Leo-RS why is the bmw faster once rolling?
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 335i LAND
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leo-RS why is the bmw faster once rolling?
Audi RS3 Sportback v BMW 1 Series M Coupe Drag Race - Auto Express
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UGdz...39RVAAAAAAAAAQ
Leo-RS why is the bmw faster once rolling?
must be the 4wd slowing it down
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UGdz...39RVAAAAAAAAAQ
Leo-RS why is the bmw faster once rolling?
must be the 4wd slowing it down
#2
No idea fella but those times from both cars are shocking. Other independent tests have put the RS3 sub 4 and sub 10 with low to mid 12's 1/4. Not sure if they used launch control in that video, didn't look like it or sound like it to me.
On the move there will be bugger all between the 2 cars to be honest. Both similar power and weight. Toss a coin.
Probably the worst set of figures I have seen from both cars though. Not really a fan of the RS3, practical yes, a lot of money for an outdated model though.
On the move there will be bugger all between the 2 cars to be honest. Both similar power and weight. Toss a coin.
Probably the worst set of figures I have seen from both cars though. Not really a fan of the RS3, practical yes, a lot of money for an outdated model though.
Last edited by LEO-RS; 07 April 2012 at 10:41 PM.
#5
Thought they would be faster over a quarter mile, I was expecting them to be like three or four seconds quicker than my 944 which is meant to do it in 14.7. I suspect the Audi if driven properly and remapped will be a lot quicker than 13.6.
#6
Top Gear test between RS3 an 1M, completely different picture.
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/attac...7&d=1308219295
0-60 in 3.8 /4.5
0-100 in 9.9 /10.7
1/4m in 12.4 /13
So even taking launch out of it, 60-100 is 6.1 for RS3 vs 6.2 for 1M, like i said in my previous post, identical on the move. Nothing to do with transmission losses, new age quattros are primarily fwd on the move with less than 15% lost through transmission. Also 1M is a 3.0 engine vs Audi's 2.5
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/attac...7&d=1308219295
0-60 in 3.8 /4.5
0-100 in 9.9 /10.7
1/4m in 12.4 /13
So even taking launch out of it, 60-100 is 6.1 for RS3 vs 6.2 for 1M, like i said in my previous post, identical on the move. Nothing to do with transmission losses, new age quattros are primarily fwd on the move with less than 15% lost through transmission. Also 1M is a 3.0 engine vs Audi's 2.5
Last edited by LEO-RS; 08 April 2012 at 02:20 PM.
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Please excuse my Spelling - its not the best !!
Posts: 2,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mmm not sure if the Audi's transmission losses would be that much more than the BMW, as if its anythihg like my old S3 it effectively front wheel drive and only 4wd when it needs it.
Yes I'm aware that the axle will be rotating to the rear diff, but the rear diff will be disabled when not needed.
I feel the differance will be more to do with gearing than anything else.
Richard
Yes I'm aware that the axle will be rotating to the rear diff, but the rear diff will be disabled when not needed.
I feel the differance will be more to do with gearing than anything else.
Richard
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post