How quick is this car?

[VR457]

Recent excursion on a nice stretch of the A38, spot an 04 plate RS6 in front. He shoots off the traffic lights at the roundabout, i catch him on the corner then floor it in 2nd. I just wanted to measure how much quicker his car would be.

But wait, his car is not increasing the gap here at all, maybe ever so slightly. Moves up to --mph and see smoke coming out of his tailpipe for an assumed gear change. Bit after that he moves to the left and lets me pass. Then he doesn't catch at all and i leave him at the roundabout.




On the way back, same stretch in opposite see a nice orange / yellow Lotus (Elise?) with black OZ Racing alloys and think, 'this is going to leave me for dust!'

So what happens? I keep to him up to ---mph and he pulls over. This time i think he is going to tailgate me and make me pay. But no, he can't close the gap. He is getting closer (-----mph) but the roundabout comes and we slow down. I have a massive a/c unit in the boot (thanks to cvr4 sales!) and slow down but still manage to floor it in 2nd before he does. This time i keep the gap open and same through another roundabout before half jumping an amber and leaving him. That was about a three mile race, enough for him to prove it.

So, what's going on here?!? It all felt great anyway for a car that probably cost less than a paint job on these cars!

[funkstardelux]

i had some fun with a few audi's lately ..i wish i could see their faces but i've left them for at least a quarter mile :)

[Wobble]

a standard 04 rs6 will see off a vr4 with relative ease a modded one will kill our vr4s, may of had issues or no balls

the elise is quickish to 80 mph but has no guts after that .

[Wodjno]

a standard 04 rs6 will see off a vr4 with relative ease a modded one will kill our vr4s, may of had issues or no balls

the elise is quickish to 80 mph but has no guts after that .

But a Standard 2006 RS6 wouldn't kill a Modded VR4 :p

0-100 km/h 4.90 s
0-100 mph 10.70 s
80-120 km/h (50-70 mph) in top
Standing ¼mile 12.50 s
@ 107.50 mph

My Silver VR4 would pull sub 5 sec 0-60's all day long and in the wet also /yes
I never did 1/4 mile it in modded form, but i don't think it would be 2 shy of these figures /rally

[AlanDITD]

wodjno it would be no where near a 12.50 unless you had gas or a rediculous amount of mods....lowish 13's maybe

[VR457]

After looking it up i thought maybe the RS6 could be embarrased by a modded VR4. It weighs 2 tons v the 1.6 tons of the VR4 for a start. Maybe it's not turbocharged so a rolling start would have favoured the Mitsi? He did increase the gap slightly to about ---mph then seemed to have hit a wall / lost his nerve.

I raced an RS4 when i first bought the car. MBC was on the wrong way so shot off and left him standing, then fuel cut came in, i hesitated and he flew past. Our roads split off so could not find out anything more.

[Wobble]

But a Standard 2006 RS6 wouldn't kill a Modded VR4 :p

0-100 km/h 4.90 s
0-100 mph 10.70 s
80-120 km/h (50-70 mph) in top
Standing ¼mile 12.50 s
@ 107.50 mph

My Silver VR4 would pull sub 5 sec 0-60's all day long and in the wet also /yes
I never did 1/4 mile it in modded form, but i don't think it would be 2 shy of these figures /rally


but like most vr4s are modded as to are that age rs6 due to it not costing more than a remap to see big figures,
in the wet yes maybe a different story though.

[Wodjno]

After looking it up i thought maybe the RS6 could be embarrased by a modded VR4. It weighs 2 tons v the 1.6 tons of the VR4 for a start. Maybe it's not turbocharged so a rolling start would have favoured the Mitsi? He did increase the gap slightly to about ---mph then seemed to have hit a wall / lost his nerve.

I raced an RS4 when i first bought the car. MBC was on the wrong way so shot off and left him standing, then fuel cut came in, i hesitated and he flew past. Our roads split off so could not find out anything more.

An RS6 is Twin Turbocharged /pan

[funkstardelux]

its all relative at the end of the day, we got a great car that costs much less than theirs and is fun to drive and surprises people :)

[SGHOM]

Err?
How can you compare modded with standard?

