What you think about audi???

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 04 Jun 2007, 05:47

I think Audis are alright, the top end ones would certainly give Beemers and Mercs a run for their money.

Just a quick note, for those who are unsure about ownership between Audi, Lambo and VW, this is how it goes:

Lamborghini is owned by Audi, and VW owns Audi, Lamborghini, Fiat, Bentley, And I'm pretty sure there's some others as well.

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:02

Um is fiat part of ferrari? Or maybe i'm mixing stuff up. VW also owns Skoda and Bugatti so its VW owns Audi, Lamborghini, Bentley, Bugatti and Skoda. Not sure bout Fiat but maybe someone can clear that one up 4 me

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:08

I'm absolutely positive that VW owns Fiat. I learnt that from Gran Turismo 4

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:21

But the Fiat Group owns Alfa Romeo, Fiat Automobiles, Ferrari and Maserati so IF VW owns Fiat then they own all those other manufacturers which i highly doubt. I'm confused.

BTW how did u get da photo under ur post is it ur signature?

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:28

VW doesn't necessarily own all those other manufacturers that Fiat owns. Even considering that VW DOES own Fiat Group, it doesn't need to worry about Ferrari, Maserati, etc. because Fisat Group takes care of that stuff. It is confusing, I'll give you that.

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:38

Do u have a link to direct me to VW owning Fiat cause i'm interested to know when they bought it out cause i can't find it and i don't really trust a game as a source of information. I know i'm being anal about it but i can't help myself. Also i wouldn't mind someone elses opinion on this matter. I'm not saying your wrong but i've heard the news between Porsche and VW but not VW with Fiat.

Cheers

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:43

I'll see what I can find.

Actually, scratch that, FIAT IS NOT owned by Volkswagen. Only Lamborghini, Audi Bentley, Skoda, SEAT and itself.

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:47

Lol ur probably thinking " Just accept it and thats it u noob!"
Sorry but its my nature to ask questions.

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:55

That's perfectly fine. I wasn't completely sure myself, really. But hey, we all get proven wrong sometimes.

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 04 Jun 2007, 06:56

Blame Gran Turismo!!!

Oh how did u get the fotos of da RX7 on each of ur posts?

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 04 Jun 2007, 07:01

You mean signature photos? You go to profile and scroll down to SIGNATURE near the bottom of the page. There should be a link to upload a photo to use as a signature.

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 04 Jun 2007, 07:09

Sweet Thanks

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 04 Jun 2007, 08:05

No worries, mate.

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 04 Jun 2007, 14:58

Glopaticki wrote:For all u Audi Fans, check out this RS6 getting thrashed, poor car but sweet engine note. Make sure u watch it till the end!!

http://www.autospies.com/news/Video-Aud ... ring-5431/

Don't think those tyres are Continentals cause they are speed tested and stuff like that. Also he should have upgraded his brakes, maybe Audis ceramic brakes option?

Upgraded RS6 brakes? RS6 brakes are allloy 8-piston fronts an 4-piston rears- that's bigger than the standard brake setup on a 911 turbo.

VAG doesn't own Ferrari, I think they're privately owned. A few years ago it was Fiat, though. Fiat aren't owned by VW.

VW is part owned by Porsche
VW owns Audi, Bugatti, Lamborgini, Bently, Seat, Skoda

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 04 Jun 2007, 15:04

steelsnake00 wrote:
Glopaticki wrote:For all u Audi Fans, check out this RS6 getting thrashed, poor car but sweet engine note. Make sure u watch it till the end!!

http://www.autospies.com/news/Video-Aud ... ring-5431/

Don't think those tyres are Continentals cause they are speed tested and stuff like that. Also he should have upgraded his brakes, maybe Audis ceramic brakes option?
Upgraded RS6 brakes? RS6 brakes are allloy 8-piston fronts an 4-piston rears- that's bigger than the standard brake setup on a 911 turbo.

VAG doesn't own Ferrari, I think they're privately owned. A few years ago it was Fiat, though. Fiat aren't owned by VW.

VW is part owned by Porsche
VW owns Audi, Bugatti, Lamborgini, Bently, Seat, Skoda

I know mate thats the point i was tryin to get accross, that VAG don't own fiat, therefore don't own ferrari. I'm pretty sure Fiat still has a chunk of Ferarri shares.

I know the brakes on the RS6 are big but if he is going to thrash em, a suggestion could be audis ceramic brake option. That'll be better for the car and the driver

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 04 Jun 2007, 19:15

Ceramic brakes are, for all the hype, utter crap.
I know for a fact that RS6 8-pots can handle upwards of 800bhp, because alot of Audi Quattro tuners run them on drag and track cars. Ceramic brakes are utterly useless in the wet, cost an absolute fortune for pads and take ages to heat up, and in all honesty, bite about as well as a 10 or 12-piston non-ceramic setup. Their only advantage really is that they're lighter.

PSZeTa · Post by **PSZeTa** » 04 Jun 2007, 22:42

The pads were completely worn down to the metal.. Driving with that on the Nurburgring will surely destroy your discs.

