|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,529
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,529 |
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Kontofosho... Did you say you werent impressed about the Audi S4??? I would give my left testicle for one... Well maybe not that far, but they are pretty sweet cars...
2 Turbos, and only 60hp more than a stock Contour. Pathetic!
BTW, looks can be deceiving... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 299
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 299 |
Originally posted by rozwell911:
Ok I must chime in here.......BMW does not messure there HP rating form the wheels....the messure from the engine (fly wheel). This i know because I work for a European car parts wholesaler. I deal and talk to BMW al day and i decided to call my vendor and my dealers about this issue. I even E-mailed my BMW contacts in Germany they all say they messure at the Engine.
So I hope this clarifies things...and the HP rating for the M5 is 395 hp. Although some top 400hp. Freak M5's. the M3 is 333hp to the engine. And with BMW's subtract 18 to 19 percent from the engine HP and you will get an estimate of wheel HP. if you want to be more exact its 18.9523%.
I hope this helps!
Roz
Directly from the source, that's good enough for me.
You guys can speculate all you want. Until I see a Contour running low 13's, I won't believe it.
Edit: I just realized the original question was from a roll. Doesn't matter, the only time one is racing from a roll is on the street, not the strip, so from a roll shouldn't matter in the slightest.
Last edited by GreenNuggs; 01/23/03 07:06 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106 |
Hmmmm 60HP more doesnt impress you? How about the AWD, or the 6 speed transmission? If not any of that, have you actually ridden in one? They are just flat out smooth. And Id love to see a contour with 60 more HP running low 13's... 13.2 I believe... Coming from experience, and not reading a "Road and Track" magazine, I would love to own an Audi S4... I guess I'll have to read the latest "Car and Driver" though to have a clue as to what Im talking about 
2000 Black CSVT
3.0L Hybrid - 206fwhp & 195fwtq
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 67
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 67 |
I think {Kontofosho} is talking about not liking the way Awd cars (in this case an S4) handle.
NEW: '05 Black Hemi Magnum
SOLD:'99 Silver Contour SVT (no mods)
R.I.P. '92 SHO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,397
b0x @dm1n
|
|
b0x @dm1n
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,397 |
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Hmmmm 60HP more doesnt impress you? How about the AWD, or the 6 speed transmission? If not any of that, have you actually ridden in one? They are just flat out smooth. And Id love to see a contour with 60 more HP running low 13's... 13.2 I believe... Coming from experience, and not reading a "Road and Track" magazine, I would love to own an Audi S4... I guess I'll have to read the latest "Car and Driver" though to have a clue as to what Im talking about
AWD means more drag and a higher parasitic loss of that 60HP. Granted they maybe be nice but for that much money they should be much nicer! Give me that extra 20k to drop into an SVT and when I was done you wouldn't look twice at the S4.
-Andy
Andy W.
The problem with America is stupidity.
I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment
for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety
labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 972
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 972 |
Give me 10k for that matter.
95 SE Modded - Gone
98 E0 Black SVT - Gone
98 se sport - Broken
00 T-Red SVT - Nice
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14
New CEG\'er
|
|
New CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14 |
Real men race from a stop.  Racing from a roll is no judge of who's faster. AWD also means you have more useable HP. I'll take a higher parasitic loss over lack of traction any day.
'99 Mustang GT
'91 Talon TSi AWD T3/T4
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Rolling start helps reduce/eliminate the advantages of launching technique and puts the responsibility on the car's abilities, not the driver. Just look at the magazines that do that test standard...helps show the really low-end torque of a motor.
Real men...quaint idea.
You have AWD and that is a distinct advantage against a non AWD vehicle. Rolling start agains a similarly powered 2wd vehicle could be your loss, no wonder you like starting from a stop.
warmonger
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by HighPSITalon:
1. Real men race from a stop.
2. Racing from a roll is no judge of who's faster.
1. Sure they do. Real mean don't race in a straight line though! 
2. Sure it does.
You are talking about who is quicker from a stop. Not who is faster! The stock SVT is by no means "really" quick, but it is pretty fast.
AWD cars are normally the opposite. Much quicker than they are fast.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14
New CEG\'er
|
|
New CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14 |
'99 Mustang GT
'91 Talon TSi AWD T3/T4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
