ClubWRX Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Both cars are manual.

Let me just start with saying that the new MB SLK350 is no slouch.

The race was from 70-110 short race. we were both dead even.

There was 2 extra people in the S4 otherwise i would have pulled him

BTW the S4 mods are:

Full exhaust
Cold Air
Short shifter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
807 Posts
They might be fast, but they might "look" way faster then they actually are....the front end of that car is awesome....


EDIT: Grammar.....BTW, the RS2 is my ALL-TIME favorite car....it is the sickest looking wagon out there....
.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,659 Posts
audirs6 said:
Both cars are manual.

Let me just start with saying that the new MB SLK350 is no slouch.

The race was from 70-110 short race. we were both dead even.

There was 2 extra people in the S4 otherwise i would have pulled him

BTW the S4 mods are:

Full exhaust
Cold Air
Short shifter.
Hmm... thats the effect of passengers for you! How much whp does your car make?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
never dynoed but should be close to 290 versus like 260 stock. hoping to take it to the drag strip soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
Nice run. Those new SLK's are definately amazing compared to the previous generation! They are actually sports cars now. Just watch out for the SLK55, which to say the least is unreal!
-Marc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Need BB said:
Well you should put new turbos in the RS6 with 600+hp then race!
if it were only that easy ;)

the RS6 already is up to 550 hp and 600lb of torque thats enough untill the new M5 or RS6 comes out. I am hoping that audi will put a V10 turbo in the next RS6 otherwise i would have to go for the new M5. But then again you never have enough HP i am shure on of you guys with a really modded sti can beat my RS6.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
What do you think of the power and power potential of the 4.2liter v8 versus the 2.7TT of the old s4's?

jigga is correct that at 70-110 mph passenger weight isn't going to make a huge difference as aerodymanics are coming into play more then anything else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
575 Posts
audirs6 said:
if it were only that easy ;)

the RS6 already is up to 550 hp and 600lb of torque thats enough untill the new M5 or RS6 comes out. I am hoping that audi will put a V10 turbo in the next RS6 otherwise i would have to go for the new M5. But then again you never have enough HP i am shure on of you guys with a really modded sti can beat my RS6.
Dang, you have one? Thats the car i wanted. There may be afew STI's out there that will compete with youre car but NOT many. Nice car :thumbup:
So you dont think youre awd audi with 550hp will hang with a new M5?
edit:
http://www.autobytel.com/content/research/vir/index.cfm/vehicle_number_int/1015944/Action/StandardFeatures
imo, you should have killed that car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Chad W said:
What do you think of the power and power potential of the 4.2liter v8 versus the 2.7TT of the old s4's?

jigga is correct that at 70-110 mph passenger weight isn't going to make a huge difference as aerodymanics are coming into play more then anything else.
Well i had the old s4 (2.7tt) but its alot harder to compare because my old s4 was Auto which was alot slower then the manual s4. So obviously its day and night between my old Auto and the new Manual, but i can say that the V8 has much better throttle response then the 2.7tt. But a big minus is you cant do much to the V8 S4 and the old S4 you were able to do alot becuase of the turbo.


were not talking about high speeds here like 130-150. at speed like 70-110 two big passangers make 450 pounds extra. make a difference. i would say maybe half a second.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
rpfride said:
Dang, you have one? Thats the car i wanted. There may be afew STI's out there that will compete with youre car but NOT many. Nice car :thumbup:
So you dont think youre awd audi with 550hp will hang with a new M5?
edit:
http://www.autobytel.com/content/research/vir/index.cfm/vehicle_number_int/1015944/Action/StandardFeatures
imo, you should have killed that car.
not really check this out:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=8684&page_number=4
2005 SLK-350 Manual
ACCELERATION Seconds
Zero to 30 mph: 1.7
40 mph: 2.8
50 mph: 3.8
60 mph: 5.3
70 mph: 6.8
80 mph: 8.4
90 mph:10.8
100 mph: 13.1
110 mph: 15.7
120 mph: 19.6 (Stock S4 does 19.4)
130 mph:23.9
140 mph: 30.2
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.0
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 8.4
50-70 mph: 7.2
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.8 sec @ 103 mph
Top speed (redline limited): 161 mph

and remember i had two passangers (+450lb)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Ya Baby SLR :)

BTW they are putting the same 3.5 engine in the E class and C class (E350 and C350) next year but both are heavier and are auto so they would be alot slower.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
As I was typing, I realized I don't know at exactly what speeds weight becomes less important then aerodynamics. Clearly the weight was less of a factor from 100-110 as it was 70-80, so it's easy to say relatively, but I wonder if some engineer could calculate the actual effect.

You could do a test of 70-110 with and without the passengers to know specifically what effect it has on your car, but it would be cool if someone could come up with a formula that takes in consideration cd, frontal area, and weight to determine effect on acceleration at certain speeds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
356 Posts
I auto crossed a SLK 350 MT a couple of months ago. (MB track day). Power deliverry was great but didnt feal as fast as my STi. handling was what i thought it would be, nimble with hevy understeer at the limit. Its deffinately a step in the right direction for MB. If I was a foot shorter and a hunderd puonds lighter i would like to have one.

On second thought, I would still take the M roadster over the Benz.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
I thought RS6's were no longer being imported due to new emissions laws? I've seen one here in Boulder and they are beautiful cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Damien83 said:
I thought RS6's were no longer being imported due to new emissions laws? I've seen one here in Boulder and they are beautiful cars.

Thats correct 2003 was the first and last year the RS6 was sold in the US.

In this thread the race was with my S4 not RS6.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
I thought someone mentioned a new year of rs6's that would be imported. Jeez, what do you do for a job?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
wow the RS6 is such a sweet sweet car and is often overlooked by car buyers in that price range...they usually go for the E55 MB or the M5 BMW...honestly ide rather have the Audi...infact i owned a 2.8 Q Audi A4 5-speed before my WRX and was inlove with it (though im glad i made the switch)...as for a turbo swap on the RS6 i belive it comes with the K04 turbos found in the RS4...just in an 8cyl...what mods have you done to it if any?...i would be worried about lessening the value of that car with mods but if money isnt an problem ide recommend a garrett turbo swap with all the necissary mods...i bet a TBE would sound sooo mean on that thing...if you have one sound clips would be appreciated :)

-steve
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top