Audi A5 Forum & Audi S5 Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Is there a possibility that some A5´s are slower than others, even though they have the same trim?
Let me explain:

Some 6 months ago, the Audi dealer here in Lima lent me the A5 3.2 (rear wheel drive) demo for a day. The same afternoon I got the demo, I called a very close friend of mine who owns a 330i E90 (European version 272hp stock) and we took the cars for a drive. We obviously performed a couple of races, where the A5 came victorious every time. As soon as we started, the A5 would take the post and after 700 meters, it would be well ahead (car and a half).

My friend and I agreed that once I got my A5, which at the time was on order, we would meet again.

Now that I´ve had my A5 3.2 Quattro for close to two months, and the car has 1800kms, which is more than enough distance for the engine to have broken in, I decided to call my friend again. I thought to myself that since the demo A5, which wasn´t Quattro handled the Bavarian contender quite well, my car would decimate it.

Seems I was wrong…

We raced… Right off the bat, the Beemer was half a nose in front of me! I had to reach 100kms/hour before I could catch up with him and 120kms before I finally passed him. I was in shock. We repeated the ritual 4 times, with the same results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I simply can´t understand why? According to the Audi manual, the A5 3.2 Quattro is half a second faster at a 0-100kms than the rear wheel drive… In my case, it seems to be the other way around!

Things I believe are worth mentioning.

1. Weather conditions were the same at both events (no rain, no snow, perfect weather)
2. Both the demo and my car have the automatic transmission. I shifted down to “S” on both occasions before we raced.
3. The demo A5 wore 17” rims, versus my 18” W´s. This might have made the demo gain speed a little faster.
4. My friend´s beemer has not suffered any mods between the two events. It is 100% stock.


Is my A5 a Friday afternoon car? Can I go to the dealer and claim that something is wrong with my car?

Going nuts here! Hope someone can give me some insight on this conundrum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,295 Posts
Since there's no such thing as a RWD Audi, I'm assuming the A5 3.2 you drove before was FWD (we don't get such a model in the US, but I'm assuming some other countries do).

All else being equal, the FWD version will always put more power to the ground. The actual driving dynamics will in most cases not be as good, but in terms of a drag race, if the FWD has sufficient traction, it will always win.

There is much more noticeable drivetrain loss in an AWD system, the trade-off being that you get better traction (esp in wet/snow conditions) and overall handling dynamics.

-Ray
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
There are several factors:

> Fuel type (98 Octane - not sure what that's called in US) is essential
> Ensure tank half full (or less)

Frankly, the FWD Audi A5 3.2 regularly slipped on full acceleration from standstill (and around corners) when I test drove it. A quattro should logically be faster on take off despite the additional weight.

On a side note - anyone have details of how to handle quattro based car when it loses control?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Thanks for the correction Ray, I always thought it was rwd.

It is true the the fwd will put more power to the ground, and that given the correct traction conditions, it should win, but then why does Audi state that the Quattro does 0 to 100 in half a second less than the rwd? That is a false statement.

With regards to the fuel tanks taniane, in both cases I had the cars running on fumes. There is a difference though, which actually doesn´t help. When the 330i ran against the demo, it had an empty tank, as opposed to yesterday, when it ran against the Quattro. In this occasion, it had a 3/4 full tank. This makes the difference between the cars increase, together with my disappointment. The fuel is always the same, 98 octane.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
There are several factors:

> Fuel type (98 Octane - not sure what that's called in US) is essential
> Ensure tank half full (or less)

Frankly, the FWD Audi A5 3.2 regularly slipped on full acceleration from standstill (and around corners) when I test drove it. A quattro should logically be faster on take off despite the additional weight.

On a side note - anyone have details of how to handle quattro based car when it loses control?
since the original question has been answered I will attempt to answer your side note. Prevention is the best way to prevent any car from losing control. The rain, snow and wet leaves are factors thatcan greatly effect your ability to stay in control. It is very hard to lose control with quattro and your tcs should kick on and save you if you start to. I have had my car slip in the rain but have not ever really lost control with spinning out or anything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,295 Posts
It is true the the fwd will put more power to the ground, and that given the correct traction conditions, it should win, but then why does Audi state that the Quattro does 0 to 100 in half a second less than the fwd? That is a false statement.

