joseph1976

I have two Motor Trend magazines right in front of me:May 2001 and September 2001(got it today).

On pg 66 of May edition, it sates that TL-S does 0 to 60 in 6.28 sec. and Audi A6 2.7T quattro in 5.91

On pg 96 of Setember issue, it shows 6.58 for BMW 540i Sport(auto) and 6.69 for Audi A6 4.2 quattro

I'm confused. I know that there are lots of factors that affect the results, but 6.58 for 540i???

And what's the case with Audi family? Is it because of the TURBO package in 2.7T?

Oh! MB E430 Sport clocked @ 6.34

Here's the question:
Is it safe to say that WE, the TL-S', are faster or rather quicker
than A6 4.2, 540i Sport Auto and E430 Sport? At least in 0 to 60 territory?
:p

I LOVE MOTORTREND!!!

I'll definitely keep those two copies of Motor Trend for future references. hehe

moomaster_99

No one has doubted the effectiveness of our cars....even with slushboxes...

Nate579

Hot off the presses. I addressed that issue earlier in this forum. Pretty good. But you forgot to mention the Nissan Altima. It's up there with us all.

moomaster_99

Not in auto form....

Mr Hyde

Those numbers may be true for 0-60 especially with the automatics but at higher speeds, the bigger engine and more torque found in the BMW will overcome its weight disadvantage and walk away from us.

BLUBYU

True, when this starts to happen its best to tap the brakes and pretend your not crazy enough to race on the street at these triple digit speeds. Around the time third gear is starting to redline, because we all know fourth aint gonna cut it especially against a v8. hehehe. And when you get stopped at the next redlight you can embarass his overpriced v8 BMW, albeit only for a limited distance.

doug_RENAMED

Thank You Mr. Hyde.. i was going to point that out.... off the line you might be able to take a 540 IA but at highway speeds.. kiss his taillights good bye..

RedLined

I think most car magazines state that 0.3 secs isn't a significant difference in 0-60 times, that it is w/in normal error range. Whether that's true or not, I don' t know, that's just what they say.

As for the Audis -- the 2.7T was a manual whereas (I'm guessing because I haven't received my MotorTrend yet) the 4.2 is an auto. Transmission type aside, the 2.7T is still quicker and sportier due to a lower curb weight. I drove both the 2.7 and the 4.2 back-to-back and the 2.7 just felt more nimble and athletic.

TLinBama

The difference for the Audis is that the 2.7T had the 6 speed manual while the 4.2 had the 5 speed auto. I guess that would make the difference in 0-60 times. The 2.7T in auto form does 0-60 in 6.6 seconds, according to older Motor Trends with the 2.7T auto still listed in the road test results.

I'm not too sure about the 540 times though because they were both "Sports" with 5 speed autos...

RUF87

CAREFULL what you say!

There are folks out there that take those results as the gospel truth. And then believe that those results guarantee that car will always reproduce those times with any driver, any condition, any car condition.

RUF

RedLined

No doubt about that. I wonder what 0.3 sec translates to in "the real world". I just remember reading in Road and Track a while back that 0.3 sec was within their margin of error and that 2 cars that had 0-60 times w/in 0.3 sec of each other should be considered the same. So does that mean that a TLS going 0-60 in 6.2ish and a manual 2.7T in 5.9ish should be considered the same? And, is the TLS at 6.2ish is the same as the 540i at 6.5ish? My math background would tell me that if A=B and A=C, then B=C but I guess that isn't always the case in "the real world".

GS430

I will say never trust the magazine blindly, no matter what magazine they are, they tend to have certain baised opinion in some ways.

I like motortrend a lot, even on the last issue it rates 430 the last out of the 4 seden, (which i find it really hard to digest) at least they provide a real world data upon their testing. Both car and driver and motortrend complain about GS430's sport side while they don't even try to get the L-tuned GS430 with 18''s sport package. "We only Wish GS430 woudl arrive with bigger tires/rims, etc etc, while they are testing it on a 16''s rims"

anywayz the point is, if you read the newest Caranddriver, you will find out they rate 540i auto sport, (the exact same car) at 5.7 to 60. that's almost a full second off of what motortrend quote.
(hehe what is Caranddriver smoking??)

The best way to see, get in the car, and see yourself. TL-s will give 540 such a tight competition to 60 or even 80, but after that, hehehe better keep it cooh and godspeed!

AKRY

But if all cars within 0.3 are the same, then ALL cars ARE the same then!! The next 0.3 sec is some margin IMO... and would be even more obvious at tracks..

Andy Kuo

Road Rage

540 is faster - period. Faster refers to speed, not acceleration. That is quickness.

Top speed is a factor of horsepower, not torque. Factors such as aerodynamics and gearing come into play. The 540 has more torque at higher RPM's, which is horsepower, and better gearing to boot, so I agree it will start to pull away.

Are the 540's top speed limited as are many BMW's? If so, then the TL-S is faster as well as quicker.

namor16

hello,


Just picked up the 2002 TL/S, my first Acura. I am very impressed.

Now as far as this topic is concerned, lets all remember that even if the 540 is a little quicker then our cars it also costst nearly twice as much.

pianoman41

At 60 mph, you'll travel about 9 feet in 0.1 seconds so 0.3 is about 27 feet--at 60mph--or about 1 1/2 car-lengths.

1SICKLEX

REALITY CHECK PLEASE!!!!!!!!

RUF87

The professional testers in MT reported that any variance of up to .5 seconds between the same car model is considered equal. This is due to the fact that no two tests even by the same driver will ever be identical. And usually you are dealing with greater variables than just back to back runs by the same tester. It is also possible that we haven't seen the fastest times for a TLS either. Perhaps the TLS run of 6.28 wasn't under the best or equal to condiditons. Maybe there is a 6.1 TLS out there somewhere. It's possible.

