You can never have too many RS4's...
09-12-2006, 08:44 PM
#41
Former Vendor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Customer feedback is glowing about this suspension, we've worked with this chassis since the B6...
was introduced using the same components and fine tuning this since then. This company was founded by multiple engineers, one of which is a professional race car driver. This idea that you propose in which we are throwing darts at a wall blindly since we do not own an RS4 just isn't true. This chassis is 100% the same as an A4 or S4 B7 that rolled off the floor in the past 2 years, including the three race cars built in our facility at Infineon Raceway where we are located. We work hand in hand with Ohlins to properly valve and put a proper range of adjustment on these dampers for this chassis to work with these spring rates. Our engineers spent plenty of time working on designing product for this chassis which just so happens to have spawned a wider, heavier, more powerful version of an A/S4. Now note that every ounce of the A/S4 suspension minus the springs, dampers and DRC system are identical in the RS4, the uprights, control arms, bushings, tie rods and so forth. With weight distribution data in hand we can accurately and properly put spring rates together with these exact dampers that we have produced for this suspension system.
Having not driven or even ridden in an RS4, S4 or A4 B7 fitted with our Motor Sport suspension there really isn't any basis for judgment about it's "handling." "Handling" is a subjective aspect of a car, many find the RS4 to have too much body roll and we know from plenty of time with RS6's that the DRC system cannot keep up with the weight of these vehicles in aggressive driving or track use. The only reason the RS4 uses such a light spring is to work in conjunction with the DRC. If you disable the DRC you would have a car with multiple extra hundred pounds over an S4 B7 with less spring. DRC attempts to behave like spring rate, which is not what a traditional damper is designed to do.
I will reiterate, softening used as a term in Motor Trend has nothing to do with spring rate. If you put an 800lbs spring with a damper not designed or valved to work with it this can create a bone-jarring experience. Put an 800lbs spring with a damper designed and valved for it you can have a feeling that the car has been softened and is more streetable, however into a corner the car will remain far flatter. This basic principal, the spring holds the weight and deal with the force, the damper controls the movement of the spring in compression and in rebound. Can every customer running this suspension in a B6 and B7 from A4 to RS4 be incorrect in their impressions that the car maintains almost stock like ride while being flatter and having a more balanced feeling? Is it just coincidence that the work we've done since the B6 rolled out has yielded these impressions and results for every user I've ever seen a review out of?
Our multiple wins in a national competitive series with this exact chassis and extremely similar suspension setup should speak volumes for our testing. Our race team spends days preparing these vehicles for single events, tweaking settings just to fine tune for each situation while spending a large amount of time looking at telemetry collected from the data acquisition systems on board in these vehicles to better fine tune these beasts for battle. We run a similar suspension on the S4 B5 that absolutely worked cars with more bhp that weighed less at the EuroTuner GP. We followed the same basic principles and engineering, higher spring rates with a higher rear split coupled with the exceedingly capable Ohlins damper, and were able to run a full 2 seconds faster at Willow Springs than our closest competitor, which funny enough was running the same suspension and placed second above competition running 150+whp.
<img src="http://www.motorgeek.com/phpBB2/d/34813-3/scan0007.jpg">
<a href="http://www.motorgeek.com/phpBB2/d/34813-3/scan0007.jpg">EuroTuner GP Article (if picture will not show)</a>
The basic principles that have been brought up have been addressed in engineering, testing and road and track use.
This is nothing new for us, we have encountered these pieces of equipment before, the same DRC, the low spring rates, the same chassis and on and on and on. I could speak volumes to our abilities until I turn blue into the face, though sometimes it just won't make an impression on someone. Some folks understand our philosophy and our ability in this marketplace while others may not.
Cheers,
Having not driven or even ridden in an RS4, S4 or A4 B7 fitted with our Motor Sport suspension there really isn't any basis for judgment about it's "handling." "Handling" is a subjective aspect of a car, many find the RS4 to have too much body roll and we know from plenty of time with RS6's that the DRC system cannot keep up with the weight of these vehicles in aggressive driving or track use. The only reason the RS4 uses such a light spring is to work in conjunction with the DRC. If you disable the DRC you would have a car with multiple extra hundred pounds over an S4 B7 with less spring. DRC attempts to behave like spring rate, which is not what a traditional damper is designed to do.
I will reiterate, softening used as a term in Motor Trend has nothing to do with spring rate. If you put an 800lbs spring with a damper not designed or valved to work with it this can create a bone-jarring experience. Put an 800lbs spring with a damper designed and valved for it you can have a feeling that the car has been softened and is more streetable, however into a corner the car will remain far flatter. This basic principal, the spring holds the weight and deal with the force, the damper controls the movement of the spring in compression and in rebound. Can every customer running this suspension in a B6 and B7 from A4 to RS4 be incorrect in their impressions that the car maintains almost stock like ride while being flatter and having a more balanced feeling? Is it just coincidence that the work we've done since the B6 rolled out has yielded these impressions and results for every user I've ever seen a review out of?