[Wobble]

its all relative at the end of the day, we got a great car that costs much less than theirs and is fun to drive and surprises people :)


i agree. 3k vs 18k do the math
if i had the cash an rs6 would be the car to sway me from a VR4

[Wodjno]

wodjno it would be no where near a 12.50 unless you had gas or a rediculous amount of mods....lowish 13's maybe

AlanDITD, I didn't say it would do it in 12.5.. I said it wouldn't be to shy of the figures. And around town where 100+ isn't easy! A good modded VR4 would be on it's tail all day long /toycar

[SGHOM]

Who you talking to Wole man :seeking:


Shurrup you :kiss:

A modded anything could beat an RS6/ VR4

[Wodjno]

Shurrup you :kiss:

A modded anything could beat an RS6/ VR4

Correct.. A modded anything could beat anything if it's modded enuff :5shots:

[AlanDITD]

AlanDITD, I didn't say it would do it in 12.5.. I said it wouldn't be to shy of the figures. And around town where 100+ isn't easy! A good modded VR4 would be on it's tail all day long /toycar

it wouldn't be shy of either mate....it would be a country mile away from it.

Around town fair enough but any thing passed 60mph the VR4 is ****e compared to the audi

[VR457]

I chased a brand new Audi 3.0 TDI down a country lane three months ago for about 15/20 miles and kept pace whilst running around 0.6-0.7 bar boost. He knew his roads well and it was madly exhilarating doing mental speeds on dodgy roads. However, only one car went past the opposite way in that entire period!

I'm not overly concerned about standard v modded; all i know is that if i'm keeping up with these cars that i thought i could only admire from a great distance then i'm doing ok. It's one less hour per day in a traffic jam in a sh**ty job trying to raise moola for the supposed extra cachet and performance.

Go vr4!!! /woot /woot /woot

[bradc]

My boss has a 2003 rs6 and overall it simply feels like a quick auto vr4. A vr4 with around 340hp should be able to keep up due to the rs6's massive weight.

At the Pukekohe race track the rs6 was getting up to 220 every lap and 225 on occaision, my car does 235 on the same track. I'm sure at least 5kmh is due to the fact I can come onto the straight a heap faster than the rs6 which had massive understeer while the throttle was open even slightly. It's lack of cornering ability was a real downside in my mind

[AlanDITD]

0-100 km/h 4.90 s
0-100 mph 10.70 s
80-120 km/h (50-70 mph) in top
Standing ¼mile 12.50 s
@ 107.50 mph

this confuses me and in paticular the 0-100 bit...

that is at least 3s quicker than any Vr4 manual or auto with light mods i.e bost control exhaust

[Turbo_Steve]

Traction.....is.......everything :)

[Gowf]

Can i just say this..... I have had the pleasure of having a 'spirited drive' behind an RS6 in my leggie when it was on the road, and i must say i was impressed with my car.

Don't for 1 minute think im saying mine was quicker, as it clearly wasnt, but the audi wasnt that much faster, and that was from 70-150ish (on private roads obviously). That being said the gap did increase but not by much.

I would consider my VR as fairly modded, but not sure what state the audi was, but all i can say is this, a VR4 without bigger tubs or some laughing gas would not have stood a chance against an RS6 in the UK.

[Gowf]

The 1/4 mile times are interesting though. I know the RS6 i was up against was a 09 plate, which i believe have more power than the earlier ones (although i may stand corrected). I was just amazed at the 70+ acceleration, I know mine was quick but had never had experience of an RS audi. Was suitable impressed. Oh.... just to add that was mine running on pump fuel so around 405bhp and 490lbft

[VR457]

These are the basic stats for the two types of RS6:

C5 (Typ 4B, 2002–2004): 4.2 litre V8; twin turbocharged; 444 bhp; 560 NM torque; weight - 1840-1865 kg

C6 (Typ 4F, 2008–present): 5.0 litre V10; twin turbocharged; 571 bhp; 650 NM torque; weight - 2025 kg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_RS6

Therefore a 2004 RS6 has a power to weight ratio of approx 240 bhp per ton and for the 2009 RS6 this would be 282 bhp per ton.

Galant VR4: 2.5 litre V6; twin turbocharged; 276 bhp; 367 NM torque; weight - 1520 kg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Galant_VR-4

A standard VR4 would have around 185 bhp per ton, 'lightly modded' around 200 bhp per ton with Gowfs prob being about 265 bhp per ton.

[stuey]

Thought it was reckoned VR4's weigh more than 1520 in reality.. ?

