:) bit of fun

formatting link
Dunno how they work out the 4.2 litre TVR can beat an RS4 but oh well

Reply to
Ron
Loading thread data ...

I did Enzo vs Fiesta Zetec for the humour :)

Reply to
Dan405

Let's consider the contenders.... One an extremely powerful car made out of plastic and weighing next to nothing. The other an extremely powerful car made out of lard and weighing seven fuckloads of a heavy thing.

Doesn't really take much working out does it ? :)

Reply to
Lordy

Yeah but ones got Twin turbo's and 450bhp, you dont need to know the rest :)

Reply to
Ron

And the 4.2 TVR will have 350 horses or so. And be lighter. And have no 4x4 transmission losses.

Reply to
Doki

Or a dog in the back. ;-)

Mark S.

Reply to
Mark S.

In article , snipped-for-privacy@ron114.com spouted forth into uk.rec.cars.modifications...

impreza sti V Lambo Gallardo Gallardo won, but only made up in the second 1/8th mile.

Reply to
MeatballTurbo

And no turbo lag, or drive-by-wire throttle.

RS4 is a quick car, no one is denying that, but it isn't a sports car and in the right hands TVR will be quicker.

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

true :)

Reply to
Ron

and does the maclaren vs the bike.

Reply to
Theo

: > Let's consider the contenders.... One an extremely powerful car made : > out of plastic and weighing next to nothing. The other an extremely : > powerful car made out of lard and weighing seven fuckloads of a heavy : > thing. : > Doesn't really take much working out does it ? :)

: Yeah but ones got Twin turbo's and 450bhp, you dont need to know the rest :)

RS4 is 2.7 V6 380bhp (RS6 is 4.2 V8 450bhp).

Blair.

Reply to
B.G. Finlay IT Services

...to break down.

Richard

Reply to
Richard Kilpatrick

What about Murcielago vs. Gallardo? IMO, whilst the Murcielago is the true 'Lambo', the Gallardo is the faster car point to point, and the one most likely to be enjoyable on a regular basis. I surely wasn't alone in noticing the closeness of the times between the two on Top Gear, but the Gallardo's time was recorded in the wet - a fact conveniently forgotten as obviously as it is remembered when something they like is a million seconds slower than a GT3.

Of course, I'd have the Murcielago. If I wanted practical, I'd have a Volvo.

Richard

Reply to
Richard Kilpatrick

i prefer the lambswagen imo.

Reply to
Theo

B.G. Finlay IT Services ( snipped-for-privacy@dux.dundee.ac.uk) wrote: : RS4 is 2.7 V6 380bhp (RS6 is 4.2 V8 450bhp).

Just to correct myself, the above is the old RS4. The current one is 4.2 V8 344bhp.

Blair.

Reply to
B.G. Finlay IT Services

no you were right the first time.

Reply to
Theo

I thought the 4.2 V8 was the S4?

Reply to
Grant Mason

it is. but the RS4 is twin turbo's also.

Reply to
Theo

Just to correct you, that's wrong - it's the S4 that has 344bhp :)

Reply to
Lordy

If you look closely you will see the 4wd RS4 leaves the line in front. Then the light RWD TVR activates weight transfer, hooks up and goes away.

Once moving on road or track a well balanced RWD with about 25bhp and

100kgs less can match a 4wd. The lower the weight the less power is needed. The 4wd may go though the corner faster but the RWD's ability to accelerate out the corner quicker negates this. FWD is just for losers.

-- Peter Hill Spamtrap reply domain as per NNTP-Posting-Host in header Can of worms - what every fisherman wants. Can of worms - what every PC owner gets!

Reply to
Peter Hill

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.