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 04 Jun 2007, 23:56

steelsnake00 wrote:Ceramic brakes are, for all the hype, utter crap.
I know for a fact that RS6 8-pots can handle upwards of 800bhp, because alot of Audi Quattro tuners run them on drag and track cars. Ceramic brakes are utterly useless in the wet, cost an absolute fortune for pads and take ages to heat up, and in all honesty, bite about as well as a 10 or 12-piston non-ceramic setup. Their only advantage really is that they're lighter.

True but can we at least agree those brakes were gone by the time he was done with them? Then again we don't know how much he had left on those brakes anyway. That also goes for the tyres.

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 05 Jun 2007, 00:02

steelsnake00 wrote:Ceramic brakes are, for all the hype, utter crap.

Now, what do people say about Ceramic brakes? Oh, that's right, nothing beats a Porsche with carbon ceramic brakes. Audis and Lambos with CC brakes are the same.

Porsche-AG · Post by **Porsche-AG** » 05 Jun 2007, 01:29

Who says that?

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 05 Jun 2007, 04:00

Koenigsegg_Rox wrote:
steelsnake00 wrote:Ceramic brakes are, for all the hype, utter crap.
Now, what do people say about Ceramic brakes? Oh, that's right, nothing beats a Porsche with carbon ceramic brakes. Audis and Lambos with CC brakes are the same.

Prehaps that's got something to do with the fact the Ceramic brake options have 12 pistons, and the standard brakes have 4 or 6, dependant on application.
I've driven cars with both standard and Ceramic brakes and I'll admit that ceramics are a little better for dry, track use, but they're a bag of shiznit in the wet, take forever to warm up and cost FIVE F**KING GRAND.

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 05 Jun 2007, 04:22

Wanna know why they cost so much? Because they are a hell of a lot better than normal brakes. Although I do agree with them being crap in the wet.

Glopaticki · Post by **Glopaticki** » 05 Jun 2007, 04:25

steelsnake00 wrote:
Koenigsegg_Rox wrote:
steelsnake00 wrote:Ceramic brakes are, for all the hype, utter crap.
Now, what do people say about Ceramic brakes? Oh, that's right, nothing beats a Porsche with carbon ceramic brakes. Audis and Lambos with CC brakes are the same.
Prehaps that's got something to do with the fact the Ceramic brake options have 12 pistons, and the standard brakes have 4 or 6, dependant on application.
I've driven cars with both standard and Ceramic brakes and I'll admit that ceramics are a little better for dry, track use, but they're a bag of shiznit in the wet, take forever to warm up and cost FIVE F**KING GRAND.

I'm sure money wouldn't be an issue if your gonna be racing with a car that has/needs ceramic brakes. Also u don't just whip out on a track an race. You gotta warm your tyres and engine up, as well as preparing yourself 4 da race

Koenigsegg_Rox · Post by **Koenigsegg_Rox** » 05 Jun 2007, 04:30

For track cars, Carbon Ceramic brakes are DEFINITELY the way to go. Steelsnake, you DO know that long periods of warming up can be an advantage, don't you? If they take longer to warm up, on endurance events they are less likely to overheat than normal brakes, so you don't get the problems you normally would. Plus, Carbon Ceramics are 65% lighter than normal brakes, so they put less strain on the suspension. For road use, normal brakes would be the way to go.

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 05 Jun 2007, 11:18

Koenigsegg_Rox wrote:For track cars, Carbon Ceramic brakes are DEFINITELY the way to go. Steelsnake, you DO know that long periods of warming up can be an advantage, don't you? If they take longer to warm up, on endurance events they are less likely to overheat than normal brakes, so you don't get the problems you normally would. Plus, Carbon Ceramics are 65% lighter than normal brakes, so they put less strain on the suspension. For road use, normal brakes would be the way to go.

Actually, the reduced likelihood of overheating is the flipside of the slow warmup time coin. Because ceramic brakes are, well, ceramic, they dissapate heat faster and have a much higher operating temperature and heat tollerance than normal brakes. However, the flip side of this is the increased warmup time, which yes is fine for track driving where you have warmup time, but you aren't very likely to drive around your block a few times braking occasionally to get your brakes to optimum temperature when your driving on the road. Remember, if ceramic brakes aren't warmed up, they barely bite at all, have vastly increased stopping distances under the same conditions and literally no pedal feel at all.

As for them being so much lighter than standard brakes, yes they're lighter than standard cast steel calipers but most performance calipers are made from aluminuim which makes ceramic brakes only margainly lighter. For example a 12-pot ceramic setup weighs roughly the same as an 8-pot non-ceramic aluminium setup. The stopping power in the wet is utterly dismal, and in the dry there would be very little difference between the ceramic and aluminium brakes. You would actually save more weight swapping your car's seats for lighter ones. If there are so many advantages to using ceramics on the track, then why aren't they used in most forms of motorsport?

Koenigsegg_Rox- drive a car with ceramic brakes, then a car with non-ceramics of the same size and power, and come back and tell me that ceramics are better. You'll have no pedal feel for a few minutes, huge stopping distances and poor bite because the ceramics will take time to warm up, then once they're warm you won't be able to notice much difference. Besides the five grand burning a hole in your pocket which you can invest on much more useful things than ceramic brakes.