[bradc]

Mine has around 400hp as well and was weighed at 1600kg with me in it and about 45 liters of fuel. I have mmcs, brembos, evo 9 wheels, no spare wheel and a small battery. My car also has a moonroof. I weigh 80kg so without the fuel which would be about 35kg my cars bare weight is about 1485kg. The weight of the Audi's will be without fuel and driver

[enigma]

At last, some realism.

www.babybda.co.uk/images/vr4/12_789.wmv

[enigma]

http://www.babybda.co.uk/images/vr4/p5.jpg

http://www.babybda.co.uk/images/vr4/p8.jpg

[Turbo_Steve]

How much NOS was it running at the time?

[enigma]

100bhp according to the article

[enigma]

http://www.babybda.co.uk/images/vr4/BruntDave3.wmv

[AlanDITD]

I give up....400hp and it ran a 13.3? 0-104 in 13.3s

How is that even remotley close to 0-100 in 10.7s

Yes its fast im not saying otherwise but its just not in the same league!

[enigma]

I give up....400hp and it ran a 13.3? 0-104 in 13.3s

How is that even remotley close to 0-100 in 10.7s

Yes its fast im not saying otherwise but its just not in the same league!

0-60 4.7
0-100 12.3

The fastest it ran was 12.7 @ 112

Derek ran 12.4 @ well over 100

Both cars at their fastest hit 60 in UNDER 4 seconds

I would suggest that you do some research.

Glenns car was an animal on the day at Bruntingthorpe, and the data suggests that his 0-60 time would have been quick also.

[VR457]

RS6 C5 quarter mile is 12.6 secs; C6 version has it at 12.1 secs.

That's assuming it's running on 98 RON. Some will be daft enough to go for 95 RON.

BradC is about right; anyone with 340 bhp or so can give the (old) RS6 enough of a headache - the vr4 will not be blown away so easily.

As for the new 08 onwards version RS6 - /Steeringw You should see the mtm tuned versions!

[AlanDITD]

0-60 4.7
0-100 12.3

The fastest it ran was 12.7 @ 112

Derek ran 12.4 @ well over 100

Both cars at their fastest hit 60 in UNDER 4 seconds

I would suggest that you do some research.

Glenns car was an animal on the day at Bruntingthorpe, and the data suggests that his 0-60 time would have been quick also.

Do you read? Seriously did I not say 0-60 they would be evenish?

THE RS6 hits 100 in 10.7 seconds...yours hits it in 12.3 seconds

12.7@ 114 when it just hit 100 in 12.3..It took you 8 seconds from 60-100.....and then you went another 12mph in .3 of a second....seems a bit inconsistent to me!

[Nutter_John]

No but I also did not go in a modified RS6

Stock versus Stock

or

Modified versus Modified

[Wodjno]

No but I also did not go in a modified RS6

Stock versus Stock

or

Modified versus Modified

2k versus :censored:

[Nutter_John]

No one has mention money , just performance

my point is you are not comparing them on a even keel . If you are comparing BDA's and SGHOM's cars against an RS6 then choose a modified RS6 to compare

There is no question about the cost side of things the vr4 wins that contest

[AlanDITD]

No mate but it all started when you claimed your car would not be far shy of an RS6 on the 1/4 with a time of 12.5

I said without gas or whatever that aint gonna happen....and then the rest was history.

[SGHOM]

Not read all this thread, but any RS would wipe the floor with a vr4
only way to beat one is to 60........... but only if you take it by suprise

[VR457]

Combined quarter mile times for VR4:

Username [1/4 Mile ET & MPH]
SGHOM 12.490@109.00 CVR4
valmes 12.600@112.00 CVR4
kevin ap motors 12.660@16.00 CVR4
AleksKrsk 12.680 CVR4
iOnic 12.770@109.00 CVR4
Gowf 13.033@103.67 CVR4
HJ 61 13.05 @ 102.97 OZVR4
wagonboy 13.053@102.97 CVR4
leebutts 13.11 @ 105.71 OZVR4
Dr_Josh001 13.39 @ 103 OZVR4
dr_josh001 13.394@101.35 CVR4
Adam.Findlay 13.400 CVR4
leebutts 13.419@103.38 CVR4
esteme 13.54 @ 100 OZVR4
izverg46 13.578 CVR4
timbo 13.67 @ 101 OZVR4
AlanDITD 13.690@100.20 CVR4
VR4CE 13.70 @ 98 OZVR4
__ET__ 13.72 @ 99.85 OZVR4
mills_88 13.73 @ 98.36 OZVR4
Mitchy 13.76 @ 97.08 OZVR4
Oblivion 13.760@104.40 CVR4
mitchy 13.760@97.08 CVR4
Nick Mann 13.806@95.75 CVR4
vrfto 13.856@100.00 CVR4
aboo 13.908@98.30 CVR4
orionn2o 13.942@100.46 CVR4
colVR4 13.958@96.69 CVR4
vipman 13.98 @ 97.51 OZVR4
cam1754 13.98 @ 98 OZVR4
miller 13.991@95.08 CVR4
RHDGALANTVR4 14.000@100.00 CVR4
esteme 14.01 @ 99 OZVR4
dinger1983 14.064@99.30 CVR4
Just Plain Nuts 14.13 @ 98.84 OZVR4
GalantOnly 14.185 CVR4
kochajj 14.190@93.17 CVR4
tolcol 14.321@94.30 CVR4
vr4-fan 14.400@90.00 CVR4
CANDEE 14.50 @ 96.13 OZVR4
pitslayer 14.600@93.52 CVR4
phosty 14.639@95.90 CVR4
Pablo 14.699@93.68 CVR4
foxdie 14.723@93.02 CVR4
White Lightning 14.798@92.77 CVR4



