.

[QuaTTrings]

True - sadly the RS5 has never been the "fastest" car in its class. The high revving V8 (RS4/RS5) previously have both been anemic when it comes to putting down "rated" factory quoted power. The face-lift RS5 seems to be slightly better than it was. It's unlike the 2.0t, 3.0t, and new 4.0t that put down almost full rated power to the wheels. Latest magazine out of Germany puts the facelift RS5 at 4.4 seconds to 100km/hr. Likely around 4.2 sec to 60mph.

Pre-facelifted RS5 being dynoed by DigiServices.
RS5 dynoed

RS5 (Facelift) Supertest

Are you guys sure about that? I have a feeling that the RS5 really is around 4.5-4.6 The issue is not that the RS5 has an ovverated engine, it is more that the S5 has an underrated engine. I would put the V6T at around 380HP so the extra 70HP in the RS5 really do only give it a 0.3 to 0.4 sec advantage. :/ Obviously, it is not all about the 0-60 times so not all decisions can be based on that. Oh, and I hope that I am wrong. :P

[TLM_S5]

True - sadly the RS5 has never been the "fastest" car in its class. The high revving V8 (RS4/RS5) have both been anemic when it comes to putting down "rated" factory quoted power. It's unlike the 2.0t, 3.0t, and new 4.0t that put down almost full rated power to the wheels. RS5 has trouble putting down rated power to the crank. Latest magazine out of Germany puts the facelift RS5 at 4.4 seconds to 100km/hr. Likely around 4.2 sec to 60mph. Approximately 420bhp to the crank.

RS5 being dynoed by DigiServices.
RS5 dynoed

Just my opinion, but I think attempts at converting dyno wheel HP to crank are inherently flawed especially when the numbers are then used in some type of comparison such as to the manufacturers rating.

All variables being equal, I think dyno runs are only useful as a point of comparison between modifications and changes to YOUR car and can provide some insight into what impact (positive or negative) a particular modification or change might have.

[QuaTTrings]

True, but I think it provides a decent base line for certain Audi models vastly performing better than their rated power, and others that don't quite live up to what they state - particularly when the testing party is identical. The new 4.0t (like its 2.0t and 3.0t counterparts) is a remarkable engine in both efficiency and power output. RS5 will always be a great car, but there are some things about it that have me considering withdrawing my RS5 order. I really wish that Audi would have released the car 2-3 years ago.

Just my opinion, but I think attempts at converting dyno wheel HP to crank are inherently flawed especially when the numbers are then used in some type of comparison such as to the manufacturers rating.

All variables being equal, I think dyno runs are only useful as a point of comparison between modifications and changes to YOUR car and can provide some insight into what impact (positive or negative) a particular modification or change might have.

[TLM_S5]

The new 4.0t (like its 2.0t and 3.0t counterparts) is a remarkable engine in both efficiency and power output. RS5 will always be a great car, but there are some things about it that have me considering withdrawing my RS5 order. I really wish that Audi would have released the car 2-3 years ago.

I don't disagree with you there. If it was guaranteed the 4.0 V8 would be in the RS5 in the next year or two I might very well have held off myself. Of course, that is precisely why Audi does not share that information.

[Get Low]

The SuperTest link is interesting. Wish I could read the German. All the performance numbers are impressive. Especially liked the Nurburgring results against the M3, c63 AMG, Cayman, etc.

[IanVr6]

I just hope it is faster and I notice a difference from my 2010 s4!!!!!!!!!!

Tune your S4 and it is faster than the RS5 if that is what you care for.