Racing against Honda S2000

[saturnz]

lol

 

[Dusty]

Must say I don't agree that E90 330i is quicker than GTI (Golf 6), maybe at the coast yes but not at altitude.

Why don't you agree ? The 330i 0-100 is 6.0 seconds (some publications have tested 5.9 seconds) The GTI is almost a full second slower.

Hi Olorin
These figures which get claimed and even "tested" very seldom are true indications. 0-100 figures of ST's, Golf 5 GTI's, 330i were all better than the A4 2.0T I owned before my BM and I promise you that A4 gave all of them a hiding:excited:. A car that I struggled against with the Audi was the Astra OPC, they are quick. But compared to the lovely 335i I currently drive the above are slow:clap:
As mentioned at the coast the 330i might be a different story. Don't rely on quoted figures.:thumbsup:

 

[Olorin]

If your Audi gave the 330i a beat down then perhaps the BMW driver simply wasn't giving it his best effort ? Or his handbrake was applied. Specs have to count for something, surely ? Otherwise what's the point at looking at the specs of cars ?

 

[Dusty]

If your Audi gave the 330i a beat down then perhaps the BMW driver simply wasn't giving it his best effort ? Or his handbrake was applied. Specs have to count for something, surely ? Otherwise what's the point at looking at the specs of cars ?

Well the proof is in the pudding. It didn't just happen once and I had witnesses.

 

[Skwinty]

The engine specs are measured on a test bench in ideal conditions.
The engine is also blue printed. Once the engine rolls off the production line, it is about 15% to 20% under spec for reliability purposes.

It is no big deal at the end of the day, unless you want a racing car.
That costs plenty more than you paid for your beemer.

 

[WyKiD]

If your Audi gave the 330i a beat down then perhaps the BMW driver simply wasn't giving it his best effort ? Or his handbrake was applied. Specs have to count for something, surely ? Otherwise what's the point at looking at the specs of cars ?

Mnfr. specs are conducted under ideal conditions and with professional drivers, very rare can these be achieved in real world conditions.

 

[killua]

If your Audi gave the 330i a beat down then perhaps the BMW driver simply wasn't giving it his best effort ? Or his handbrake was applied. Specs have to count for something, surely ? Otherwise what's the point at looking at the specs of cars ?

He isn't at the coast, so the turbo cars lose half as much power as the NA engines. The 2.0 tfsi engine is known to push out more power than is specified, don't know if this is on purpose. At reef the 2.0tfsi should do the same 0-100 as the 330i...

Specs are a guideline... They work for most car comparisons, but unfortunatly the comparisson here isn't 100% valid because its not at the coast...

 

[Dusty]

If your Audi gave the 330i a beat down then perhaps the BMW driver simply wasn't giving it his best effort ? Or his handbrake was applied. Specs have to count for something, surely ? Otherwise what's the point at looking at the specs of cars ?

He isn't at the coast, so the turbo cars lose half as much power as the NA engines. The 2.0 tfsi engine is known to push out more power than is specified, don't know if this is on purpose. At reef the 2.0tfsi should do the same 0-100 as the 330i...

Specs are a guideline... They work for most car comparisons, but unfortunatly the comparisson here isn't 100% valid because its not at the coast...

+1

 

[WyKiD]

If your Audi gave the 330i a beat down then perhaps the BMW driver simply wasn't giving it his best effort ? Or his handbrake was applied. Specs have to count for something, surely ? Otherwise what's the point at looking at the specs of cars ?

Well the proof is in the pudding. It didn't just happen once and I had witnesses.

At the reef, boosted 2ltr beats 330i...fact.

 

[Olorin]

Are we splitting hairs in terms of performance difference (330i vs Audi 2lt) or is the difference in performance really that noticeable at the reef ?

 

[WyKiD]

Are we splitting hairs in terms of performance difference (330i vs Audi 2lt) or is the difference in performance really that noticeable at the reef ?

Cannot comment on the Audi, but an OPC leaves a 330i for dead. You can literally short shift and still be in front of the BM.

 

[Olorin]

Cannot comment on the Audi, but an OPC leaves a 330i for dead.

I never expected that. I thought the 330i would beat an OPC. In fact, I thought the OPC was in a similar class as the GTI.

 

[killua]

Cannot comment on the Audi, but an OPC leaves a 330i for dead.

I never expected that. I thought the 330i would beat an OPC. In fact, I thought the OPC was in a similar class as the GTI.

They are technically in the same class, but remember, the astra OPC 177KW, which is almost the same as the 330i. And it is lighter. And if I am not mistaken, we are still talking about reef not coast. So the astra has about 165kw at the reef and the 330i (assuming brand spanking new 200kw version) has 170kw at the reef. The astra should in theory win by virtue of being lighter and having less drive train losses....

 

[Olorin]

He isn't at the coast, so the turbo cars lose half as much power as the NA engines

Could you please explain why that is ? I'm not very clued up when it comes to these things.

 

[ChrisBrand]

He isn't at the coast, so the turbo cars lose half as much power as the NA engines

Could you please explain why that is ? I'm not very clued up when it comes to these things.

Thinner air being pumped through the turbo housing and thinner air mixed with petrol...:dunno:

Experts help here...

 

[moranor@axis]

the turbo can boost more to make up a little for the thinner air, but on an NA car it just has to deal with the thin air as is

 

[Coisman]

imp:
Olorin, to refer you back to how you started this thread...

I know this thread probably won't last long but I thought I would post my experiences..."

...and still the discusions continue... :thumb:

 

[killua]

He isn't at the coast, so the turbo cars lose half as much power as the NA engines

Could you please explain why that is ? I'm not very clued up when it comes to these things.

Ok. The main idea starts with the concept that fuel+air creates power. I will keep things limited to petrol engines. The fuel and air have to be supplied in a certain ratio (stoichiometric) for all the fuel to burn properly. So when you add more air, you can add more fuel, and thus have more HP. Its why modern cars have valve timing and more valves per cylinder than old cars, to let more air in.

Now, coming to the highveld, the air gets less dense. To be more exact, we have about 15% less air density up here than at the coast, depending where in Gauteng you are. So now with a naturally aspirated (NA) engine, the same volume of air sucked into the engine has less air molecules to burn. So the NA engine will make aproximately 15% less power at reef.

Turbo chargers, I will only describe free-floating and normal wastegated, boost a certain amount of air into the engine. Lets say that a turbo boosts 1 bar at the coast, which has about 1 bar ambient pressure, the engine will have about 2 bar of air to burn fuel in. And that is the maximum power specified by manufacturers. Now here at the reef the ambient pressure is 0.85 bar. And the turbo is still only boosting 1 bar, but working harder because the air is thinner. So the total pressure inside the engine is 1.85 bar. Which is 8% less than the 2 bar at coast. So the turbo engine will lose only 8% of power where the NA will lose 15%.

 

[Phoenix]

My apologies Coisman.....Please don't "SKiet Die Bliksem"

 

[Olorin]

Killua, thank you for explaining this for me ! :thumbsup: Definitely makes more sense now.

---

and still the discusions continue...

I know, I can't believe it. Just want to say thanks for everyone who participated. I definitely learned a few things.