The new BMW M3 gets 420 horses

[Erik]

420 horses. Now where did they get that number from?


•Erster Achtzylinder-Motor für den Sportwagen BMW M3.
•Enormes Leistungspotenzial mit 309 kW/420 PS aus 4,0 Litern Hubraum.
•Maximales Drehmoment von 400 Newtonmetern bei 3 900/min-1.
85 Prozent des maximalen Drehmoments über eine Drehzahlbreite von 6 500 min-1 abrufbar.
•Einzigartige Schubkraft durch konsequente Umsetzung des M Hochdrehzahlkonzepts, maximale Motordrehzahl: 8 300 min-1.
•Konsequenter Leichtbau bei Motor und Nebenaggregaten, neuer V8-Motor gehört zu den leichtesten Achtzylindern der Welt, Gewicht geringer als beim Reihensechszylinder-Motor des Vorgängermodells.
•Variable Nockenwellensteuerung, Niederdruck-Doppel-VANOS für optimalen Ladungswechsel, volle Leistungsfähigkeit des Systems schon bei normalem Motoröldruck.
•Acht Einzeldrosselklappen für spontanes Ansprechverhalten des Motors.
•Sichere Ölversorgung bis zu 1,4 g Längs- und Querbeschleunigung durch zwei Ölpumpen und dynamikoptimierte Nasssumpf-Ölschmierung.
•Abgasanlage optimiert Ladungswechsel, gewichts- und funktionsoptimiert durch Innenhochdruck-Umformverfahren, Abgasemissionen erfüllen EU4-und LEV 2-Normen.
•Verbessertes Motorsteuergerät MSS60 koordiniert optimal alle Motorfunktionen mit den verschiedenen Fahrzeugsteuergeräten.
•Ionenstromtechnologie erkennt beziehungsweise unterscheidet Motorklopfen sowie Zünd- und Verbrennungsaussetzer durch Ionenstrommessung im Verbrennungsraum.
•Brake Energy Regeneration mit intelligenter Generatorregelung.

First eight-cylinder for the BMW M3 sports car.
• Supreme performance ensured by 309 kW/420 hp from 4.0 litres.
• Maximum torque of 400 Newton-metres (295 lb-ft) at 3, 900 rpm,
85 per cent of maximum torque over a speed range of 6,500 rpm.
• Unique thrust and muscle ensured by consistent implementation of the M high-speed engine concept, maximum engine speed 8,300 rpm.
• Consistent lightweight construction of engine and ancillary units,
new V8 power unit one of the lightest eight-cylinders in the world,
lighter than the straight-six power unit in the former model.
• Variable camshaft control, low-pressure double-VANOS for an
optimum charge cycle, system offering full power and performance even with normal engine oil pressure.
• Eight individual throttle butterflies for spontaneous engine response.
• Consistent and reliable oil supply with longitudinal and lateral acceleration up to 1.4 g ensured by two oil pumps and wet sump oil lubrication optimised for supreme dynamic behaviour.
• Exhaust system optimising cylinder charge, optimised for weight
and function by means of internal high-pressure remoulding,
exhaust emissions fulfil EU4 and LEV 2 standards.
• Upgraded MSS60 engine control unit for optimum coordination of all engine functions with the various control systems in the car.
• Ion flow technology recognising and distinguishing engine knocking phenomena as well as misfiring and miscombustion by measurement of ion flow in the combustion chambers.
• Brake Energy Regeneration with intelligent alternator control.
More in Every Respect:
The new V8 Power Unit for the BMW M3.
(Short Version)
Its name alone spells out the epitome of ultimate driving pleasure:
the BMW M3. And now the new version of BMW M GmbH’s most successful high-performance sports car bears out this claim once again, at the same
time providing a thrilling answer to the question asked by so many sports car fans around the world whether a further improvement is still possible at all.
And the answer is yes – for the new BMW M3 offers more in every respect.
This applies not only – but particularly – to the power unit: After 15 years
and two model generations, the trendsetting six-cylinder has now found its successor. The new BMW M3 is entering the market with an eight-cylinder power unit – more cylinders, larger capacity, more power, higher engine speed. And it is fair to say from the start that this will also mean an even more thrilling experience on the road.
The benchmark the new power unit was required to exceed could hardly have been greater: BMW’s 3.2-litre straight-six has gained fame and admiration the world over, receiving a long list of awards and prizes. Acknowledged several times as the “Engine of the Year” and developing a supreme 252 kW/343 hp in its last version, this power unit made the BMW M3 not only the ultimate performer in the segment of high-performance sports cars, but also a genuine best seller.
The fact still remains, however, that everything has its time. And now the
time has come for the six-cylinder to bow out and leave the stage. The time has come for the advent of the new V8 in the new BMW M3.
The specifications of this new high-performance power unit alone clearly confirm the enormous progress this engine has to offer. Engine displacement is 3,999 cc, maximum output is 309 kW/420 hp. Peak torque of 400 Newton-metres or 295 lb-ft is just as impressive as the top engine speed of 8,300 rpm. So clearly, the new BMW M3 is striking out for the top right from the start through its thrilling performance.
Ideal dimensions for performance at its best.
Displacing 500 cc per cylinder, the new V8 power unit meets the ideal concept of the most demanding engine designers right from the start through its engine dimensions alone. And the other design criteria – all the way from the engine’s dimensions and filling capacities through the number of components to the weight of the engine – likewise represent the very best achievable today.




