Mystery Audi Blew Me... [Archive] - G5CLUB.net Forums

: Mystery Audi Blew Me...



RVCA
08-07-2008, 10:29 PM
Pulled into a gas station a mile from my house to see some sort of at least an exterior modded yellow car. Once the glare cut out I saw that it was an Audi and a few years old too.

I don't know the exact model, but it had a red and blue and chrome logo on the back somewhat similar to the bmw m badge... Anyways, the guy stared me down as i went inside to get a drink. I came back out and the guy started his car and It had a nice sound... I thought maybe this guy wants to go...

Pull out right behind him and he took the turn onto the road with his tires squeeling and smoking and I thought yay here we go.

A mile away, I knew the road opened up into a two lane divided street and the whole way there this guy was ten over. Luckly the light right after the road opened up to two lanes turned yellow as we pulled up side by side. I have an automatic non gt just so everyone knows.

Light turned green and I burned out of first and pulled off the line to about a half car lead, but once we hit second, this guy took off. I don't know if it was a supercharger or what but he really picked up fast.

cut it at 60 with him a car ahead and he pulled into another gas station so I followed. He rolled his window down and said something like good go. I asked what he had done to his whip and he said in a deuchey tone "it's a secret..."

So whatever i got beat twice in two days and it makes me want some extra horses to heave around. Soon as I bring in some cash... boo.

BigEMU1
08-07-2008, 11:51 PM
Honestly, non-GT, automatic, and if you're unmodded, it's not going to be worth your time racing any sport/luxery coupe... be it audi, bmw, lexus... The L61 motor was just never designed with performance as a main factor for resale. It's a point A to point B car. Even other stick shift base econoboxs might pose a problem... it's like a 17 second car at least.

Now I'm not saying you can't make it quick. but I would be aware of what kind of cars are going to be in your class. Even the 2.4l is a dog stock.

karnivor
08-08-2008, 03:26 AM
they are actually quick cars compared to others in their class. maybe not numbers, but in real life situations

sacrdandprofne
08-08-2008, 06:07 AM
I don't think our cars are that bad stock. :(

McGuyver
08-08-2008, 09:49 AM
I agree, even my 2.4l auto is quicker than most in the same class that I have found. VVT FTMFW! :D

kingG5
08-08-2008, 10:51 AM
Honestly, non-GT, automatic, and if you're unmodded, it's not going to be worth your time racing any sport/luxery coupe... be it audi, bmw, lexus... The L61 motor was just never designed with performance as a main factor for resale. It's a point A to point B car. Even other stick shift base econoboxs might pose a problem... it's like a 17 second car at least.

Now I'm not saying you can't make it quick. but I would be aware of what kind of cars are going to be in your class. Even the 2.4l is a dog stock.

...what kind of glue are u on...this is definatly not a 17sec car...i dont know where u get your numbers from..but the 2.2 is barely slower then a 2.4...stock for stock i think its a drivers race to tell u the truth...

Ir0niK
08-08-2008, 01:12 PM
my car runs in the 13 (GT 2.4L) and then another G5 ( base) at the track ran a 15.2 i believe...

and he has DEFINATELY been racing more than me. It was my first race and i know he has been around a couple times cuz i used to go up there to watchthe races. He has a very clean and stylish car which made me decide to get a G5 but his performance isnt as great.

p.s. i do have an air intake and an exhaust but that shouldnt be enough to make to much of a difference..he is stock

Mikey B
08-08-2008, 07:09 PM
...what kind of glue are u on...this is definatly not a 17sec car...i dont know where u get your numbers from..but the 2.2 is barely slower then a 2.4...stock for stock i think its a drivers race to tell u the truth...

lmfao what glue are on lol true bout the 2.4

Nighthawk243
08-08-2008, 07:10 PM
The L61 isn't meant to race in stock form... euro cars will pretty much destroy you.

They do take Civics out quite nicely though since they have more torque and horsepower (I'm EXCLUDING the Si)

007G5GT
08-08-2008, 08:29 PM
Yea, wouldn't quite say the stock 2.2 auto is a 17 second car, but 16's for sure (mind you I said AUTO, I've seen a stock 2.2l cobalt do a 15.9 a the track here but it was a stick). The stock GT auto (NOT STICK) runs a 15.7 according to the 9 million car websites out there that have tested it and the only time I've ever seen an actual time on an auto 2.2 was in a Car and Driver econobox comparison a long time ago that I can't find the link for now but they did a 16.3, I've seen other folks with stock 2.2's (including my old stock cavi with the same motor) run 16.1-3's at the track here (autos).

