[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by Kerr

Not a chance a 335bhp car doing 100mph in 9 secs.

All the times I'm seeing are mid 11s.

What reviews were mid 11s 0-100mph?

There are vbox results showing stock S-Tronics doing 0-100mph in 8.3s (which is about the best that was got with manual remapped cars) and with a remap 7.4s which is mental. This car is regularly at Crail, the last time it was there it did 11.65 @ 119.7mph with 410hp.

[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by Kerr

With the figures you are quoting, the performance variance is huge.

As an average you are gaining 10mph in less than a second. That would mean that one car would not have reached 80mph while the other will be doing 100mph.

Nothing with similar power to weight can match that time.

Common sense says those figures are nonsense.

Why would they make a car as fast as that for women anyways?

Very mature debate, I have posted actual test results here and you just anecdotal evidence and to top it off have to resort to snide comments.

Of course the results will vary due to different testing protocols, a quick look at 335i 0-100mph acceleration tests, anywhere from to 12,1 from AutoZeitung to 13,0s from Sport Auto for the same transmission.

[Kerr]

Originally Posted by conneem-TT

What reviews were mid 11s 0-100mph?

There are vbox results showing stock S-Tronics doing 0-100mph in 8.3s (which is about the best that was got with manual remapped cars) and with a remap 7.4s which is mental. This car is regularly at Crail, the last time it was there it did 11.65 @ 119.7mph with 410hp.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/...2.5-RS/242577/

11.4 secs in the above test. Granted not fancy gearbox but no chance it gains that much time.

Again 100mph in 7.4secs and takes 4.2 seconds to gain another 19mph? Performance will drop off the faster you go but that's a huge huge drop off. Too much to make that figure accurate.

It would also be quicker than any other 410bhp car and even a Nissan GTR.

Obviously you are a TT fan boy but you are beyond hopeful.

[Kerr]

Originally Posted by conneem-TT

Very mature debate, I have posted actual test results here and you just anecdotal evidence and to top it off have to resort to snide comments.

It's called humour.

You have provided a result of 10.6 secs then claimed 9.4.

[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by Kerr

It's called humour.

You have provided a result of 10.6 secs then claimed 9.4.

Where?

The 10.6s was for a manual car and the 9.3s for an S-Tronic

[Kerr]

The difference between 12.1 secs 13 secs is big enough.

The difference between 11.4 to 9.4 is a totally different planet to each other. The faster the car the harder it is to shave off tenths, not 2 full seconds.

As said before that's over a 20mph speed differential for the quicker one hitting 100mph.

[Kerr]

Originally Posted by conneem-TT

Where?

The 10.6s was for a manual car and the 9.3s for an S-Tronic

How can you lose 1.3 secs with 2 gear changes?

[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by Kerr

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/...2.5-RS/242577/

11.4 secs in the above test. Granted not fancy gearbox but no chance it gains that much time.

Again 100mph in 7.4secs and takes 4.2 seconds to gain another 19mph? Performance will drop off the faster you go but that's a huge huge drop off. Too much to make that figure accurate.

It would also be quicker than any other 410bhp car and even a Nissan GTR.

Obviously you are a TT fan boy but you are beyond hopeful.

Hmm Autocar seem to post slow acceleration times they got 11.3s 0-100mph for the 1M though which keeps things all relative with the other comparison tests I posted earlier.

Here is the Vbox graph

[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by Kerr

How can you lose 1.3 secs with 2 gear changes?

It's 3 changes with the RS's gearing, it doesn't have the nice long gear BMW use

and also the double cluth holds boost in between the changes.

Here is a manual TTRS accelerating, notice the ~0.3-0.4s lost in each change vs the smooth acceleration of the S-Tronic above

[Kerr]

Originally Posted by conneem-TT

Hmm Autocar seem to post slow acceleration times they got 11.3s 0-100mph for the 1M though which keeps things all relative with the other comparison tests I posted earlier.

Here is the Vbox graph

11.6 at 119mph standing quarter yet 12.4 for 130mph.

