|
|
Post by racingteatray on Feb 1, 2018 10:49:34 GMT
Except that my car has brown seats these days... "these days", suggesting that they weren't brown to start with but have become brown due to...... ?? ...it being a different car that was ordered with brown seats?! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 10:36:14 GMT
Autocar this week describe the new RS4 as the best one yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 12:32:03 GMT
I read that - Prosser, wasn't it. I can believe that the car is a little more balanced as a result of a lighter engine, set further back. But steering gets mentioned just once in all four cars*, and whilst the V6 sounds effective and efficient, it doesn't sound like it's got much of a soul (man). If I were further from retirement I'd perhaps consider a test drive.
*I wonder what this says - that standards are generally lower so it's seen as less important, or that there's just not a huge amount worth saying? |
|
|
|
Post by michael on Feb 13, 2018 12:48:09 GMT
I read that - Prosser, wasn't it. I can believe that the car is a little more balanced as a result of a lighter engine, set further back. But steering gets mentioned just once in all four cars*, and whilst the V6 sounds effective and efficient, it doesn't sound like it's got much of a soul (man). If I were further from retirement I'd perhaps consider a test drive.
*I wonder what this says - that standards are generally lower so it's seen as less important, or that there's just not a huge amount worth saying? I too wonder what this says... |
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Feb 13, 2018 13:32:00 GMT
I don't really see how the engine could actually be lighter. It loses 2 cylinders of fresh air plus the metalwork that surrounds them but gains a turbo (or 2?) plus all the plumbing and intercooler for that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 13:59:30 GMT
The piece reckons a 31ks saving, so I suspect positioning is at least as important. I wonder what 31kg is as a percentage - I'm guessing the V8 must weigh 150kgs, probably more.
EDIT: Quick Google suggests 219, so a worthwhile saving. |
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Feb 13, 2018 14:03:21 GMT
It probably has much more alloy/aluminium in the block than the V8 which was probably cast iron (and in many ways better for it)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 14:18:38 GMT
V8 is alloy, having looked it up. Clearly when Clarkson described it as being a 'very light engine', it's all 'relative'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 9:27:20 GMT
Autocar this week describe the new RS4 as the best one yet. Were you talking about last week's pair of twin tests? There's a full road test this week, which is a little less glowing. I quite like the looks, but it's maybe a little angular in places. The size graphic used to show f/r weight distribution but no longer does - a pity as it'd be interesting to see how much further back the mass is sited.
Performance is interesting - clearly if you are pootling the extra torque (and how low it's developed) make it a different car, but they preferred the V8 despite its lack of torque and economy. Compared with the B7 it's half a second quicker to 60, 9/10ths to 100 but only goes beyond a second quicker at 140. During that time, the manual has to swap gears four times, so I think it's the auto box that makes the difference at full chat. Similarly, 30-70 is half a second quicker, during which there would be one manual change. Track times are interesting too. Dry is a tenth slower than the B7, but hard to compare as the track is damp and 10 degrees, compared with 3 degrees and 'greasy' for the B7. Wet lap is slower than mine by just under 2.5s, which surprises me. The wet track was resurfaced 2-3 years ago and became quicker as a result, so the new car should be faster. I'd love to have mine figured post remap (or rather I'd love to know what the figures would be - I wouldn't want to subject it to that sort of treatment).
The new car looks like quantifiable progress, but I have concluded that I don't lust after one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Feb 14, 2018 10:37:08 GMT
Those performance figures are surprising but then I expect the new RS4 is probably a lot closer to 2,000kg than your one and with little, if any, extra power it won't be much faster.
However in normal driving it'll probably be a lot quicker.
That was what surprised me when we had the Alfa GT with its 3.2 V6 compared with the Fiat Coupe with a 2 litre turbo.
Outright figures were almost identical but at, say, 40 in 4th gear the Fiat would destroy the Alfa.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 10:50:47 GMT
I'm sure you're right, doubly so when mated to a quick-shifting 8 sp auto with very short gearing. But I've never minded working an engine - indeed consider the loss of the top 2k revs too big a price to pay. New car weighs in at 1,790 kgs, so it is a little heavier.
|
|
