Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

The 2013 Audi S8 - A Closer Look

A few days ago, I made a post about about Motor Trend's test of the Audi S8. It does a 0-60 mph sprint in 3.5 seconds and goes through the 1/4 mile in 11.8 @ 118.3 mph.. very impressive numbers. Even more so when you look at a couple other cars:

2012 Porsche Panamera Turbo S
0-60 mph: 3.5 s
1/4 mile: 11.8 s @ 118.0 mph
Power: 550 hp
Torque: 553 lb-ft
Weight: 4,388 lb

2012 Audi R8 GT
0-60 mph: 3.5 s
1/4 mile: 11.5 s @ 125.1 mph
Power: 560 hp
Torque: 398 lb-ft
Weight: 3,484 lb

Now let's compare those to the Audi S8
0-60 mph: 3.5 s
1/4 mile: 11.8 @ 118.3 mph
Power 520 hp
Torque: 481 lb-ft
Weight: 4,619 lb

The Panamera and R8 have weight to power ratios of 7.98 lb/hp and 6.22 lb/hp. The S8? Well, that one has a weight to power ratio of 8.88 lb/hp... The identical 0-60 time of the R8 GT and S8 can somewhat be explained by their engines' way of induction. Since the R8 is NA, the torque curve probably isn't as meaty so even though it weighs a lot less and has a higher weight to torque ratio, the torque curve is probably more peaky and the Audi S8 has a lot more torque off the line. The 1/4 mile reflects the additional power and superior weight to power ratio compared to the S8

But what about the Porsche? It has more power, a lot more torque, it has the same method of induction and it is significantly lighter (231 lbs). How could the Audi match its numbers? I immediately thought of 3 possibilities: someone spent a lot of time on gearing to get the numbers that low for bragging rights, the car is hugely underrated (again, for bragging rights) or a combination of both. A few days ago, I was hoping someone would dyno the S8 which could tell part of the story.

Luckily, Motor Trend did just that. In fact, they dyno'ed two cars on the same day which is even better for comparison. I know dynos are mainly tuning tools and not measuring tools because there are so many parameters that could change - both external and inherent to the dyno - that could alter the results. It can provide some insight though in this case, especially when you have two different cars dyno'ed back to back.

The two cars are the car in the question - the 2013 Audi S8 - and a 2013 BMW Alpina B7.
The BMW is rated at:
540 hp and 538 lb-ft of torque
and put down:
414 hp and 437 lb-ft of torque

The Audi is rated at:
520 hp and 481 lb-ft of torque
and put down:
479 hp and 422 lb-ft of torque

The Audi started out with a 20 hp disadvantage and yet it came out with a 65 hp advantage, before drivetrain losses.. Using 15% drivetrain losses (MT used 20% but I think that's too high for a modern car), The Audi should be making about 564 hp at the crank and the BMW 487 hp - a 77 hp advantage for the Audi which, on paper, was the "underdog" of the comparison.. and that's only half the story.

BMW is known for underrating their engines. A lot of factors could have caused a low reading on that day and at that time. If that is true, the BMW should be making a lot more than 487 hp.. which would mean that the Audi is also making a lot more than 564 hp. I wouldn't be surprised if the Audi is making as much as 600 hp under ideal conditions - much more than the rating of 520 hp. Next time you look at a test of an Audi and the acceleration numbers look too good for the specs on paper, remember that they probably are because it seems like Audi is joining the "doing more with less" club.

Comments







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky

How would a Mustang 3.5L EcoBoost compare to the 5.0L V8?

Ever wonder how a 3.5 litre EcoBoost might fair against the 5.0 litre V8 in the Mustang? Of course you have. Ever since Ford dropped it in the F150 (and perhaps well before), everyone has been wondering how it would perform. There are basically two camps; those who think it would be awesome because of tuneability and power potential and those who think it means the death of the V8 in the Mustang. If you are in the latter group, we seem to be good so far with continuous upgrades to the 5.0 litre Coyote and the brand new Shelby GT500 which still uses a supercharged V8 as it has been for over a decade and multiple iterations. But what if... Well, it seems we are closer than ever to finding out the answer to that question. American Trucks recently got together two crew cab, short box, 4x4 F150's but one has the 5.0 litre V8 and the other has the 3.5 litre EcoBoost V6. There has been a few comparisons between 5.0 litre and 3.5 litre EB F150's, but this seems to be the most di

Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R Track Review

2012 Boss 302 on square 305/30/19 RE-71R's at AMP - Graham MacNeil © For better or for worse, I have heard and read so much about RE-71R's. Everyone swears by the grip but complains about the wear. Generally speaking, the pros are: 1. They grip as well or better than most R comps. 2. They don't wear as quickly as R comps if driven occasionally on the street. 3. They work better in the rain than R comps. The cons were limited to overheating quickly when used on track (being an autocross tire) and wearing too fast on heavy cars like mine. In the popular 200 TW category, they are faster than the popular Hankook RS-4's and BFGoodrich Rival S's according to published Tire Rack Tests. According to plenty of reviews, they are also faster than well established R comps like R888R's (which don't seem to work too well on heavy cars anyway) and the venerable NT01's. But I was still hesitant for a while until I talked to a tire tech support gentleman