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 Super Sports vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 - Street Review

I've been a huge fan of Michelin PSS tires and exclusively bought them for the Mustang over the last four years. So how did I end up here? This year, I was hugely interested in trying an "R-comp" tire. I had my eyes set on Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's for two simple reasons: price and reputation. Although not a true "R-comp" tire on paper, it performs like one by the account of every single test and review I've read (down to wear rates...). They seem like they're easily the most affordable (from a big brand) R-comp tire and combine that with a reputation for having tons of grip, it was an easy top contender. I had my concerns, though. For one, I'm told and have read that they are an autox tire, not really designed for high speed, pressure, and temps associated with open track. For another, the Mustang is a heavy car (as far as track cars are concerned) being roughly 3,800 lb. (including driver), which will amplify the unwanted open track loads.…

Michelin PSS vs Firestone Indy 500 - Track Review

A couple of weeks ago, I posted my first impressions of Michelin's PSS vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 tires. I've run PSS's for several years on the Boss, but I'm trying the Indy 500's for the first time. In short, I was worried about the narrower tires (I was running 285/35/18 PSS but could only find the Indy 500 in 275/35/18) and tread squirm, but I was happy with them up to that point just driving on the street. I had the chance to drive on them for three track days now. So what were they like? After my first session, they made an impression that basically persisted for the rest of track sessions on them. Phenomenal, unmatched value. Now, if value is something that stands out above all else, it typically means the compromise between qualities you want and those you don't is less than ideal, but the value is attractive. This is no different. I'll start with the bad, which really boil down to two: ultimate grip and grip longevity.

Grip is noticeably lowe…

The Truth behind Owning a Modified Ferrari 458 Italia

After driving and reviewing this modified 620 hp Ferrari 458 Italia, I talk to the owner to find out the truth behind owning and living with a modern Ferrari. This isn't a garage queen Ferrari either, it serves double duty as an every day car and track car. Watch to find out ownership costs, reliability, and experience. Interested in joining Scott at the track? Check out MHPDC.

Liked this? Make sure to subscribe so you don't miss new videos!



Follow Rams Eye The Track Guy on Facebook and Instagram!






View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Michael R (@ramseyethetrackguy) on May 21, 2019 at 5:17pm PDT

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's

If you've had any doubts about whether or not they will fit, fear not! You absolutely can run square 305/30/19's. I had a lot of doubts before pulling the trigger, even more so when the wheels where on the car. The tires do poke out a bit and I figured rubbing is all but guaranteed at full compression but I couldn't be happier I trusted APEX and those on here who have run it.

Here's what you need:

1. Camber plates: I have MM C/C plates and they are maxed out at -2.3 deg with the stock struts. I have been running them for years with many track days without issue.

2. 1"/25 mm spacer: I have Motorsport-tech 1" spacers and they look like high quality units. There is maybe a 1/4 inch clearance in the back so you can't go any narrower than 25 mm. http://www.motorsport-tech.com/adaptec/car/ford_s and you want Design 2.


3. Elongated studs: your best bet is to get the FPP hubs with elongated studs instead of reusing the old one. Bearings are consumables anyway so…