Given that an 04 RS6 time is most likely 13.2 secs i don't think it was unreasonable to suggest that it was possible to keep up with one. As said before, even a change in fuel could have brought his power down.

Or maybe i just had a good day. I know i did. The Lotus was as fast as the RS6 so i need to know which Lotus it was.

[SGHOM]

Still top of the pile after 5 years /Devil5

Shows how much vr4's have evolved since then! :smoking:

[Wodjno]

Combined quarter mile times for VR4:





Given that an 04 RS6 time is most likely 13.2 secs i don't think it was unreasonable to suggest that it was possible to keep up with one. As said before, even a change in fuel could have brought his power down.

Or maybe i just had a good day. I know i did. The Lotus was as fast as the RS6 so i need to know which Lotus it was.

Granted /yes And duly noted :D
I don't once doubt that you were as close as you say you were.. A multitude of different factors can change the outcome of what on paper seems a forgone conclusion..

I am in No Doubt that a Standard RS6 against a Standard VR4 driven by the same driver in the same circumstances would win /yes
But we are talking reality here.. Everything on paper is so black and white.. But in the cold light of day, things are a little different.. /yes

Otherwise i should have been trounced by the fire breathing, volcano like rumbling of the Merc SL55 AMG V8 Compressor on a 500metre drag, off the lights :stop:

But in reality that never happened :D /thankyou

http://www.clubvr4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10764&highlight=amg+kompressor

[bradc]

You need a massive power difference to appear to be much quicker than the other car. The RS6 I was in for example was only 10kmh faster than a new golf gti along the back straight at pukekohe. On paper the numbers look massively different

[djb160]

So that'd make it massive power given similar weights. OR
Massive weight advatage given similar power OR
Overall power/weight difference instead?

[enigma]

% of stock VR4s on the road in the UK vs % of stock RS6s on the road in the UK?

I have more REAL data to post later. I had it all in a reply earlier but the thread was locked while I was presenting the data.

[enigma]

http://www.babybda.co.uk/images/vr4/distquarter.jpg


A 13.2 second 1/4 mile against a 15 second 1/4 mile

pretty much like for like stock vs stock times

10 seconds acceleration from standstill, which is like you would expect for on road conditions......

~20m advantage - a country mile! :jester:

[enigma]

Standard bone stock VR4 with no launch 31/08/03

1/8 mile 9.991@71.01

using http://www.wallaceracing.com/0-60_equation.php

0-60 = 7.13

1/4 mile 15.492@88.75

Lightly modified VR4 with launch 29/02/04

1/8 mile 8.861@78.01

0-60 = 5.24

1/4 mile 13.999@94.7

Lightly modified VR4 plus nitrous with launch 31/10/04

1/8 mile 8.141@86.39

0-60 = 3.93

1/4 mile 12.789@106.57

Standard bone stock manual VR4 plus nitrous and weight reduction 45mph headwind and dodgy clutch 24/06/06

1/8 mile 8.067@88.77

0-60 = 3.93

1/4 mile 12.437@111.40

from another calculator

http://www.torquestats.com/modified/index.php?pid=calculator&action=calculate_bhp_weight&drive=4WD&weight_bhp_selector=weight&weight_bhp_value=1400&time_selector=1%2F4+Mile+ET&time_value=12.437&submit=Calculate

As shown above the real world difference between a 13.2 second car and a 15 second car during a 10sec burst of acceleration (assuming you value your own life and other road users) is about 20m given a standing start from the lights, or less if nailing it off a roundabout.

