Performance figures for SC C4S

Results of 1/4 mile runs on GT Pro with Supercharged C4S as follows (5,000 ft above sea level) Pre SC time 14.4 sec., post SC time 13.5 sec.; pre SC hp 219, Tq 256, post SC hp 288, Tq 383. My 60 ft times were awful as I could not launch the AWD without burning the clutch, my best was only 2.6 sec. Speed with the best run was 111.8 mph. I did have some problems with pre-detonation I attribute to bad gas, 91 octane from the pump. I did not have that with the mix of 100 and 91 when I first got the SC installed. The problem only occured at 6800 rpm and I never hit the rev limiter. If I had shifted at 7250 I would not have needed 4th gear as I was about 107 when I shifted into 4th. This seemed really hard on the car and I will not do it again without higher octane fuel. These cars are not made for this type of driving, obviously. I doubt those hp and torque figures. Will

Are you sure that�s right? I�ve done 13.68 time with my Audi S4 Avant, with Stage 2, which means 340 Hps. You should be doing turbo times, shouldn�t you?

the post-SC times you give are about what a stock C4 can do... i'm confused...

I hit mid 12s on my 90 964 cabriolet with 245 hp and 243 torque at the wheels. The trap speeds are 112.X with the best 0 - 60 on a 1/4 mile run being a 4.685. It should seem to better with all of that torque.

At that altitude your 1/4 mile times are always slower. NHRA uses a correction for altitude, at least they did when we were class racing. Maybe it's on their website.

You have the torque and HP figures reversed. And 91 octane at 5000 feet is MORE than enough. Get down to lower altitudes and you'll need more. As for the pre-detonation, you should have NONE if the program is right and your konck sensors are working. The computer should be automatically retarding the timing based on input from the knock sensors. Is it a EVO charger?

That was what the numbers were. I was dissapointed also, but I just could not launch with AWD and bogged down every time. My 60ft time was very bad, it should have been 2 sec or less. At altitude you loose .1 sec for each 1000ft in the quarter mile. I did improve almost 1 full sec from my pre SC times. Again I do not trust the Hp or Tq numbers. Will

I think those hp and torque numbers are reversed also. But, even at that, those performance numbers are dissapointing. When my S4 was at stage 2 it turned a 1/4 mile at 13.3 sec. Something is definitely wrong.

111.8mph trap speed? You should be in the 12s no problem, must have had an absolutely horrible time getting out of the hole.

Last year I did 13.5 before the SC. I would think that mid 12's should be a target. Won't get a chance till early july to get to the drag strip but will post as soon as I have the information.

Since hp and torque must equal each other at 5250 rpm, the max hp number would have to be 383 unless the tq is alraedy falling off by then. However, this would suggest that the engine loses hp as the revs climb past 5250. So, you either have a diesel supercharger conversion or an inconsistency. The articles on the SC have suggested that the hp gain is at the top end of the rev range-in contrast to your data. This is why I've always been leary of aftermarket SC conversions. The result is proportionate to the skill and experience of the installer, and with bad luck, you wind up needing to go back and forth to the installer demanding better results. Until you lose confidence or he gets sick of you. The claims of the manufacturer are also in question. The new issue of Excellence defines the best you could expect. AS

What does it says the new issue of Excellence? Thanks in advance. J.Seven