http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/7303/13583817hj0.th.jpg (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=13583817hj0.jpg)http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/4475/23836595zf7.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=23836595zf7.jpg)http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/174/89241095sj4.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=89241095sj4.jpg)http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/9239/82778252kp7.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=82778252kp7.jpg)
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/8939/76609577tq7.th.jpg (http://img215.imageshack.us/my.php?image=76609577tq7.jpg)http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/4746/58716349xr9.th.jpg (http://img215.imageshack.us/my.php?image=58716349xr9.jpg)http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/7738/83983807yg9.th.jpg (http://img85.imageshack.us/my.php?image=83983807yg9.jpg)

[Leadfoot]

I see it revs to 8300rpm, 50rpm more than the RS4's V8 that's a bit of one-up-man-ship to me.

I don't speak German but am I right in saying that it produces 85% upto 6500rpm, if so what rev range does it cover with 85% of it's torque?

It does look like there will be a right old battle royal between it and the RS4 when they finally meet for the first.

[Erik]

More pornography...

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/7303/13583817hj0.th.jpg (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=13583817hj0.jpg)http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/4475/23836595zf7.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=23836595zf7.jpg)http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/174/89241095sj4.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=89241095sj4.jpg)http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/9239/82778252kp7.th.jpg (http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=82778252kp7.jpg)
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/8939/76609577tq7.th.jpg (http://img215.imageshack.us/my.php?image=76609577tq7.jpg)http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/4746/58716349xr9.th.jpg (http://img215.imageshack.us/my.php?image=58716349xr9.jpg)http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/7738/83983807yg9.th.jpg (http://img85.imageshack.us/my.php?image=83983807yg9.jpg)


http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/8387/74467280nz2.th.jpg (http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=74467280nz2.jpg)http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/2317/32861854xa2.th.jpg (http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=32861854xa2.jpg)http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/3782/65613971xj8.th.jpg (http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=65613971xj8.jpg)
http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/1764/67643236vr2.th.jpg (http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=67643236vr2.jpg)http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/5180/70672995sa9.th.jpg (http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=70672995sa9.jpg)http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/5917/36610432xp0.th.jpg (http://img206.imageshack.us/my.php?image=36610432xp0.jpg)
http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/130/96002529vw5.th.jpg (http://img206.imageshack.us/my.php?image=96002529vw5.jpg)


http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/9419/10537039mn3.th.jpg (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=10537039mn3.jpg)http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/270/53282384ud0.th.jpg (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=53282384ud0.jpg)http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/3233/99047450bg1.th.jpg (http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=99047450bg1.jpg)http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/7601/57513467vs4.th.jpg (http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=57513467vs4.jpg)http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/6317/14369476ov8.th.jpg (http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=14369476ov8.jpg)
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/1225/24765140fk3.th.jpg (http://img88.imageshack.us/my.php?image=24765140fk3.jpg)http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/3752/16800285qb8.th.jpg (http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=16800285qb8.jpg)http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/9083/96521801zm7.th.jpg (http://img88.imageshack.us/my.php?image=96521801zm7.jpg)http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/2402/34891189gs6.th.jpg (http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=34891189gs6.jpg)

[AndyBG]

Lightest V8 in the world !

[Erik]

Lightest V8 in the world !

Really? :vhmmm:

http://www.germancarzone.com/89469-post1.html

Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale: 173kg
Audi S4 4.2: 195kg
Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG: 199kg :hahahehe:

Audi S8 V10 5.2: 220kg :dig:
BMW E60 M5: 240kg


http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/425/kurvais0.th.jpg (http://img168.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kurvais0.jpg)http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/9519/kurva2ox0.th.jpg (http://img262.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kurva2ox0.jpg)

[Qriouz]

You get 85% of the torque at only 2000 rpm and that means that you get a big part of those 400nm below 6000rpm.