I could see what data I have from Bruntingthorpe as the logs go all the way to 155mph for my car and not far behind for some of the others. However it is pointless as some people are blinkered by paper.

[enigma]

Was at the Pod today and there was an Audi R8 there.................

13.5.............

You can trust the paper stats ;)

:bananadan

[AlanDITD]

Was at the Pod today and there was an Audi R8 there.................

13.5.............

You can trust the paper stats ;)

:bananadan

at what terminal speed just out of interest.

[Turbo_Steve]

Two pages of childish bickering and topic-deviation have been removed.
Let's keep this on track please, people.

Body Text removed at the request of Wodjno, who feels it was inlammatory.

Once the bickering is removed, I think everyone is actually broadly saying the same thing.

[Wodjno]

Standard bone stock VR4 with no launch 31/08/03

1/8 mile 9.991@71.01

using http://www.wallaceracing.com/0-60_equation.php

0-60 = 7.13

1/4 mile 15.492@88.75

Lightly modified VR4 with launch 29/02/04

1/8 mile 8.861@78.01

0-60 = 5.24

1/4 mile 13.999@94.7

Lightly modified VR4 plus nitrous with launch 31/10/04

1/8 mile 8.141@86.39

0-60 = 3.93

1/4 mile 12.789@106.57

Standard bone stock manual VR4 plus nitrous and weight reduction 45mph headwind and dodgy clutch 24/06/06

1/8 mile 8.067@88.77

0-60 = 3.93

1/4 mile 12.437@111.40

from another calculator

http://www.torquestats.com/modified/index.php?pid=calculator&action=calculate_bhp_weight&drive=4WD&weight_bhp_selector=weight&weight_bhp_value=1400&time_selector=1%2F4+Mile+ET&time_value=12.437&submit=Calculate

As shown above the real world difference between a 13.2 second car and a 15 second car during a 10sec burst of acceleration (assuming you value your own life and other road users) is about 20m given a standing start from the lights, or less if nailing it off a roundabout.

I could see what data I have from Bruntingthorpe as the logs go all the way to 155mph for my car and not far behind for some of the others. However it is pointless as some people are blinkered by paper.

Some good Stats there Dave /yes

Look forward to seeing the rest :D /toycar

[AlanDITD]

Can i just be clear here im talking about and always have been talking about the Newer RS6.

Still waiting on the terminal speed of the R8 if you know it

[Wodjno]

Can i just be clear here im talking about and always have been talking about the Newer RS6.

Still waiting on the terminal speed of the R8 if you know it

Alan..But the original post in this thread clearly states an 04 RS6. And not only that a Yellow Lotus Elise..
At no point in this post does it mention that a VR4 is as fast as an RS6 or Lotus Elise.. Only that the Member was shocked at how close their VR4 stayed in relation to the above cars..

Wodj

[Wodjno]

Body Text removed at the request of Wodjno, who feels it was inlammatory.


Harsh word inflamatory!.. Committee have been notified of my thoughts on the above quote..

Glenn

[AlanDITD]

Alan..But the original post in this thread clearly states an 04 RS6. And not only that a Yellow Lotus Elise..
At no point in this post does it mention that a VR4 is as fast as an RS6 or Lotus Elise.. Only that the Member was shocked at how close their VR4 stayed in relation to the above cars..

Wodj

Ahh well im going to retract everything i said, admit i failed to read the OP correctly...

Just to add i also do not doubt that the OP kept up with an RS6 as i understand about real word and paper figures..I did mean same drivers same conditions etc.

But frankly the topic all the way through was fine, the committee or certain members of it anyway need to get off there high horses and quit this nanny state moderation.

[Nick Mann]

But frankly the topic all the way through was fine, the committee or certain members of it anyway need to get off there high horses and quit this nanny state moderation.Alan - this club has always had a friendly family feel to it. In this thread, three posters felt that they would rather have a gloves off abusive argument reather than an intelligent debate. One particular post had a vary vulgar swear word aimed at another member. That is not what we are about. We try to keep the forums with a family feel - that is what most members tell us they want. So to that end, if people persist in making abusive, inflammatory and vulgar posts then we will persist in locking threads, deleting posts and issuing warnings. The small amount of time we spend deleting posts and issuing warnings is testament to the vast majority of this club falling into the friendly family club description I gave earlier.

The part of your post I have quoted at the start of this post is inflammatory, I'm not sure why you felt the need to say it.

