RS3 Saloon Vbox Figures (0-60/100mph)

[bond1313]

Got a bit of private road and had a go with my Vbox to see how it compared, fl sportback wet road about 8 degrees, 4500 miles a full tank of fuel and me a 6'2 15stone lump, vbox tools times below:-



Test Summary:
Test Desc Max Slope Elapsed Time Slope Results
0-60 MPH -1.00% 3.674 Seconds 0.01% Results Valid
0-100 KPH -1.00% 3.855 Seconds -0.01% Results Valid
0-100 MPH -1.00% 8.885 Seconds -0.66% Results Valid
0-60 MPH (1-Ft) -1.00% 3.335 Seconds 0.01% Results Valid
0-100 KPH (1-Ft) -1.00% 3.515 Seconds -0.01% Results Valid
0-100 MPH (1-Ft) -1.00% 8.545 Seconds -0.66% Results Valid
30-60 MPH -1.50% 2.112 Seconds -0.93% Results Valid
40-80 MPH -1.50% 3.751 Seconds -0.74% Results Valid
60-100 MPH -2.00% 5.210 Seconds -0.85% Results Valid

 

[3SR]

Got a bit of private road and had a go with my Vbox to see how it compared, fl sportback wet road about 8 degrees, 4500 miles a full tank of fuel and me a 6'2 15stone lump, vbox tools times below:-



Test Summary:
Test Desc Max Slope Elapsed Time Slope Results
0-60 MPH -1.00% 3.674 Seconds 0.01% Results Valid
0-100 KPH -1.00% 3.855 Seconds -0.01% Results Valid
0-100 MPH -1.00% 8.885 Seconds -0.66% Results Valid
0-60 MPH (1-Ft) -1.00% 3.335 Seconds 0.01% Results Valid
0-100 KPH (1-Ft) -1.00% 3.515 Seconds -0.01% Results Valid
0-100 MPH (1-Ft) -1.00% 8.545 Seconds -0.66% Results Valid
30-60 MPH -1.50% 2.112 Seconds -0.93% Results Valid
40-80 MPH -1.50% 3.751 Seconds -0.74% Results Valid
60-100 MPH -2.00% 5.210 Seconds -0.85% Results Valid

Nice numbers! Stock?

 

[bond1313]

Yes stock, I was surprised and wonder what some of the stage 1’s and 2’s with 480-510 bhp will do.

 

[Shawn8V]

60-100 MPH -2.00% 5.210 Seconds -0.85% Results Valid

Any 100-120mph numbers or 100-200kmh ?

 

[JamesCrs3]

Little testing done today in my completely standard RS3 saloon, 700 miles on the clock so engine is still loosening up. Either way was shocked with the 1/4 mile result. I did another run cause I thought that was a bit quick and ran a 11.6 @ 115. Obviously need to verify the times when I get back to my computer due to slope etc, but this is what the box was reading. I'l post up all the other data I have as well when I can.

 

[Spinstorm]

So what we have established is unless you have a ferrari, lamb or similar next to you we are pretty much in the fastest car possible....

 

[Kristijan Sabljar]

Little testing done today in my completely standard RS3 saloon, 700 miles on the clock so engine is still loosening up. Either way was shocked with the 1/4 mile result. I did another run cause I thought that was a bit quick and ran a 11.6 @ 115. Obviously need to verify the times when I get back to my computer due to slope etc, but this is what the box was reading. I'l post up all the other data I have as well when I can. View attachment 151150View attachment 151151

Mine did with correction 11.67 on Racelogic

 

[JamesCrs3]

Mine did with correction 11.67 on Racelogic

Ah cool, that was totally stock as well? Also, whats the program I need for the correction factor?

 

[Kristijan Sabljar]

Ah cool, that was totally stock as well? Also, whats the program I need for the correction factor?

Yes all stock, u need DNB scanner

 

[JamesCrs3]

Yes all stock, u need DNB scanner

Got a link to that mate? Can't find it on google.

 

[Leo-RS]

James,

It’s a site called vbox verify that you are after. Neither vbox verify or dnb scanner are racelogic endorsed so I’ve no idea where they’ve actually come from and what algorithms are used in either of the programs.