Pretty impresiv engine!!!

[Bingocaller]

That is one impressive motor!

Hope they finally have solved all the problem with the VANOS so we dont see a E39 M5 reenactment :-)

[Alex Kim]

I don't know that much about the technology.. but how does this compare to current RS4? Is it similar to what we expected.. ? Like RS4 is fast at first and at high speed, M is faster..?

[SuperstarDriver]

for me i think the best V8 in the world will remain the V8 from RS4 like it is now (Clarkson said is the best and more like him) why i say that?!Just look at the engine specifications and torque...420HP @ 7800 rpm and 430 NM at 5500rpm (with 30NM than the M3) and 90% of it available between 225 to 7600 rpm more than the M3 80% reviving torque avalaibility...and the performance of course better than the M3 because of the 4WD (forget the 100kg more than the new M3 sedan it just doesn't matter)...4WD is better than RWD, 4WD puts 100% of power at every second to the ground and is extremely unlikely to burn tires in the corners in which RS4 is the king of 4 door saloons...and of course DRC power in which nothing from BMW compares to it...we shall see the tests..i just wait to see how M3 is kicked by RS4 in both categories:CORNERS AND DRAG RACE...I JUST LOVE THE RS4!

[AndyBG]

...neuer V8-Motor gehört zu den leichtesten Achtzylindern der Welt...


Doesn't this mean ''lightest V8 in the world'' ?

[Leadfoot]

The specs are interesting and the way the power is delivered is very similar to that of the RS4 but the RS4 is stronger in torque and over a much wider range. Has there been many word on the weight of the M3?

The 335i scales at 1600kgs which isn't light for a 3.0L 6 cylinder rwd coupe, especially when compared with the S5 which has quattro and a V8 weighing only 30kgs more.

I believe the M3 will weight less than the 335i but by how much, a carbon roof panel can only drop 10kgs at most off the weight and at 202kgs the engine will be no lighter than the 335i with turbos attached, I reckon it will scale at 1570~80kgs.

[AndyBG]

... Has there been many word on the weight of the M3?

Less than RS 4, I am afraid...

[QuattroFun]

Specs look okay and it will no doubt be good for the claimed horses and propel the new M3 past the RS4 in a drag race - but like the M5, it seems to be peaky. The current benchmark to beat is really not the current RS4/R8 engine, but rather the subsequent C63 AMG - and here is falls woefully short on the version in the CLK AMG just as the RS4 does. Handling will no doubt be good and beat the RS4 on the track - but in everyday driving, a thin low end is pretty irritating longer down the road and let us see if it rides better than the previous crashy M3...

[Ruergard]

Very impressive, looks like a fantastic engine!

[Leadfoot]

There is no doubt it will be an improvement on the old M3 engine, no matter how much people rated it like QuattroFun said it was very peaky and only can alive at the top end. Ferrari cars get away with needing to use all of the revs because of the flat plane crank (what a lovely sound :love: ) but on a normal crank you only get a deep chested sound of which the Aston and the RS4 are top dogs at :bow: and usually don't sound their best at the rev limiter, maybe the M3 will prove me wrong.;)

As for the C63amg, it will be quick but like all Mercs they will in the service bay replacing the small bulb in the dash that is attached to the ESP sensor.:hihi: And if the C320Sport is anything to go by the handling isn't top billing, it will fall into it's norm of providing very quick motorway express trains.

[SuperstarDriver]

The V8 from RS4 like i said and almost everybody say in this forum is better than the new V8 from M3 with the same amount of power but less torque and less torque squering in a huge amount of rev like it does in the RS4!We shall not be sacred by the new M3 cause it will not handwell better than the mighty RS4 and especially not be beaten on the race track, time will show that!And then again we all know that RS4 will not be the rival to M3 Coupe but to the M3 Saloon in which the weight will bounce even higher the RS4 to be again the best saloon in the world and shall have to wait to the new RS5 Coupe to beat the crap M3 Coupe and Cabrio for RS5 Cabrio...Audi is like a giant tornado, you see it, you can feel the breeze closely, you can run from it but you can hide, it will surpass your limits in a few seconds...for me guys Audi is like the biggest high-end superstar in car makers, the best of the best in every segment doing everything with the newest and highest technology ever made in a car...Audi is not only a driving machine is a totally different league of performance in every way and even the smallest the tightest and the lowest price model range of Audi will give the pleasure of driving a sportscar!Is amazingly how Audi is launching so mean and beautiful new models to show is NO.1 IN SUPERCARS AND SPORTSCARS MAKER...for ME AUDI IS MY HEART AND I CAN'T LEAVE WITHOUT IT!!!(SORRY FOR OFFTOPIC)

[Ruergard]

http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/country/gcf/newsID/2070322.001/bmw/new-bmw-m3-v8-engine-in-detail

[Leadfoot]

I must say after reading the write-up in WorldCarsFans the engine does sound like the real deal. It's every bit the equal of the RS4 though it's no lighter. It will be interesting to see the torque curve from the S5 as I reckon it will be better than both of them.