When the 330i ran against the demo, it had an empty tank, as opposed to yesterday, when it ran against the Quattro. In this occasion, it had a 3/4 full tank. This makes the difference between the cars increase, together with my disappointment. The fuel is always the same, 98 octane.
You won't get that half second advantage in the Quattro unless you launch the car abusively. You'll get a big jump over most any 2WD car that way. From an easy luanch or a rolling start, you will lose.

-Ray
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
871 Posts
There are several factors:

> Fuel type (98 Octane - not sure what that's called in US) is essential
> Ensure tank half full (or less)

Frankly, the FWD Audi A5 3.2 regularly slipped on full acceleration from standstill (and around corners) when I test drove it. A quattro should logically be faster on take off despite the additional weight.

On a side note - anyone have details of how to handle quattro based car when it loses control?
Yeah, learn to drive it properly and you wont loose it :D:D:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,046 Posts
Thanks for the correction Ray, I always thought it was rwd.

It is true the the fwd will put more power to the ground, and that given the correct traction conditions, it should win, but then why does Audi state that the Quattro does 0 to 100 in half a second less than the rwd? That is a false statement.

With regards to the fuel tanks taniane, in both cases I had the cars running on fumes. There is a difference though, which actually doesn´t help. When the 330i ran against the demo, it had an empty tank, as opposed to yesterday, when it ran against the Quattro. In this occasion, it had a 3/4 full tank. This makes the difference between the cars increase, together with my disappointment. The fuel is always the same, 98 octane.
...FYI, yes, there can be a difference between cars and your car will continue to get noticeably quicker up to 5k miles (8,000Km). The Quattro is a little heavier that 2wd, so within the limits of traction the 2wd will have an advantage. Although personally, I'm a little surprised the demo beat the 330i in the first place.

Can I suggest that if you want to beat him, stop racing on straight roads on a dry day. Any dampness or wet surface and you will be a clear winner every time. Learn to drive the quattro properly and you will be able to make use of the traction to get on the power earlier from roundabouts and bends and gain the upper hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
871 Posts
To get away as quickly as possible you need a little wheelspin, the FWD car gives this before the TC kicks in. The spin stops the engine bogging down and dropping out of the power band. The 4WD cars tend not to spin the wheels thus dropping the revs out of the powerband, unless you really build the revs and dump the clutch. Not recommended too many times
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,251 Posts
On the other hand I don't quite understand how come a stock 3.2 A5 is faster than a stock 330i E90? It seems little bit like a miracle to me!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
I personally think 1800 kms is not adequate for a new car to break in and loosen up. Dpending on the way one drives it can take up to 10k before you feel the thing unfolding its full potential. If you continue racing your friend's 330i you'll probably need a new set of tyres by that time. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
On the other hand I don't quite understand how come a stock 3.2 A5 is faster than a stock 330i E90? It seems little bit like a miracle to me!
Well, that´s how it was... The fwd A5 demo was faster hands down. On the other hand. I don´t know whether I need to learn to drive the car better. I´m obviously not an expert driver, nor is my friend. We both just floor the cars on a straight line.

It probably is true tha
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 · (Edited)
On the other hand I don't quite understand how come a stock 3.2 A5 is faster than a stock 330i E90? It seems little bit like a miracle to me!
Well, that´s how it was... The fwd A5 demo was faster hands down. On the other hand. I don´t know whether I need to learn to drive the car better. I´m obviously not an expert driver, nor is my friend. We both just floor the cars on a straight line.

What Ianhp1 says is true. It might take another 7000kms before I get the car´s full potential, however, I doubt that it will ever overwhelm the 330i in such a manner as the demo did.

Next time I go to the dealer, I will ask them whether they have performed some sneaky mod on the demo. I had no idea that the 330i should be faster than the A5. I would have expected them to be pretty much the same.

Why? Well, because I found an article which compares the C350, the 330i and the A4 3.2 FSi, where all the cars seemed to perform similarly. My ignorance on the subject made me assume that the performance of the new A4 and the new A5 would be pretty much the same... I have attached the article so that those of you who are interrested can take a peak. Even though it´s in German (I don´t understand the language), it has lots of data and numbers which are easy to read. Hope you enjoy it.

Changing the subject, my friend has told me that he wants to shoot some videos of the cars running, so as soon as we have something, I will be posting the youtube address.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,251 Posts
I don't know about sedan, but speaking about E92 Coupe, acceleration time from 0-62MPH is exactly 6.1 seconds which is faster than A5 3.2 V6.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top