tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile, now:Re: superchargers are bad, mmkay?

Sun Jun 6 12:12:16 EDT 2004

Calvin and others,

Well, hmmm, something is wrong. My B5 is either over performing or the C4 is
underperforming. Possibly my Butt Dyno needs recalibration. I'll do some
heads up testing next time my brother is in town. Have you driven the B5?

Please don't misunderstand me. The C4 is a fabulous car. I think it's better
looking than the current crop of Audi's as well. Owner of a local VW/Audi
Tunning shop, Fast Enough Performance, said mechanics and customers were
drooling over the car. Aren't many Audi's in my neck(Kentucky) of the woods.

Richard
1992 S4 Fast...down to mysterious Hydraulic Fluid leak, but soon to receive
RS2 Goodies
2002 S4 Faster

-----Original Message-----
From: Calvin & Diana Craig [mailto:calvinlc at earthlink.net]
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 6:29 PM
To: Gabriel Caldwell; Bill Clancy; Richard Harris;
s-car-list at audifans.com
Subject: RE: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:
superchargers are bad, mmkay?

Actually, contrary to popular opinion, there is only 77 lbs difference in
the curb weight of a '92 Urs and a B5 S4, at least that is what Edmund's has
to say about it.  Audiworld's specs seem to be more like 240 lbs but their
spec. for the Urs is about 75 lbs over what I measured.  I have verified
Edmund's number for the '92 at the dragstrip with the scales and I was
within 20 lbs of what they state (20 lbs under).

The 6 speed is a moot point until over 100mph since the first 3 gears of the
early UrS Tranny is the exact same ratio as the B5 S4, as well as the final
drive ratio.

The "paper" drag race gives the edge to the B5 by 0.5 seconds at sea level.
What I am saying is that I see that difference become about 0.1 to 0.2
seconds at 6000 feet because of the different boost levels due to the ECM
algorithms for altitude correction as well as just the fact that you are
dealing with more absolute psi on the UrS so 2 psi difference is not as much
relative difference.  If 0.1 to 0.2 seconds is destroying, then yes, the B5
destroys it :)

--Calvin

-----Original Message-----
From: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com
[mailto:s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com]On Behalf Of Gabriel Caldwell
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 2:34 PM
To: Bill Clancy; Richard Harris; s-car-list at audifans.com
Subject: RE: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:
superchargers are bad, mmkay?

~600 lb. diet + 6 speed.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Harris" <rnharris at bellsouth.net>
To: <s-car-list at audifans.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 10:13 AM
Subject: RE: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:
superchargers are bad, mmkay?

> Both the C4 and B5 S4 are rated @ 258 lbs of Torque down low. I own
both
and
> the B5 is much stronger. Maybe it's the gearing. A stock B5 will
destroy a
> C4.
>
> Richard
> 1992 S4 Fast ...down to mysterious Hydraulic fluid leak
> 2002 S4 Faster
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com
> [mailto:s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com]On Behalf Of Bill Clancy
> Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 12:56 PM
> To: kirby.a.smith at verizon.net
> Cc: s-car-list at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:
> superchargers are bad, mmkay?
>
>
> all good questions.   I guess it will take me time to get you the
answers.
>
> thanks for replying....
>
> I think I just got bagged by the Audi-S-Car list supervisor.    This
reminds
> me of being 8 years old and my mom catching me lighting matches or
pissing
> in the back yard.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kirby Smith" <kirby.a.smith at verizon.net>
> To: "Bill Clancy" <clancybill at yahoo.com>
> Cc: <s-car-list at audifans.com>
> Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 9:51 AM
> Subject: Re: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 , 1/4mile,now:Re:
> superchargers are bad, mmkay?
>
>
> > Things to consider: Is your bypass valve functional or leaking? Are
you
> > using too heavy of an oil?  Mobil 1 15W-50 vs 10W-40 makes a
difference,
> > even in warm weather, I perceive.  Don't try to operate the engine
in
> > lug mode, i.e., full throttle under 2500 rpm.  There is only so much
an
> > Audi DOHC system can compensate for.  Is your wastegate frequency
valve
> > in need of replacement?
> >
> > kirby
> >
> >
> > Bill Clancy wrote:
> > >
> > > but, read into this.   I am asking for help man.
> > > has anyone been able to get the turbo to respond quicker?     if
you
> read
> > > the data, it is supposed to have 265 ft-lbs of torque at 1800.
> > > ahhh.....I'm not getting that.   I need 3000 rpm to get torque.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Bill Clancy" <clancybill at yahoo.com>
> > > To: "Dave Forgie" <forgied at direct.ca>; <s-car-list at audifans.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 8:59 AM
> > > Subject: Re: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 ,
1/4mile,now:Re:
> > > superchargers are bad, mmkay?
> > >
> > > > OK... you got me.  yes, I bad mouthed the S-car.
> > > > but my argument/question was why not a supercharger?
Mercedes
> makes
> > > that
> > > > SLK kompressor.   I have never driven one, so I don't know if it
is
> any
> > > > good.
> > > >
> > > > thanks for your feedback.
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Dave Forgie" <forgied at direct.ca>
> > > > To: <s-car-list at audifans.com>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 8:50 AM
> > > > Subject: tubo vs super -- Re: [s-cars] was, 0-60 ,
1/4mile,now:Re:
> > > > superchargers are bad, mmkay?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Bill:  Your San Francisco hill story has more to do with
having a
> > > > > standard transmission instead of an automatic than it does
about
> having
> > > > > a turbo instead of a supercharger.  If I had to live in San
Fran
> (and I
> > > > > visit fairly often), my daily driver wouldn't be a heavy car
with
a
> > > > > standard.  It would be something automatic.  Same for bumper
to
> bumper
> > > > > commutes anywhere.  The S-car was not developed to service
that
> need.
> > > > > Or at least not a std. trans S-car (they had autos in Europe,
even
> on
> > > > > the 20vt).
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think your arguement holds.  Regardless, rather than
> continuing
> > > > > to bad mouth the S-car, you should probably just sell it, and
get
> > > > > something with a sport-matic/ tiptronic/manumatic.  Everyone
will
be
> > > > > happier, even your favorite chick.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dave F.
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > S-CAR-List mailing list
> > > > > S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> > > > > http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > S-CAR-List mailing list
> > > S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> > > http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list

_______________________________________________
S-CAR-List mailing list
S-CAR-List at audifans.com
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list

_______________________________________________
S-CAR-List mailing list
S-CAR-List at audifans.com
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list