So it gets to 100mph in 7.4 secs, takes another 4.2 secs to find another 19mph but only 0.8 secs to find the next 11 mph?

Does not work out does it?

[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by Kerr

11.6 at 119mph standing quarter yet 12.4 for 130mph.

So it gets to 100mph in 7.4 secs, takes another 4.2 secs to find another 19mph but only 0.8 secs to find the next 11 mph?

Does not work out does it?

That vbox is not from the 1/4 mile at Crail, it is from a private airfield in the early morning at about 12oC cooler ambient temperatures, the surface at Crail is not too good either. His 60ft times at Crail were in the 1.9s+ range so he is realistically only getting a 4 second + 0-60mph.

That is one thing the TTRS really suffers from, excessive intake temps and it has a measurable effect on it's performance.

[dxb335d]

So you rekon a 340HP TTRS will do the same 0-100mph as a 480+ (they alll come out the factory with 500Hp) GT-R?!



No way would 410HP 4wd audi trap At 119mph. That's a Mis reading.

That's less HP at the wheels than an M3 which traps at 108-110mph

[Kerr]

4wd cars do very well at Crail. It seems to offer the right level of grip and Scooby and EVO drivers I know prefer it.

I guessed it was not the same run but again there is huge variance. The car is travelling 10 mph faster with the vbox figures.

That's a lot of power to gain that amount. No chance heat would make that difference.

[Kerr]

Can you link the crail time?

All Crail times are online.

[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

So you rekon a 340HP TTRS will do the same 0-100mph as a 480+ (they alll come out the factory with 500Hp) GT-R?!



No way would 410HP 4wd audi trap At 119mph. That's a Mis reading.

That's less HP at the wheels than an M3 which traps at 108-110mph

No a 410hp TT is about the same as a Gen 1 480hp GT-R up to 200km/h, the newer ones are on a different level.

Here are the results from a 30-130 event last year, there was one manual TTRS there and it had an full Milltek exhaust and remap, not too far off the standard GT-R's that attended, add in S-Tronic and there is not much in it at all.

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/8869/other30130.gif

[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by Kerr

Can you link the crail time?

All Crail times are online.

Yep, here are the most recent ones

http://www.crailraceway.co.uk/showdr...ate=2011-10-30

and here is a JB4 335i from the same day

http://www.crailraceway.co.uk/showdr...ate=2011-10-30

you can see from this post the surface isn't the best

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...3&postcount=19

[Real Thing]

Sorry about deviating from the 335i debate but as someone who has just gone from M3 (which is slightly quicker than a 1M) to TT-RS S-Tronic I think you will find for the average driver (Me) the RS is the quicker of the two alright a good Driver will probably get an M3 round a track quicker than a TT but for as mere mortals in everyday use the RS is easier to drive fast from A to B
Vid of the TT-RS at Crail:

[dxb335d]

Mate 8.3 is what a new GT-R does to 100. Your implying a 410HP TT can match it.

[conneem-TT]

here is a slow-mo launch vid of it

and a full speed launch vs a bike

[conneem-TT]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Mate 8.3 is what a new GT-R does to 100. Your implying a 410HP TT can match it.

new one does it in about 7,4s the first gen in about 8,5s

http://www.einszweidrei.de/nissan/ni...20092011-1.htm

[zltm089]

Originally Posted by Real Thing

Sorry about deviating from the 335i debate but as someone who has just gone from M3 (which is slightly quicker than a 1M) to TT-RS S-Tronic I think you will find for the average driver (Me) the RS is the quicker of the two alright a good Driver will probably get an M3 round a track quicker than a TT but for as mere mortals in everyday use the RS is easier to drive fast from A to B
Vid of the TT-RS at Crail:

plus one....


I think its a bit of a close one ...

e92 M3 v/s TTRS (Probably the M3 would be faster on track)
335i v/s TTS

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by conneem-TT

Where?

The 10.6s was for a manual car and the 9.3s for an S-Tronic

No chance there is that difference between
The two.