I went and test drove an S5 on Friday as got a promotion and can afford another car. I was fully ready to buy it there and then as I thought I would adore the V8.

After the test drive I was very impressed with eveneything except the power. My brother and I honestly believe that the mid range was not as quick as the VRS. For this reason alone I have decided to keep the VRS and try and find something with the quality of the Audi but more power.

I honestly thought the V8 would blow my mind. I guess this shows how well the VRS goes at stage 1.

they are uber heavy though 1600kg ish iirc

the Octavia vRS is a solid 200kg lighter

A non-turbo car will always feel different to a turbo car. We used to own an Audi A6 1.8T and replaced it with an Audi A6 3.0SE quattro. The non-turbo V6 3.0 didn't feel as fast as the 1.8T but when you looked to see how quick it was actually going (and compare 0-60 times) it was the quicker car. It's just the deceptive linear nature of the V6 that just meant it didn't feel as quick as the turbo 1.8T. Audi will be relacing the 4.2 V8 engine with the supercharged 3.0 V6 next year (bringing the S5 coupe in line with the S5 cabriolet and sportback) which might prefer, or if you really want huge midrange shove try the 3.0 TDI

Isn't the new S5 the V6 turbo from the S4?

Yes i believe so however, It's the V6T where the T means supercharged.

Maybe back to back the S5 would be quicker but even looking at the speedo it didn't seem quicker.

Yes i believe so however, It's the V6T where the T means supercharged.

Maybe back to back the S5 would be quicker but even looking at the speedo it didn't seem quicker.

That's interesting because I had a little play with one a few weeks ago and it couldn't pull away but I wasn't sure whether he was trying or not.

I think he probably was trying based on my experience in both plus I've had a run in with an S4 that couldn't pull away. The S4 was the 3.0T as well.

My guess it's because of how the vrs gets to high bhp very quickly and holds it whereas the S model audis get to higher bhp but only for a short period of time.

I think he probably was trying based on my experience in both plus I've had a run in with an S4 that couldn't pull away. The S4 was the 3.0T as well.

My guess it's because of how the vrs gets to high bhp very quickly and holds it whereas the S model audis get to higher bhp but only for a short period of time.

It's very impressive when you think about it as the S4/5 are £35k+ motors. Would be a different story though for a remapped S4/5 which is a fairer comparison. The TSi produces a massive amount of torque too which helps

Edited 20 November, 201114 yr by Guest

Yes true. Problem I have is I can only really afford the 4.2 V8 which doesn't have great tuning potential. Maybe I should just keep tuning the vrs although the lack of 4 wheel drive does bother me.

plan B, get a big turbo slapped on to the VRS, lol

Yes true. Problem I have is I can only really afford the 4.2 V8 which doesn't have great tuning potential. Maybe I should just keep tuning the vrs although the lack of 4 wheel drive does bother me.

I'm the same, really want 4wd so it's s4 avant or golf r next time round for me I think.

how about a scout and then tuning/bodywork etc. to turn it into effectively a 4x4 vRS?

Perfect plan (except for the huge amount of work that would be needed!)

how about a scout and then tuning/bodywork etc. to turn it into effectively a 4x4 vRS?

Perfect plan (except for the huge amount of work that would be needed!)

Ur, no.

how about a scout and then tuning/bodywork etc. to turn it into effectively a 4x4 vRS?

Perfect plan (except for the huge amount of work that would be needed!)

Sounds good to me, you can come and start on mine anytime, although first you will need to refurb the Haldex :-(

I'm a bit puzzled by this, I mean, its a 4.2 litre v8 FFS..! 350ish bhp and 320 lbs/ft plus a proper quattro drivetrain (unlike a haldex) so it should blow the vRS in to the weeds. Maybe its just the FWD scrabble effect you get - ie you really feel the tyres struggling to put the power on the road with the skoda, where the 4wd Audi just goes, no fuss..? Also, the turbo gives you a real push in the back when it comes on boost, where a NA engine is much more linear in the way the torque builds.

Great car though - if I could afford it (and I didnt' need the big boot) i'd love to have one of these. Super engine, great looks, great cabin, 4wd security etc. Mpg would be a killer though!

02p.

S3 sportback with a stage 2+ would be my choice over the S5. S5 is more about looks, 18k on an S3 then 2K on mods will see you in a quality motor than will walk away from an S5 and scare some bigger boys - e90 M3, RS4, etc. The S3 will still do decent mpg aswell.