It's close enough to be a drivers race between the GT and 2.2 if the GT REALLY can't drive a stick, if they are both autos driving ability doesn't really play as big a role. As someone who has owned BOTH a 2.2 and a 2.4, the drivers race thing seems less apparent. The car I sold to my roommate to get my current ride was a 2004 fully bolted (Injen CAI, DC sports header, Vibrant cat-back) Cavi that is LIGHTER than the G5/balt and I owned that thing when my GT was still stock, it's a killing with the current mods. I had to drive it for a few days when my car was recently at the dealer and it amazed me how much slower it was than I remembered.

All THAT being said, the 2.2 just wasn't designed as a performance engine and is going to get handled by anything out of its class.. The 2.4 barely knows what performance means and it's the "performance" version of our car.. A fully bolted 2.2 will be lucky to see 165-170BHP (does NOT open up like a 2.4 does simply due to displacement). Stay away from the euro's, they scare me off most of the time too ;)

RVCA
08-08-2008, 10:57 PM
Just so BIG emu knows, I know I'm not the fastest car on the road... But why not pass up a race? You don't have to be an asshole and tell me a bunch of information I already know trying to dampen my spirits.

"not worth your time racing any" blah blah. It is worth my time because I like driving...

I like my car, I like driving my car and I respect other drivers too. Simple as that.

BigEMU1
08-09-2008, 09:19 AM
Entirely too many misconceptions in this thread so there needs to be a newsflash. In my defense, I never brought up the 2.2l vs. 2.4l discussion so...


...what kind of glue are u on...this is definatly not a 17sec car...i dont know where u get your numbers from..but the 2.2 is barely slower then a 2.4...stock for stock i think its a drivers race to tell u the truth...

I don't know what kind of paint you're huffing, but, negative. And here's proof. Stock 2.2l automatic vs stock 2.4l automatic. The 2.4l will pretty much straight leave the 2.2l midway through second gear and entirely through third. Going to have to be a god aweful driver in a stick for the 2.4l to lose.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MV8d8h7zWo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmkV7LDKBjQ

Fully bolted, yes the 2.2l can keep up. They're just as restricted stock like all the other trims (2.2l, 2.4l, 2.0l), but it normally just barely beats out the 2.4l. Here's a I/H/DP/E 2.2l MANUAL racing a bone stock 2.4l AUTO. Wins by a bumper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU2o0l9HKDA


my car runs in the 13 (GT 2.4L) and then another G5 ( base) at the track ran a 15.2 i believe... ..he is stock

:bsEither you're confused about the times or it wasn't on a 1/4mile track. You'd need a Turbo or Supercharger kit to be hitting 13's, or some headwork/cams/full bolt-ons. And if a stock 2.2l is hitting 15.2 we have a new world record. Automatic 2.4l's stock run like a 15.9 even low 16's in high altitude. The record for a 2.4l MANUAL online with perfect altitude/driving/track setup is 14.9/low 15's. Car and driver did it in 15.7. 2.2l's are lucky to be cracking into 15's stock. So maybe it's not a 17 second car stock automatic but pretty close.


Just so BIG emu knows, I know I'm not the fastest car on the road... But why not pass up a race? You don't have to be an asshole and tell me a bunch of information I already know trying to dampen my spirits.

"not worth your time racing any" blah blah. It is worth my time because I like driving...

I like my car, I like driving my car and I respect other drivers too. Simple as that.