I think BMW will be drip feeding us with wee bits of info over the next few months until the car finally make an appearance at the German MotorShow.

Is it known if the M3 will be standard spec 7spd SMG or 6spd manual? Also will it be offered with dynamic handling pack like the one in the X5?

We have talked a lot about it exterior looks and how it no longer has the bulging wheels look of the last car or the RS4, but after studying the A5 and S5 I very much doubt the next RS5 with have the flared arches of the RS4 as the track is already a lot wider than the old A4. I think the most we will see is the bodywork being lowered by an inch or so and the wheel size increasing to 19" from the S5's 18".

[buyalemon]

M3 will be a hell of a car ...BUT I won't like it until it comes as a sedan or even better as touring!

[SuperstarDriver]

you care about the wheels?f..k them men...we shall wait to see the new RS5 in 2008 i think and then compare to the new M3 and highly unlikely to beat the new RS5 this year's M3...likewise to beat RS4...M3 and BMW is only a legend, a name in the past nothing more, nothing better than Audi, no good interiors, no feeling when driving, very ugly cars, very few could survive by pushing an M car to his limits because of the instability in the curves and more and more...BMW is like a bitch, you f...k here now and you forget about her, but Audi is like a fine sexy young beautiful and honest girl who is moving all your thoughts to her every time at a day...i really really really don't realise why the hack someone could like BMW cars?!Why?Because of the "Bring Me Women" thing?Because of burning tires and let yourself to be the star off the road and want everybody to look at you?!Why people with brains in their heads like BMW?What's so special on them?Loosing your life by driving at the edge of the limit of an BMW?Burning tires and loosing money by changing them periodically?!Why? I think BMW fans are stupid (sorry if i offended someone but that's the reality)...Audi is better driving, better looking, better handlling, better interior maker, more performant and more precise, more speed in curves, more sexuality (for those who buy a car to be observed by girls, not me but i know every bmw driver do that), better service support, better mechanics, better resale value, etc...did someone understood me?!!!!

[cally]

haha nice comparison

[Alex Kim]

haha by the way I heard M3 Convertable with Full option will be like 80000 ~ 90000 USD.. BMW 3-series for that amount..? I think a person can buy M5 with that amount.

[skratch]

Don't forget that BMW severly under rates there engines...Ten bucks says this car will put down numbers that will make us all scratch our heads lol....Just take a look at what the 335 and M5-M6 put down

peak power is at 8300 vs 7800

I think that this car actually has a broader torque cure than the rs4...When they say it makes 85% there talking about low end where from It makes plenty of torque until 7k
http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=57086&d=1174579749

Its also making power right until fuel cut.That means that it can make more power up top once people start moding them....this engine is coming in at 105 hp/l and everyone knows BMW is good for 110/l easy so expect about 440 hp with the basic bolt ons...chip,intake,exh

I think the 105 hp/l is bmw playing it safe so they don't repeat the s54 problems it had at launch

[Leadfoot]

http://www.rri.se/spec/view/png/graph/STR-06021701-kW-Nm-C.png

These grey lines shows the power and torque curves of the RS4. Now from what I see the RS4 has a broader torque curve and more of it.:D

[sticky]

for me i think the best V8 in the world will remain the V8 from RS4 like it is now (Clarkson said is the best and more like him) why i say that?!Just look at the engine specifications and torque...420HP @ 7800 rpm and 430 NM at 5500rpm (with 30NM than the M3) and 90% of it available between 225 to 7600 rpm more than the M3 80% reviving torque avalaibility...and the performance of course better than the M3 because of the 4WD (forget the 100kg more than the new M3 sedan it just doesn't matter)...4WD is better than RWD, 4WD puts 100% of power at every second to the ground and is extremely unlikely to burn tires in the corners in which RS4 is the king of 4 door saloons...and of course DRC power in which nothing from BMW compares to it...we shall see the tests..i just wait to see how M3 is kicked by RS4 in both categories:CORNERS AND DRAG RACE...I JUST LOVE THE RS4!
You don't know what you are talking about. I can't believe the AUDI guys on here don't find this type of junk posting embarassing.

