I've heard that removing 10 lbs is the equivalent of adding 1 HP, and every 10 HP gets you .1 seconds off the 1/4 mile time. If that's generally going to be true, the qs should do the quarter mile roughly .25 seconds faster. How that translates into 0-60, I don't know.

 

A nice comparison would be 0-60 for:

180:
180 re-mapped (Stage 1):
225:
225 re-mapped (Stage 1):
240:
240 re-mapped (Stage 1):

And I mean actual measurements from members.

I will try to make the first one with vag com. (the minus is that with 35C degrees here (95 degrees Fahrenheit), it will lose a lot - maybe I will try during the night where the temp is around 22-24)

 

225 remapped 4.5secs (won't be doing it again)

 

225 remapped 4.5secs (won't be doing it again)

Err Jamman, I think it's 0 - 60 on flat ground, not down a steep hill :wink:

 

225 remapped 4.5secs (won't be doing it again)

Err Jamman, I think it's 0 - 60 on flat ground, not down a steep hill :wink:

*forgets to mention the small matter of a big turbo*

 

225 remapped 4.5secs (won't be doing it again)

Err Jamman, I think it's 0 - 60 on flat ground, not down a steep hill :wink:

*forgets to mention the small matter of a big turbo*

Ahhh

 

225 remapped 4.5secs (won't be doing it again)

Err Jamman, I think it's 0 - 60 on flat ground, not down a steep hill :wink:

*forgets to mention the small matter of a big turbo*

Was probably done before he went BT, not many cars can launch like a TT, it just doesnt do much good to the car

As for OP, why does it matter QS-225 0-60 times, anyone interested in performance will get either remapped and hence will be very similar as remap will take both to same figure, weight is negligible for that small amount, like you said fat v thin guy, empty tank full tank etc etc.

 

Weight isn't negligible at all, at the pod last year I done only the 1 run without a passenger (50kg roughly) and was 0.3 seconds faster then any other run, including a botched 3rd to 4th shift! Weight makes so much difference to performance!

 

Completely agree with Nick. When I have certain mates in the car, it feels a lot more sluggish.

 

How often do you go 0-60, 60-120's where its at...

 

As for OP, why does it matter QS-225 0-60 times, anyone interested in performance will get either remapped and hence will be very similar as remap will take both to same figure, weight is negligible for that small amount, like you said fat v thin guy, empty tank full tank etc etc.

I was mainly interested in the manufacturers original quoted times(dunno if theyre even rl figures) in relation to 1 gearchange or 2.
My own remapped 225 can theoretically hit a real 60 at about 6900 rpm in second(cos tyres are oversize,actually the profile, not the width) and map has a slight rev limit increase. Havent tested yet
but in standard spec a 225 needs 3rd for 60.

I havent seen any original road tests of a qs describing "how I got to 60" and There seems to be a fair amount of qs owners on here

So ,Im just wondering aside from the weight reduction and the extra go does that alone account for the 0.7 second time to 60 drop

OR did audi make 2nd gear slightly higher and add a couple of 100 rpm on the limiter of the qs to enable 60 to be just reachable in second gear and that helped the quoted time too?

 

With the weight I've dumped out, the extra bit of power from the pipework and mapping plus the grip from my haldex insert and track rubber, my (irrelivent/pointless) 0-60 time would now be below 5 secs on a dry surface.

VT

 

With the weight I've dumped out, the extra bit of power from the pipework and mapping plus the grip from my haldex insert and track rubber, my (irrelivent/pointless) 0-60 time would now be below 5 secs on a dry surface.

VT

Ahh yes Im as fond of a good 0-60 as the next,and I bet most maybe all on the forum have tried it once but not everyday especially with the age our unmodded cars are going to.But 0-60 quoted times sell cars with"sporty credentials" and while 6.4 6.5 sec is still pretty good today a sub 6.0 second time must have been part of of the original qs brief for sales purposes too.
So was it massaged even more by having just one gearchange or no?

Like I had an audi 80 and a audi 80 gt came out with recaro seats .. oooh dechroming 3 gauge console in front of the gearshift n so on...but a reviewer was moaning about the low gearing,the first 2 gears anyway it needed 2 gearchanges before 50

 

How often do you go 0-60, 60-120's where its at...

Good point made, it starts to get towards higher speed this is where the weight saving of the car is then negligible compared to the air resistance and down-force created and when power makes the greater difference.

With the weight I've dumped out, the extra bit of power from the pipework and mapping plus the grip from my haldex insert and track rubber, my (irrelivent/pointless) 0-60 time would now be below 5 secs on a dry surface.

VT

Maybe a TTF Santapod day would be a good idea, a good place to meet but still have a bit of "racing" action for a much lower cost than a trackday!

 

Maybe a TTF Santapod day would be a good idea, a good place to meet but still have a bit of "racing" action for a much lower cost than a trackday!

[/quote]

V6RUL has organised one every year as far as I can remember and then cancels it because his car isn't working, maybe contact him and sort something out but be prepared to be let down.

Got to be honest I'm far more interested in track days I find the "Pod" boring in the extreme but whatever floats your boat.

Agree with Trig that 0-60 is a most pointless exercise 30 onwards is where it's at.

 

Maybe a TTF Santapod day would be a good idea, a good place to meet but still have a bit of "racing" action for a much lower cost than a trackday!

V6RUL has organised one every year as far as I can remember and then cancels it because his car isn't working, maybe contact him and sort something out but be prepared to be let down.

Got to be honest I'm far more interested in track days I find the "Pod" boring in the extreme but whatever floats your boat.

Agree with Trig that 0-60 is a most pointless exercise 30 onwards is where it's at.

I do remember something was organized for May now that you mention it, went very quiet though!

Likewise regarding trackdays, i was thinking this was a good compromise in terms of cost for some, but i'd be up for a TT track day if something where to be planned! Wouldn't have a clue where to start planning something like that myself but more then happy to learn if people are interested.

(Apologies for the thread highjack 3TT3!)

 

Maybe a TTF Santapod day would be a good idea, a good place to meet but still have a bit of "racing" action for a much lower cost than a trackday!

V6RUL has organised one every year as far as I can remember and then cancels it because his car isn't working, maybe contact him and sort something out but be prepared to be let down.

Got to be honest I'm far more interested in track days I find the "Pod" boring in the extreme but whatever floats your boat.

Agree with Trig that 0-60 is a most pointless exercise 30 onwards is where it's at.

I do remember something was organized for May now that you mention it, went very quiet though!

Likewise regarding trackdays, i was thinking this was a good compromise in terms of cost for some, but i'd be up for a TT track day if something where to be planned! Wouldn't have a clue where to start planning something like that myself but more then happy to learn if people are interested.

(Apologies for the thread highjack 3TT3!)

Will look into something Nick once the RR day is out the way there's a few of us like minded folk about

Sorry OP back on topic now