When did I say that means you can't race? I just told you to be aware of what your car is capable of. Have fun with your car. But you're completely misinterpreting being realistic and being an asshole. You asked why you lost. I told you. A stock automatic 2.2l is not DESIGNED to race. Once again, like I said, you can mod it up and bust audi ass all day if you want. But don't go getting sore on me when I try to give you a reality check.

kingG5
08-09-2008, 09:33 AM
my car runs in the 13 (GT 2.4L) and then another G5 ( base) at the track ran a 15.2 i believe...

and he has DEFINATELY been racing more than me. It was my first race and i know he has been around a couple times cuz i used to go up there to watchthe races. He has a very clean and stylish car which made me decide to get a G5 but his performance isnt as great.

p.s. i do have an air intake and an exhaust but that shouldnt be enough to make to much of a difference..he is stock

you really expect me to believe u ran a 13sec quarter mile with a 2.4 na...not happinen man..

hey emu...i wasnt talkin autos...who gives a fuck about the autos..those cars are grocery getters...im talkin 5 speed...u bring me a stock one and ill race it...and it will be super close...autos...waste of fuckin time.

njg5gt
08-09-2008, 10:18 AM
this thread makes me :shock::):):p

kingG5
08-09-2008, 10:40 AM
lol...im sure everyone is laughin at what im sayin..but im serious...serious like the hiv...

BigEMU1
08-09-2008, 11:40 AM
How does switching from an automatic to a 5-speed make any difference in power between the two cars? The power loss in the drivetrain is pretty much even on both ends. All you're allowing for is driver error. I'm positive, no, I'm HIV POSITIVE that if you (stock) raced a stock 5-speed 2.4l with a driver that wasn't a complete toolbag, he'd take pretty easily. I've ran plenty of 2.2l's. Trust me. Not close.

I'm not saying you haven't had encounters with 2.4l's where it wasn't relatively even, but I'm not comparing people, I'm comparing cars. The 2.4l will walk the 2.2l hands down in stock form, honestly... why am I even trying to debate this topic. It's common knowledge... you're looking at the same weight and a 20+ difference in HP. That's not "super close". You beat the driver, not the car.


hey emu...i wasnt talkin autos...who gives a fuck about the autos..those cars are grocery getters...im talkin 5 speed...u bring me a stock one and ill race it...and it will be super close...autos...waste of fuckin time.

Auto doesn't make it a waste of time. Quite the contrary... go boost and you'll feel a lot different about it when you're constantly having to drive perfect / deal with traction issues when the auto is just punching it and cranking out more consistant times because he's constantly in boost.

Ir0niK
08-09-2008, 01:43 PM
THe track im at was made terribly so im really not sure what the length is on it. Supposedly its a 1/4th mile so thats what i call it lol. I'll try to find out exactly what it is next time im up there. For sure isnt a 1/8th though. Im not that slow lmao.

And i've never gotten beat by a stick shift 5. When my car was stock i raced a stick 5 stock and won by a nose.

I agree that the auto's are more consistent. That's why i went with one. I've been around the track enough and seen enough auto's killing the stick shifts that seem to never have a perfect run as the autos do.

kingG5
08-09-2008, 01:45 PM
either way...u definatly did not run a 13sec...i know this.,

Ir0niK
08-09-2008, 02:00 PM
well i DID run a 13 sec...it just might not have been a 1/4th track

BigEMU1
08-09-2008, 04:23 PM
I agree that the auto's are more consistent. That's why i went with one. I've been around the track enough and seen enough auto's killing the stick shifts that seem to never have a perfect run as the autos do.

It's sad but true... the ever brutal driver mod in the long run almost makes the automatic transmission worth it. But where's the fun in letting your car do all the work :).

On the other hand, you'll never get as fast a time as the manual. There will always be that one run where the driver just nails it. And the inability to launch your car negates a lot of potential in traction mods like slicks or suspension. Plus you can beef up the components (clutch, flywheel, etc) to sustain more power... much simpler design. And it's nice to be able to hit the gas without the lag of the downshift.

But you have to get used to the car or any manual transmission before you can start reeping the benefits. Hell, even I blew horribly when I first got my car. But the goal is to get good at launch/control/shifting. Not to mention it's just fun!

I would also like to take a brief moment to reflect on the title of this thread.

Mystery audi blew me... (followed by a sadface)

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Ir0niK
08-09-2008, 10:02 PM
hahaha i never really noticed that

njg5gt
08-09-2008, 10:55 PM
ironik, are you a 2.4 or a 2.2? either way that couldn't have been a 1/4 mile track, because you wouldnt have gotten a 13 sec time. not even high thirteens. do you have a slip? maybe it was a 1000 foot track

Ir0niK
08-09-2008, 11:03 PM
lol njg i dont think you realize i understand it wasnt a 1/4th. But i dont know what to call it because thats what they say it as. It might be a 1000 foot track....I just know it wasnt really a track meant for accurate times most likely. Just a fun little race strip.

im a 2.4L with CAI and gmpp exhaust. No slip...it was ghetto.