[sticky]

Don't forget that BMW severly under rates there engines...Ten bucks says this car will put down numbers that will make us all scratch our heads lol....Just take a look at what the 335 and M5-M6 put down

peak power is at 8300 vs 7800

I think that this car actually has a broader torque cure than the rs4...When they say it makes 85% there talking about low end where from It makes plenty of torque until 7k
http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=57086&d=1174579749

Its also making power right until fuel cut.That means that it can make more power up top once people start moding them....this engine is coming in at 105 hp/l and everyone knows BMW is good for 110/l easy so expect about 440 hp with the basic bolt ons...chip,intake,exh

I think the 105 hp/l is bmw playing it safe so they don't repeat the s54 problems it had at launch
Wasn't expecting this, great post.

Not to mention this motor will easily put down more horses to the ground as the RS4 driveline saps such a large amount of power. BMW's driveline is much more efficient, and RS4's are dynoing in the 310 range, E46 M3's can reach that NA.

Additionally, they rated it at 420 hp for a reason, they don't want to rate it higher to encroach on the M5/M6 and also people will see how much more efficient 420 BMW horses are than the competition, such as the RS4. It is definitely underated, just like the 335, M5, M6, ect.

I wish we knew what the official tranny was, as if it is the same 7 speed SMG expect performance relatively close to the M5.

[sticky]

haha by the way I heard M3 Convertable with Full option will be like 80000 ~ 90000 USD.. BMW 3-series for that amount..? I think a person can buy M5 with that amount.
Anything to substantiate this? Of course not. Come on, don't spread misinformation, you should be smart enough to realize that BMW won't price an M3 convertible at the same price as an M6 and above the M5.

[Leadfoot]

Wasn't expecting this, great post.

Not to mention this motor will easily put down more horses to the ground as the RS4 driveline saps such a large amount of power. BMW's driveline is much more efficient, and RS4's are dynoing in the 310 range, E46 M3's can reach that NA.

If we had a smilie for being catty here is where I would put it.:boring:

You always bring up how efficient the BMW drive-train is over Audi's Quattro. Blah, Blah, I like most here are sick to death hearing about this, sure rwd is more efficient than awd but I ask you WHAT F#CKING GOOD IS THIS EFFICENCE DOING YOU WHEN THE ROADS GETS SLIPPY.:hihi: You talk about this as if awd is a bad thing, but at least Quattro and all other awd drive-trains are at the same efficience all of the time

As for the RS4 only producing 310hp at the wheels, please someone test a RS4 with 20K on the mileometer to just see the difference.:deal:


Additionally, they rated it at 420 hp for a reason, they don't want to rate it higher to encroach on the M5/M6 and also people will see how much more efficient 420 BMW horses are than the competition, such as the RS4. It is definitely underrated, just like the 335, M5, M6, ect.

I don't agree with this statement, this time round I believe BMW are playing catch-up to Audi and Mercedes. :p The BMW M3 could have produced more power but at the expense of torque and this it's two main rivals both producing greater amounts of torque and over a greater range, BMW had to match with this engine. It already produces more hp/Lt than the M5/6 to give it more might have made it unreliable.:doh: And I doubt BMW want to go the same way as the M5/6 on reliability.:lovl:


I wish we knew what the official tranny was, as if it is the same 7 speed SMG expect performance relatively close to the M5.

At last we are almost agreeing on something, the M3 will I believe match the M5 to 60mph and almost to 100mph but after this point the bigger engine's power will tell and it will start to increase the gap. But as we have seen from test done against the 70hp down S6, a win is not a sure thing for the M5 and the same will be the case with the M3.:jlol:

[Alex Kim]

Anything to substantiate this? Of course not. Come on, don't spread misinformation, you should be smart enough to realize that BMW won't price an M3 convertible at the same price as an M6 and above the M5.

I am sorry, If I spread misinformation. I saw that article from m5board.com if I remember correctly.

[SuperstarDriver]

of course the m5board wants to put BMW on the top of the range but we all know audi is faster and better handlling because of AWD drivetrain!!!sweet...

