Re: VR6 0-60 times

["Brandon Wilson" <brandon@eicsoftware.com>]

So what are the actually numbers on a A3 vr6 compared to a A4??   (0-60
times)


Brandon Wilson
Excellence In Computing
----- Original Message -----
From: Khan Klatt <khan@mediaaccess.com>
To: <jettaglx@igtc.com>
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: VR6 0-60 times


> At 3:27 PM -0400 04/07/2000, VW155mph@aol.com wrote:
> >In a message dated Fri, 7 Apr 2000 11:16:43 AM Eastern Daylight
> >Time, "FlyinVR6" <FlyinVR6@optonline.net> writes:
> >
> >  > Good point, but, WHEN and WHERE the cars have to pull those weights
(in the
> >  > power curve) is the deciding factor.
> >  >
> >  > >>If you do the math, the A4 has to
> >  > pull 17.6 lbs for every 1 HP, while the A3 only has to deal with
16.9.<<
> >  >
> >  > -FlyinVR6
> >  > AIM: SwiftVR6
> >  > ICQ: 8994103
> >  > LI Rep ClubH2O
> >  > http://members.aol.com/qwikvr6/index.html
> >
> >That's true.  That is why I stated in a street start and in regular
> >daily driving (when you actually use lower rpms), the A4 VR6 has the
> >advantage.  Once you get past 4000 rpms, the curve on both cars are
> >very similar.  This is where that power to weight difference is
> >evident.  Both cars are peaking at 5800 rpms with only a 2 HP
> >difference, not enough to make up for the weight.
> >Let me also add that VW did try to make up the weight difference
> >with the gear ratios.  They shortened 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in the A4s,
> >but once again, not enough to make a significant difference.
>
> So why the discrepancy on the reported times? I mean it's a given
> that any published figure is dependent on many conditions (including
> drivers' skill), but you'd think that if the A4 wasn't much slower or
> faster than the A3, you'd see numbers in the 6.9 - 7.1 range... Yet
> one person noted that the A4 is at 7.4 sec?
>
> Of course, to put this in perspective, a car that does 0-60 in 6.9
> seconds compared to one that does it in 7.0 seconds is only about 9
> feet ahead. Hardly a commanding lead. It's not exactly right, but
> roughly, you're talking about a 9 foot difference for every tenth of
> a second for a 0-60.. this number is roughly accurate, I would guess,
> for times between 6.0 sec to 8.0 seconds (where a 0-60 in 6 secs
> would put the car ROUGHLY 9x20 or 180 feet ahead of one that does
> 0-60 in 8 secs) when the first one reaches 60mph.
>
> -Khan
>
>
> Khan Klatt                                         khan@mediaaccess.com
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Media Access Internet Solutions, Inc.       888.750.0777 tel
> http://www.mediaaccess.com       425.519.3741 fax
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>