You can do all this with performance tools by plotting the height charts on the graphs and working out the gradients. Anything under 2% gradient over the distance covered can be deemed accurate and valid. I believe these 2 programs above correct the time as if it was run on a 0% gradient but no idea how they do it.

 

[JamesCrs3]

James,

It’s a site called vbox verify that you are after. Neither vbox verify or dnb scanner are racelogic endorsed so I’ve no idea where they’ve actually come from and what algorithms are used in either of the programs.

You can do all this with performance tools by plotting the height charts on the graphs and working out the gradients. Anything under 2% gradient over the distance covered can be deemed accurate and valid. I believe these 2 programs above correct the time as if it was run on a 0% gradient but no idea how they do it.

Ok thanks mate, I just uploaded my file to the website and had a look at the data. It's confusing me because it's throwing up slower times on the verification site than on vbox test suite even though the runs were actually slightly uphill.

 

[Shawn8V]

Ok thanks mate, I just uploaded my file to the website and had a look at the data. It's confusing me because it's throwing up slower times on the verification site than on vbox test suite even though the runs were actually slightly uphill.

Uphill doesn’t necessarily mean the ground is actually uphill, it may look uphill due to the surrounding but it could actually be downhill.
It’s called the gravity hill effect.

 

[JamesCrs3]

Uphill doesn’t necessarily mean the ground is actually uphill, it may look uphill due to the surrounding but it could actually be downhill.
It’s called the gravity hill effect.

I don't mean it looked uphill, the starting height and end height from the gps data confirms it's up hill.

 

[JamesCrs3]

So my verified results are as follows:

Completely standard car, standard wheels/tyres, no pan roof, 85 kg driver.
Ambient air temp: 0°C
Tyres temp/pressure: ~25°C / ~42 psi

Test Description Max Slope Elapsed Time Slope Results
0-60 MPH -1.000 % 3.703 Seconds 1.290 % Results Valid
0-60 MPH (1-Ft) -1.000 % 3.344 Seconds 1.290 % Results Valid
0-100 KPH -1.000 % 3.880 Seconds 1.342 % Results Valid
0-100 MPH -1.000 % 8.834 Seconds 1.078 % Results Valid
100-200 KPH -3.000 % 9.610 Seconds 0.321 % Results Valid
40-80 MPH -1.500 % 3.790 Seconds 1.337 % Results Valid
60-100 MPH -2.000 % 5.132 Seconds 1.015 % Results Valid

1/8 Mile -1.000 % 7.496 Secs @ 93.219 MPH 1.188 % Results Valid
1/4 Mile -1.000 % 11.727 Secs @ 116.713 MPH 0.604 % Results Valid

 

[RadekCor]

Hi Guys

Iam new here and i need your help with something special.

I was owner of BMWs M2 and finally iam looking for some more "family" car and the quickest in the strait line.

Yes, right... iam ordered an RS3 Sedan/Saloon NARDO Gray.

Iam very exited with your numbers for 0-60ty times here and i have some Questions on you.

I ordered tires 8,5J 255/35/R19 8J 235/35/R19. So front tires are bigger one (yes of course i know that its just for some a bit better cornering to avoid a bit less understear) But its OK for an good times 0-60 then please ? (strait way acceleration) ?

My car specific is without any assistants, no sunroof, no electric seats, etc for en maximum weight reduction of the car.

Please let me know if its good solution and what yours tire type you had for those excelent 0-60 times here.

Very appriciate!

RadekCor

 

[JamesCrs3]

Hi Guys

Iam new here and i need your help with something special.

I was owner of BMWs M2 and finally iam looking for some more "family" car and the quickest in the strait line.

Yes, right... iam ordered an RS3 Sedan/Saloon NARDO Gray.

Iam very exited with your numbers for 0-60ty times here and i have some Questions on you.

I ordered tires 8,5J 255/35/R19 8J 235/35/R19. So front tires are bigger one (yes of course i know that its just for some a bit better cornering to avoid a bit less understear) But its OK for an good times 0-60 then please ? (strait way acceleration) ?

My car specific is without any assistants, no sunroof, no electric seats, etc for en maximum weight reduction of the car.

Please let me know if its good solution and what yours tire type you had for those excelent 0-60 times here.

Very appriciate!

RadekCor

For my times I had the standard wheels 8j. 235/35 x4. I don't think there will be any difference to be honest.