[sticky]

If we had a smilie for being catty here is where I would put it.:boring:

You always bring up how efficient the BMW drive-train is over Audi's Quattro. Blah, Blah, I like most here are sick to death hearing about this, sure rwd is more efficient than awd but I ask you WHAT F#CKING GOOD IS THIS EFFICENCE DOING YOU WHEN THE ROADS GETS SLIPPY.:hihi: You talk about this as if awd is a bad thing, but at least Quattro and all other awd drive-trains are at the same efficience all of the time

As for the RS4 only producing 310hp at the wheels, please someone test a RS4 with 20K on the mileometer to just see the difference.:deal:



I don't agree with this statement, this time round I believe BMW are playing catch-up to Audi and Mercedes. :p The BMW M3 could have produced more power but at the expense of torque and this it's two main rivals both producing greater amounts of torque and over a greater range, BMW had to match with this engine. It already produces more hp/Lt than the M5/6 to give it more might have made it unreliable.:doh: And I doubt BMW want to go the same way as the M5/6 on reliability.:lovl:



At last we are almost agreeing on something, the M3 will I believe match the M5 to 60mph and almost to 100mph but after this point the bigger engine's power will tell and it will start to increase the gap. But as we have seen from test done against the 70hp down S6, a win is not a sure thing for the M5 and the same will be the case with the M3.:jlol:

Let me get this straight, you bring up what happens when things get slippery? I'll tell you what happens, I don't drive like an idiot and get home safely, thats what I do when the conditions get bad. Winning a race in the rain or pushing your car when the conditions aren't great just isn't smart. It is great that the Audi can get better traction in the rain, I'm sure most performance enthusiasts care that they could lose a drag race in a downpour or blizzard. You say at least quattro is the same efficiency all the time vs. others, that doesn't even make sense, every tranny always puts out the same amount of power to the tire, it doesn't magically change.

It isn't just that the RWD is more efficient, that is obvious isn't it? It is that the M3 will also have significantly less weight due to it and less weight over the front providing far less understeer and much better balance. The RS4 is extremely heavy for the size of car it is. So put two and two together, less weight + more power to the wheels with most likely shorter gearing due to 7 speeds means a significant performance difference.

You seriously think 20k miles will make a 40 whp difference on an AWD car? All of a sudden the car will make significantly more power? You would see maybe 10 whp more and that is optimistic at best depending on break -n technique. Are you serious? Are you really reaching this far? Why is it that any other car on the planet can go on a dyno off the floor and put down numbers that won't vary significantly upon breakin? You know they run these motors to redline for a while before they put them in the car right? All I can go by is the dynos that have been posted, unless you have a different one hiding somewhere?

I have no idea how BMW is playing catch up. What do you base this on? The 335i outperfoming the S4? The M5/M6 outperforming everything in Audi's lineup? Isn't Audi the one that has been playing catch up from a strictly performance standpoint for decades now? Isn't Audi the one that abandoned their turbo power view in the S4 and RS4 cars to follow BMW's NA footsteps?

Those 4 rings are blinding you from reality. Hell, I don't even like the new M3 that much but I can see how far ahead it will be of the RS4 performance wise. RS4 vs. M3 will be similar to E46 M3 vs. B6 S4. Before you get all upset, I have to put up the usual disclaimer that I am not bagging on Audi simply providing the facts and you can come to your own conclusion. Everyone ends up buying whatever car they like the most anyway.

[Erik]

Take it easy now...

Pdf of the engine.

http://shrani.si/files/thenewv8enwcux.pdf

[tazsura]

Wowzer, some strong views going on here! :w:

Erm, fogive me if i'm wrong but the M3 has 420 PS so thats 414 HP, not 420 HP right? :vhmmm: (hmmmm why does 414 HP ring a bell? lol)

Sticky, with regards to Leadie comments about the merits of Quattro etc...i don't think he means driving like a nut-bag just for the sake of it when it rains! Its more about the safety factor and sure footedness of having 4x4 instead of rear wheel drive. I'm sure we've all had similar experiences of going around bends too fast and lifting off the accelerator sharply. Quattro really does just sort this out with no fuss at all, where as the M3 would require much more (sweaty/frantic!) driver involvement! And if you DO have a car that can perform at high level in the rain, why not take advantage of this?! You don't need to compromise..thats the beauty of it! :dig:

I don't think the battle between the two will be a forgone solution as you have suggested. I may be wrong, and no doubt the usual suspects among the motoring press will have their favs already (i.e Autocar = M3!! lol). M3 will be the better drivers car, as a packaged all rounder, i'm not so sure.