Please lets keep this thread on topic now - as always, new topics should demand a new thread. If you want to make queries about rules and moderation policy, this is not the place to do it.

[AlanDITD]

Alan - this club has always had a friendly family feel to it. In this thread, three posters felt that they would rather have a gloves off abusive argument reather than an intelligent debate. One particular post had a vary vulgar swear word aimed at another member. That is not what we are about. We try to keep the forums with a family feel - that is what most members tell us they want. So to that end, if people persist in making abusive, inflammatory and vulgar posts then we will persist in locking threads, deleting posts and issuing warnings. The small amount of time we spend deleting posts and issuing warnings is testament to the vast majority of this club falling into the friendly family club description I gave earlier.

The part of your post I have quoted at the start of this post is inflammatory, I'm not sure why you felt the need to say it.

Please lets keep this thread on topic now - as always, new topics should demand a new thread. If you want to make queries about rules and moderation policy, this is not the place to do it.

It does have a family feel to it your right nick, the moderators are parents and the rest of us are the naughty children who either conform or suffer with no tea!

[the_boy]

My team leader has a 2004 remapped Audi RS6 Plus (something daft like 500bhp).

0-60 in just over 4 seconds and quattro drive means it just grips and grips.

Never been in anything so fast.

[VR457]

The figures here are for the new rs6. If anyone wants to try it out on there own then at least you will know the deal. The reviewers claim that their test car only had 482 bhp as opposed to the official 571 bhp.

We need more stats like this. Any figures on the old rs6?

[

[bradc]

Personally I'd like to know why no one has even asked a single question about my post in the first page of this thread:

My boss has a 2003 rs6 and overall it simply feels like a quick auto vr4. A vr4 with around 340hp should be able to keep up due to the rs6's massive weight.

At the Pukekohe race track the rs6 was getting up to 220 every lap and 225 on occaision, my car does 235 on the same track. I'm sure at least 5kmh is due to the fact I can come onto the straight a heap faster than the rs6 which had massive understeer while the throttle was open even slightly. It's lack of cornering ability was a real downside in my mind

[Wodjno]

Personally I'd like to know why no one has even asked a single question about my post in the first page of this thread:

My boss has a 2003 rs6 and overall it simply feels like a quick auto vr4. A vr4 with around 340hp should be able to keep up due to the rs6's massive weight.

At the Pukekohe race track the rs6 was getting up to 220 every lap and 225 on occaision, my car does 235 on the same track. I'm sure at least 5kmh is due to the fact I can come onto the straight a heap faster than the rs6 which had massive understeer while the throttle was open even slightly. It's lack of cornering ability was a real downside in my mind

Thats probably because what you have posted is pure, hard fact data from the real world /Wave As is Enigma's Data /yes And most people would rather read figures from the back of What & Autocar and take these as gospel /popcorn

[VR457]

I did mention your observation Brad. Post was probably culled.

So, as far as i can see, the pace of the vr4 can be said to be good enough to be ranked far higher than was originally thought. In modded form that is.

[miller]

It does have a family feel to it your right nick, the moderators are parents and the rest of us are the naughty children who either conform or suffer with no tea!

you have hit the nail on the head Alan. Grow up! :seeking: :zzz:

[Dom B]

If you watch some of the youtube vids of the RS6 around the ring for example, they obviously understeer like a total pig, one of the vids the guy has to get it to a virtual crawl to turn some of the corners. Typical audi safe understeer like most of the range which is a shame on what is otherwise a very nice car it has to be said.

My personal opinion from years of country road duels is that you can only use so much power on country roads. While the rs6 may eat a vr4 on a motorway i don't think one could ever embarrass one on the typical b road/country road.
But that's just my pennys worth

[WildCards]

On the way back, same stretch in opposite see a nice orange / yellow Lotus (Elise?) with black OZ Racing alloys and think, 'this is going to leave me for dust!'


When I had my VR4 two mates had Elises, both mk1's. One was a 111R and one was 135, my stock VR4 could stick with the 135 from a standing start to about 80mph at which point my car would start to pull away. The 111R however was considerably quicker on accelerating to 100mph but dropped back considerably after that, IIRC that car topped out at 140.

[elnevio]

When I had my VR4 two mates had Elises, both mk1's. One was a 111R and one was 135, my stock VR4 could stick with the 135 from a standing start to about 80mph at which point my car would start to pull away. The 111R however was considerably quicker on accelerating to 100mph but dropped back considerably after that, IIRC that car topped out at 140.
That sounds about right, Steve. /yes