Our multiple wins in a national competitive series with this exact chassis and extremely similar suspension setup should speak volumes for our testing. Our race team spends days preparing these vehicles for single events, tweaking settings just to fine tune for each situation while spending a large amount of time looking at telemetry collected from the data acquisition systems on board in these vehicles to better fine tune these beasts for battle. We run a similar suspension on the S4 B5 that absolutely worked cars with more bhp that weighed less at the EuroTuner GP. We followed the same basic principles and engineering, higher spring rates with a higher rear split coupled with the exceedingly capable Ohlins damper, and were able to run a full 2 seconds faster at Willow Springs than our closest competitor, which funny enough was running the same suspension and placed second above competition running 150+whp.
<img src="http://www.motorgeek.com/phpBB2/d/34813-3/scan0007.jpg">
<a href="http://www.motorgeek.com/phpBB2/d/34813-3/scan0007.jpg">EuroTuner GP Article (if picture will not show)</a>
The basic principles that have been brought up have been addressed in engineering, testing and road and track use.
This is nothing new for us, we have encountered these pieces of equipment before, the same DRC, the low spring rates, the same chassis and on and on and on. I could speak volumes to our abilities until I turn blue into the face, though sometimes it just won't make an impression on someone. Some folks understand our philosophy and our ability in this marketplace while others may not.
Cheers,
09-12-2006, 09:48 PM
#42
New Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well we have an opportunity here !
The Fifth Gear piece, along with just the SOUND in some other simple home video of some guy in Europe revving each gear out to 8000rpm, were key moments in my life when I decided I had to have the RS4.
But Tiff's advantage over the CS driver was clearly down to power. When it came to agility, it was very difficult to compare the cars, where the power of the RS4, and the yardsticks used by the format to measure success, conspired to produce the margin you cite.
I recall something else is that video, late in the show, when the CS driver mused that he was having more fun, or something like that, that indicated the M3 CS excelled in ways that were different.
As for data pertaining to the Stasis kit, I have already logged every single mile of my car's engine break-in (through just over 2000mi) with a GTech Pro RR, and I was planning to do some quantitative/qualitative analysis of the Stasis too, OEM vs. Stasis in a controlled venue.
But Tiff's advantage over the CS driver was clearly down to power. When it came to agility, it was very difficult to compare the cars, where the power of the RS4, and the yardsticks used by the format to measure success, conspired to produce the margin you cite.
I recall something else is that video, late in the show, when the CS driver mused that he was having more fun, or something like that, that indicated the M3 CS excelled in ways that were different.
As for data pertaining to the Stasis kit, I have already logged every single mile of my car's engine break-in (through just over 2000mi) with a GTech Pro RR, and I was planning to do some quantitative/qualitative analysis of the Stasis too, OEM vs. Stasis in a controlled venue.
09-13-2006, 06:41 AM
#44
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 18,597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C'mon Bob yes STaSIS sells products to make money but they have a pretty darn good reputation...
In making products for all our Audis that improve the car.
DRC is nothing short of a compromise, if DRC was so good, it would be used in all Audis racing on tracks all over the world but it isn't. You would think Audi would use it in their DTM cars, better yet why didn't they use it on the Champion RS6 in the Speed World challenge series?
The system is too heavy, doesn't work that well for a performance car, better get a classic set up that as been tested to work well with the chassis.
DRC is nothing short of a compromise, if DRC was so good, it would be used in all Audis racing on tracks all over the world but it isn't. You would think Audi would use it in their DTM cars, better yet why didn't they use it on the Champion RS6 in the Speed World challenge series?
The system is too heavy, doesn't work that well for a performance car, better get a classic set up that as been tested to work well with the chassis.
09-13-2006, 07:36 AM
#45
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think DRC performs admirably for the road but it's failure rate SUCKS,
and given the leakage problems that I have encountered and the lack of intelligencia to repair it thus far (3 months and counting), I am getting closer and closer to pulling the trigger on the Stasis-Ohlins as hearing nothing but great comments about it.<ul><li><a href="https://forums.audiworld.com/rs6/msgs/29244.phtml">so how do I/others feel about DRC???</a></li></ul>
09-13-2006, 11:25 AM
#46
Rest In Peace
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,871
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
that's funny, an automotive journalist says the handling is better with a softer>
suspension.
quantify better.
what is softer? the ride quality, the spring rates?
If you've ever driven on a track, you'd have a clue as to what stiffer rear spring rates do to the handling of a car.
quantify better.
what is softer? the ride quality, the spring rates?
If you've ever driven on a track, you'd have a clue as to what stiffer rear spring rates do to the handling of a car.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ernestolopez
A4 (B8 Platform) Discussion
11
10-31-2010 06:37 PM
trichards
S4 / RS4 (B5 Platform) Discussion
2
11-03-2007 03:24 PM
Zed 2.0
A4 (B5 Platform) Discussion
5
09-09-2002 09:39 AM