GTCAM
08-10-2008, 01:50 PM
ok ive been following this thread and decided to test out what people have said. my buddy that i do most of my cruisinwith has a base model g5 stick with the same mods i have (sri/cat-back exhaust/shortshift) and we decided to do an "official race" we always do little runs but we wanted to actually see the power diffrence in a strait up dig. we started at a set of light and stopped at the next set (a little longer than 1/4 mile). my gt absolutly owned the base by more than 5 lengths. then we switched up drivers just to make sure so now im driving his car. it was alittle closer this time but still my gt won by about 4 and a bit. the hp. diffrence is to much to overcome by bein a better driver or gettin auto or anything. simple enough the gt is faster stock and with identical mods.

Ir0niK
08-10-2008, 02:25 PM
thank you :)

BigEMU1
08-10-2008, 02:59 PM
ok ive been following this thread and decided to test out what people have said. my buddy that i do most of my cruisinwith has a base model g5 stick with the same mods i have (sri/cat-back exhaust/shortshift) and we decided to do an "official race" we always do little runs but we wanted to actually see the power diffrence in a strait up dig. we started at a set of light and stopped at the next set (a little longer than 1/4 mile). my gt absolutly owned the base by more than 5 lengths. then we switched up drivers just to make sure so now im driving his car. it was alittle closer this time but still my gt won by about 4 and a bit. the hp. diffrence is to much to overcome by bein a better driver or gettin auto or anything. simple enough the gt is faster stock and with identical mods.

Good example. But the 2.4l REALLY takes off with mods. People don't realize how much power is gained in the LE5 by opening up the airflows with that larger displacement and VVT. Had you been tuned, it would have been even worse.

If you did a regrind on the cams and port polished everything with new valve spring/retainers, did the 4.2l TB swap and got a good tune for VVT and adjustment for the new airflow rates, I guarantee this thing would EASILY be making 210 at the wheels all motor. Hell, some guy on CSS was claiming to be at 213whp with JBP stage 2 cams, which honestly don't adjust for the powerband as well as a custom regrind and all the adjustments would. I'd like to see someone get ahold of Crower and get a custom regrind and build a bolted/cammed 2.4l.

denlou
08-10-2008, 04:12 PM
simple enough the gt is faster stock and with identical mods.

Definately agree with that, Mike smoked my ass.

underground
08-10-2008, 09:30 PM
Fully bolted, my 2.2L was running low 15's before trans and nitrious... 13 sec is barely attainable cause after I slapped on a 75 shot my best time and still haven't hit it again since was a 13.988 and i average between 14.3 to 14.5 with trans and nitrious. I DO know that before all that I was just BARELY ahead of Cruisin's 2.4L (ECU Tune and custom exhaust) w/ my weight rediction and stock 15's.

As for the difference between auto and manual... well the shift points make the difference there. Rather than have the ECU decide when to shift the driver gets to... that's all.... and that's where driver skill comes into play. A good driver in a stock 2.2L would give a good run to a 2.4L...

...There's NO skill involved with putting a pedal to the floor and going... IMO for a fair match up it's has to be manual to manual...

None the less, NICE BURN! I love war stories that aren't all about beating shit, it's cool and respectable that you posted a bad beating! KUDOS!

oh yeah and for the record... this is another one of those very easily misinterpreted thread topics LMFAO!




It better have swallowed.... :o

nair88
08-10-2008, 09:49 PM
It better have swallowed.... :o
:lol:

BigEMU1
08-10-2008, 10:18 PM
Isn't cruisn at some crappy high altitude?

underground
08-10-2008, 11:01 PM
Same altitude as me... i don't know what it is exactly but we both see each other quite often here in Edmonton....

BigEMU1
08-10-2008, 11:09 PM
Yeah but you've got the driver mod on your side. Me thinks cruisn's is broken :lol:

underground
08-10-2008, 11:13 PM
Yeah but you've got the driver mod on your side. Me thinks cruisn's is broken :lol:

LMFAO! Nah, he's a good driver... I'm just slightly better...? ;)