Now think of a day at the track and consider how many runs are made. Consider the different results you came up with. You can have a resonably sized variance because of a slower reaction time, temperature, executing the launch etc. And if you happen to blow 3 or more of these you can easily have a variance of .5 secs or more.

Now consider that a car that is any where from .1 seconds to .8 seconds faster than another. Take an average of 5.9 to 6.2 for car one, and 6.3 to 6.7 for car two. While the second car will never be technically faster, unless there is something wrong with the car, and that can happen right from the factory. I know. I used to work on cars for a living many years ago. Anyway, the driver in car one messes up by .6 secs off his best posted time and ends up with a 6.4 run. And the second driver nails his race and matches his best time of 6.3.

Guess what! The technically faster car just lost the race! While car one is technically faster, it still lost. That said, it doesn't mean that car two is faster than car one.

BTW - I wonder what a TLS with better wheels and tires would do? How much closer is it now to that .1 - .8 second difference. Enough so that there is less room for error on the part of the driver in the faster car.

This is what I've been trying to explain in how a TLS can beat a GS 400, and even possibly a stock GS 430 with stock 16" tires and an automatic. It doesn't mean that the TLS is faster than either. It just means that the TLS is fast enough to beat a faster car from time to time due to the realities of racing.

So the Lexus' guys shouldn't get their feathers ruffled because they think we mean that the TLS is faster. We just got lucky and beat one of their brethern and that the facts Jack.

Oh, and in no way do I think the TLS should be compared to the GS 4xx. The GS 4xx should be a better car at $20k+ more than a TLS. That is unless you are conservative and or don't have the $$$ for it. Then the TLS is a really nice car for the $$. It will also be fast enough so that most drives out there couldn't feel or wouldn't know that there is a .5 second difference to 60.


RUF

GS430

HEHE Ruf, that's quite reasonable. = ).

enjoy your TLS, and get us some kills on the 540i =D

RUF87

GS430, does this mean a truce and perhaps becoming "buds" on the forum?

Since you love nice fast cars and like to run them that's enough for me.

RUF

SteVTEC

According to some older mags...

MT, Feb 97, 540iA: 0-60: 6.20; 1/4 mile: 14.60s
C&D, Mar 97, 540i (6spd) 0-60: 5.4s; 1/4 mile: 14.10s

1997 is the first year of the current generation 5-series. The manufacturer claims are 5.80s for the manual and 6.20 for the manual, and manufacturer performance claimes are usually a bit conservative so I think these are pretty real numbers...

That 4.4L V8 engine has 282HP @ 5400rpm and 324 lb-ft of torque at only 3600rpm, which more than compensates for its extra weight.

I didn't think a TL-S could outrun a 540i whether it's the 5-spd auto or the 6-spd manual. I would definitely give better odds to a 540i"x" in any race against a TL-S...

AC

Are some of you morons? I can't believe that some of you actually think your TLS will beat a 540i just cuz a mag produced the worst time I have ever seen on the 540i. Geez. But nothing wrong with wishful thinking...

Off the line the TLS will keep up not the other way around guys. I have a 540iA Sports Package, and I will not lose to a TLS/CLS off the line and no you won't embarrass me cuz my car costs a lot more

Enjoy guys...

namor16

Dude,


Like I said yes the 540i is faster but you paid nearly 60G's for it. so being that I saved 30 I am really not that upset that your car is a second or so faster then mine. I just want to thank the financial people at Acura for pricing it so low, cause had they priced it at say 45 grand I would still get it. I think I got the best car for the money I was looking to spend a lot more but didn't.

AC

No one is arguing that the TL/TLS is the best bang. If you bought your TLS simply for "I want to go fast 0-60 but pay only $30K" then you should have bought a Mustang. "Haha, my $30K car just beat your $60K car" - so you're cool as **** now...

Anyone with a common sense would know that the 540i is a SUPERIOR car over the TL/TLS period. Yes, it costs more, yes it's only a tad bit quicker, yes the interior is outdated, etc. No one is arguing that. As a 540i owner and a TL owner, I agree the 5 Series has an outdated interior but fact still remains, build quality, materials, etc is far beyond what we have in our beloved TL/TLS.

Not trying to start a fight, and frankly, I'm glad I own a TL. It's a good break from the stiffness of my 540i every now and then.

1SICKLEX

and ya'll call me Sick.......:p ......

I mean car mags are there to help not closed cases.

For instance the E55 was tested at 0-60 5.7 sec when it first came out (seen 4.9 to 5.5 since) and the GS 4 was tested at 5.7 but I KNOW that car will beat me cause specs say it has a 5.5 liter engine witrh 349 hp and almost 400 lbs torque.......

Anyway it probably don't matter what ANY magazine says, real world will telll u everything u need to know (and try to race)

Holla

ZodiakTL

hey, how does ur gs compare to ur sc? which one handles better? feels faster? what do u enjoy driving more?

R Man

Just heard this one today:

What’s the difference between a porcupine and a BMW?
The porcupine has the pr!cks on the outside.

namor16

HAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHA

that's a good one !!!

AC

Actually, I liked that one...Good one!

RUF87

ROTFALMAO

Thanks - I needed that today.

RUF

1SICKLEX

ZodiackTL, I like how the SC handles (has 17" wheels) better than the GS, it feels more at ease but on straights the GS will kill it. Overall the GS is more fun to drive, more willing to be thrown into a turn and is very, let's say frisky........



"Loves to frolic"!