Lamborghini Gallardo (520 PS) specs

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-reviews/40476/wild-wild-zest-specifications
0-60 mph in 4.0 seconds and 0-100 mph in 9.0 seconds, unfortunately the best i can find and it was in a comparison with the 997.1 Turbo. @FastestLaps please can you add the results above?

New price: 161.840 €

https://www.autobild.de/marken-modelle/lamborghini/gallardo/1/

Autobild 11/2007 acceleration numbers and laptime are for Spyder version.
https://www.autobild.de/artikel/vier-offene-supersportler-439491.html

...Actually i dont own a Bmw, But i love building sand castles, Although its prolly more like sand squares-_-

lol, haters gonna hate. what does he drive? a Sangyong?

...Lol I'm just curious as to what I'm crying about on this page now?...

This BR2+ guy is a bmw cryboy jumping back and forth all over the site crying over bad choice he made buying a bmw. Admin his posts are biased, you should make a page called bmw owners sandbox, so they can enjoy playing together buiding sandcastles.

Tbh, lambos have always been about show and less about usable perpeformance.
The Audi R8 was always a bit slower and heavier but well built and cheaper. But both cars were using last generation tech. Porsche was getting 0-60 times well under 3s while these cars were doing around 3.2-3.7. Even the 458 managed to beat those times despite being RWD and having the same power.

The 2nd gen r8 and lambo have updated their launch controls and gearboxes. Now they are doing 2.5/2.6s

Found some sites. Yeah for the 520 hp gallardo the factory claimed 3.8 seconds to 60 and 4.0 seconds to 100kph. That means it's very close to the r8 and I was wrong.

Also yes the updated 520 hp gallardo from 06-08 should be a lot faster than the original 04-05 models. They get shorter gearing and 20 extra horsepower and now it's more on par with the r8. There was other stuff done to it too.

It matters to me because imo it seems like they messed up with the original 500hp gallardo. I hate to say it's slow but it should've been faster and from what I read the criticism it got led to them updating it to make an all around better version(06-08 520hp models)

It's honestly not that big of a deal lol. I love the car. I'm just trying to find out all the info on it

With a manual and an E-Gear, The times bother vertical from 4.0s being the fastest to 4.8s being the slowest, North was it 0 to 100kph, The cars is 13 years old, Tests are around just look, The 520bhp model doesn't really different in acceleration then the 500bhp model, The face-lift ed R8 also had much more done to it, but why she's it even matter?

The facelifted v10 r8 does 60 in 3.2 seconds while the preface lift did it in 3.4 I believe. 3.2 is the same as the lp560 and it has less power. Quarter mile on the lambo is faster though

Didn't notice it just said 6 speed. It's hard to find any times of the lp520. Does anyone have a link to Lamborghini stating the 4 seconds to 100 kph in stick(?)? If that's true then it would put the automatic closer to the pre facelift v10 r8 to 60 which makes sense especially since lambo likes to underate their times I hear

Well the R8 4.2 is faster to 60mph then the Gallardo, 3.9s vs 4.0s of the fastest magazine tested times, But thats where it ends. Maybe he meant the 5.2 V10 version, Which is a good deal slower then the LP560, And a bit faster then the LP530 SuperLeggera. Plus Lambos back then still had the SCT, Or you could just get a 2008 ZO6 or 911 Turbo and smoke them both if performance is what your looking for.

The last gen R8 V8 actually made damn near its claim for power, I havent seen any dynos of more then 440Bhp, Back then Audi wasnt lying there arses of about how much power they really made, Not NEARLY as much ike today, So its not anywhere near 560Bhp. I think your getting your R8s mixed up.

Lol... R8 4.2 faster than this? what are you smoking?
and i hope you do realise this is a lp520 6 speed manual lambo... not the 560hp DCT found in the later models...

Also, the r8 4.2 with like 100 less hp is just as fast if not faster to 60...what the hell Lamborghini?

Is it me or should this car be faster? The r8 has the same engine with supposedly about the same power and its heavier but it's faster by half a second to 60. Is the r8's power underrated and it's actually more on par with the lp560's engine's power? Does it have a better transmission than the gallardo?

IMO, the best looking Gallardo ever made!

look. this car does quater mile .1 seconds faster. 12.2secs on .dragtimes.com/Lamborghini-Gallardo-Timeslip-20313.html

i have now commented every lambo

@Georg
I don't know, yesterday they weren't there, so I submitted them again and gave more information

@Mike B

I have approven the laptimes...don´t know if someone has deleted them?
They are online with your IP adress as submitter

Here is the article of the Autozeitung laptime:

http://www.autozeitung.de/grosser-sportwagen-vergleichstest

It doesn't mention the laptimes, but they are here:

http://www.digitalcorvettes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57681

Here is the data from the article of the Vairano laptime stating that is from the 2006 Gallardo and not from the the 2003:

http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?viewThread=y&gID=3&fID=0&tID=92780

I'm looking for scans.

Here is the article for the comparition against the F430, Z06 and Turbo, by looking at the pictures you can see it's a 2006 base Gallardo and not the SE

http://www.autobild.de/artikel/porsche-turbo-im-vergleichstest-56229.html

And here they quote the accelerations and the laptimes:

http://www.germancarforum.com/internal-combustion/4957-autobild-997tt-z06-f430-gallardo.html

Why were all the laptimes deleted? They really belonged to this car, why?!!

Hey please, the engine is in the middle.

I created this page in order to separate the times from the '03 Gallardo to the ones from the '06 Gallardo which had some upgrades, The vairano time of 1:17.814 belongs to this car.

Edit: I've made two lazy errors, the engine is in the middle, not in the front (as we all know) and that time in the Adams motorsports park was put by accident, it should be deleted.