Lastly, I think i remember seeing that the M3 will be launched initally with the 6 speed manual as standard...:stick:

Taz :incar:

[skratch]

guys here is a bone stock AUTO 335 with less than 2k miles on it.BMW might be underating the M3 also so who knows....It could be for marketing against the rs4(same hp but look at the performance)They also did that with the 335 so it could kill the new lexus and g35/37.The japs must be pissed when BMW rated that engine at 300hp because its destroying there 300hp cars they had planned...Even you leadfoot think that the csl makes more power than advertised....Either way look at this dyno...Its putting almost 300whp and 300ftlb to the ground and it is an auto.When I said it has a broader band i ment it makes like 85% of its torque up to like 7700rpm look at the top end how the engine is still making plenty of torque

http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/7259/dynooj7.jpg

Edit I was just reading the pdf...BMW is trying everything they can to put the power to the ground...When the car acclerates the ecu diconects the alternator to let the engine give more power....and uses a brake technology to charge the batt while braking.

[M&M]

http://www.rri.se/spec/view/png/graph/STR-06021701-kW-Nm-C.png

These grey lines shows the power and torque curves of the RS4. Now from what I see the RS4 has a broader torque curve and more of it.:D

Do you deliberately post drivel?

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/1012-1/V8M3.jpg

[KK265]

guys here is a bone stock AUTO 335 with less than 2k miles on it.BMW might be underating the M3 also so who knows....
AND HERE IS A BONE STOCK S3 265 PS:

http://www.rri.se/popup/performancegraphs.php?Flap=Graph&ChartsID=733

[Leadfoot]

Sticky and M&M,

I will not be drawn into another argument as what ever I or others will say, you and rightly so will be able to counter, such is the objectiveness of the subject and the multiple views on it.

I would like to shown what the difference between the engines with regards to torque band.

BMW M3 vs RS4
1500rpm 285Nm - 340Nm (+55)
2000rpm 330Nm - 370Nm (+30)
2500rpm 360Nm - 400Nm (+40)
3000rpm 380Nm - 400Nm (+20)
3500rpm 400Nm - 400Nm
4000rpm 400Nm - 400Nm
4500rpm 395Nm - 410Nm (+15)
5000rpm 395Nm - 420Nm (+25)
5500rpm 400Nm - 430Nm (+30)
6000rpm 400Nm - 415Nm (+15)
6500rpm 395Nm - 400Nm (+5)
7000rpm 390Nm - 390Nm (+5)
7500rpm 380Nm - 380Nm
8000rpm 370Nm - 370Nm

As you will see the M3 has a very even torque curve which will make it very linear but as you will also see never does the RS4 produce less torque than it and most of the time it produces more, in some cases a lot more.:D

The point that you failed to understand by what I was saying was that the RS4 grips totally unless the conditions are extremely slippy, but even then the grip it will have compared to a rwd car will be about 10 times more. I have tested my S4 to 60mph in the dry and the rain and the only difference in time between to two was only 0.2 seconds, I doubt an M3 will get close to that. You might not be aware but I use to own two BMWs 328i and a 525i and when the road was icy they were the worse cars to drive in these conditions, it might have been the 50/50 weight balance I don't know but I have never experienced anything like it in any other car.

All I was trying to say is quattro has it's merits, you might not like it but it's the better system for traction and all the extra power the BMW drive-train might make over it is immaterial if it can't all be used.:harass:

Here's a small equation showing percentage of power put to the road through the tyres relating to power output.

M3 vs RS4
85% - 75% You're figures based on a dry grippy surface.
75% - 75% Reality when accelerating on a road surface.
50% - 75% Reality figures based on a wet road surface.
15% - 55% Reality figures based on a snow covered surface.
5% - 35% Reality figures based on a icy surface.

Does anyone see a tread.:dig:

[M&M]

Where did you get those figures from?"DId you zoom in & plot each point? Well I bet I could do that & get different numbers. A 3rd person could do the same & get another set of figures.

But once again you forgeth that these curves are engine dynos from an engine on a bench. When you install said engine into a car, it gets attached to a clutch - flywheel - gearbox - shafts - diffs - wheels, etc.

In the case of the RS4 there is a front diff, a rear diff & a centre diff & 4 wheels for this power to get to the ground. Each diff has mechanical components that turn & run in oil & heat up & there are frictional losses at each point in the drivetrain. The M3 has 1 diff & 2 wheels to lose power through.

So you see those torque figures you just plotted? Do it again. But take away 30% from the RS4's & 15% from the M3's. That is all that's needed when you driving on the road. The POWER TO THE WHEELS! What's at the crank doesn't mean Jacksh1t unless we have a garage dyno contest in someone''s backyard.

And yeah Quattro has advantages, especially in indifferent conditions. No argument from my side. But I've been driving M3's since 1998 with no issues. It's not like you just dissolve when it rains. Even if I had a quattro car I STILL wouldn't race in the rain. There are too many factors beyond one's control, not to mention the braking distances increase quite a bit & quattro can't save you under braking. I have driven my 600hp BMW in heavy rain with slicks on the highway & made it home just fine.