I'm a bit puzzled by this, I mean, its a 4.2 litre v8 FFS..! 350ish bhp and 320 lbs/ft plus a proper quattro drivetrain (unlike a haldex) so it should blow the vRS in to the weeds. Maybe its just the FWD scrabble effect you get - ie you really feel the tyres struggling to put the power on the road with the skoda, where the 4wd Audi just goes, no fuss..? Also, the turbo gives you a real push in the back when it comes on boost, where a NA engine is much more linear in the way the torque builds.

Great car though - if I could afford it (and I didnt' need the big boot) i'd love to have one of these. Super engine, great looks, great cabin, 4wd security etc. Mpg would be a killer though!

02p.

Very linear was the V8 but also not that exciting. I am thinking of trying an RS4 to see how that feels, maybe worth a go.

My vrs does indeed struggle to put the power down in low gear. Really annoying!

I went and test drove an S5 on Friday as got a promotion and can afford another car. I was fully ready to buy it there and then as I thought I would adore the V8.

After the test drive I was very impressed with eveneything except the power. My brother and I honestly believe that the mid range was not as quick as the VRS. For this reason alone I have decided to keep the VRS and try and find something with the quality of the Audi but more power.

I honestly thought the V8 would blow my mind. I guess this shows how well the VRS goes at stage 1.

I suggest trying the 2.0t A5, it will be quicker than your octavia because of the VVT.

The bigger Audis share the same engine as your VRS but with variable valve timing added, which gives the engine a significant boost in torque over the regular 2.0t in vws and skodas.

they come with 350nm of torque stock and remap to 475nm+.

So the midrange in the 2.0t A5 should be exactly what you want

Golf edition 30 then add a diff

First question - was it really slower or did it feel it?

Weight is a real killer as is size (not always linked!)

The 4x4 will also kill some excitement. Not convinced by audis weight being very truthful - would expect more like 1800kg

I've got an old 80's alfa 75 - it feels very fast.... Quicker than a vrs - nope lightyears slower...but one feels much more of a handful

Another on paper fast car which doesnt feel it - insignia vxr 1800kg and 4x4 transmission losses make it feel slower than a vrs despite 325bhp

First question - was it really slower or did it feel it?

Weight is a real killer as is size (not always linked!)

The 4x4 will also kill some excitement. Not convinced by audis weight being very truthful - would expect more like 1800kg

I've got an old 80's alfa 75 - it feels very fast.... Quicker than a vrs - nope lightyears slower...but one feels much more of a handful

Another on paper fast car which doesnt feel it - insignia vxr 1800kg and 4x4 transmission losses make it feel slower than a vrs despite 325bhp

I would say it felt slower but maybe was the same or a little slower. It just didn't excite me like I was hoping for.

I'm a bit puzzled by this, I mean, its a 4.2 litre v8 FFS..! 350ish bhp and 320 lbs/ft plus a proper quattro drivetrain (unlike a haldex) so it should blow the vRS in to the weeds.

Won't a stage 1 TSI being making similar torque and 250+ bhp possibly? With 200kg less weight? Maybe less difference than you'd think?

(Is the FFS the new Audi engine acronym like TFSI? )

Won't a stage 1 TSI being making similar torque and 250+ bhp possibly? With 200kg less weight? Maybe less difference than you'd think?

(Is the FFS the new Audi engine acronym like TFSI? )

The Mk2 V8 S4 weighs 1700kg and has 339 bhp / 302 lbs so that is 206bhp per ton.

The Mk3 V6 S4 weighs 1650kg and has 328 bhp / 325 lbs so that is 202bhp per ton.

A Revo stage 1 vRS TSi weighs 1350kg and makes circa 260 bhp (and that's conservative I think) / 314 lbs so that's circa 190bhp per ton.

Peak power figures don't tell the whole story though, it's more about the area under the power curve. There's other factors involved too like 4WD transmission loss on the S4.

However at cruising speeds it's quite conceivable that a stage 1 vRS would offer similar levels of straight line performance. Obviously the vRS struggles to get the power down from a standing start so the S4 would probably destroy it there or on a twisting back road for that matter.

Those numbers make some sense then..

Comparing both when you're already rolling, "torques per tonne" i think will give you an idea how it accelerates; 177 for the V8 vs. 232 for the vRS. That's a win for the cheeky skoda then!

:p

I think you're right jonno.