[buyalemon]

BMW would never release a new M3 that ain't faster than it's competition (in dry)...M3 will kick ass but still ..it looks like shit :doh:

Too much talk about rolling road numbers ..the cars must be driven against the clock

The ring:
RS4: 8,09
M5: 8,13
M3: ? ...my guess 7,59 (you heard it from me first 7:53 RS6) :jlol:

[M&M]

Buyalemon, that's exactly what I was thinking. Around 7:56-7:59 on stock tyres.

Of course the M3 was revealed at Geneva with the Pilot Cups. I heard that, as well as the carbon roof, will be an option on the Coupe only. So I'm pretty sure the press car sent to SPort Auto for the Supertest will have the Cups. In that case I reckon a 7:48-7:50 time is possible.

[7:53 RS6]

BMW would never release a new M3 that ain't faster than it's competition (in dry)...M3 will kick ass but still ..it looks like shit :doh:

Too much talk about rolling road numbers ..the cars must be driven against the clock

The ring:
RS4: 8,09
M5: 8,13
M3: ? ...my guess 7,59 (you heard it from me first 7:53 RS6) :jlol:

Yes new M3 will be faster than RS4, heck the old M3 E46 would be close to RS4 if on the same tiers(not said it would be faster, but it should get close).

( And please do not say that it differ big time among corsa vs cup r-compound, it dont. But it would differ among street tiers vs R-compound whater ever its cups or corsa R-compound, betwen R-compound vs street tiers ther will be a diffrance to talk about. That would hardly be the case r-tiers vs r tiers as cup vs corsa)

So if M5 was not on street tiers as it was, well if it was on R-compound (what ever r-compound) it would for sure get under 8.09 RS4 time. Still the cars are tested as they where, so as it is RS4 is faster than M5 around the ring:thumb:

[Leadfoot]

Where did you get those figures from?"DId you zoom in & plot each point? Well I bet I could do that & get different numbers. A 3rd person could do the same & get another set of figures.

Yes I did plot them using both graphs, someone was going to, if just to prove that the RS4's engine produces the most torque which it does.:rs4addict


But once again you forgeth that these curves are engine dynos from an engine on a bench. When you install said engine into a car, it gets attached to a clutch - flywheel - gearbox - shafts - diffs - wheels, etc

So you see those torque figures you just plotted? Do it again. But take away 30% from the RS4's & 15% from the M3's. That is all that's needed when you driving on the road. The POWER TO THE WHEELS! What's at the crank doesn't mean Jacksh1t unless we have a garage dyno contest in someone''s backyard.

They are as relevant as you comparison races which have to only be done in the dry.:doh: If quattro and all awd system is so inefficient then why does a Porsche Carrera S and Carrera 4S post times within 0.1secs of each other to 100mph. If awd systems lose twice to efficiency of rwd systems than surely the gap would be much greater do you not think or is it just Quattro that is so inefficient proving what we all think that you are anti-Audi and just here to stir.:nono:


I have driven my 600hp BMW in heavy rain with slicks on the highway & made it home just fine.

I am interested in your car, what type of BMW is it? To drive any car with slicks on a highway is both stupid and dangerous never mind against the law.

I thought I should just point this out to you.:D

[7:53 RS6]

Just want to add, AWD cars do lose it totaly and spin of tracks as well. Stop the safty talk about AWD. To day we was at the drift tack close by. Its a drift area whit sprinkler hidden in the tarmac, when we want we press the systems and the track get rain:applause: like on the golf coursce!!

CSL, RUF AWD 996 turbo and EVO8, 996 GT3. Well guess what i managed to lose all cars on the wet track at times, so did most others as well. My CSL i dont lose to much whit a total spinn as a result, even it happen. The EVO8(AWD) was new to me, it took a while to figure out, i did lose it sevral times. The RUF AWD was not to hard to figure out on the drift, still i lost it one or twice, it was new to me as well. Still of course its most easy for me to drift my CSL vs the others, often the same result was when peopel change cars and dont experience the cars before.

Well these thing was of course not news to me, that one do lose AWD cars as well, whit a big spinn as a result....but it was just a pointer to all the safty talk on here about AWD..

And last i have never been afraid of my rear driven cars anytime, rain, snow or in the dry. So stopp the proppaganda. I happen to love wet driving at the ring as well the wide GP track. The GP at the ring is a super fun drift track on rain, safty is god. As well the ring is a great place to drift in the rain.

[Leadfoot]

So if M5 was not on street tiers as it was, well if it was on R-compound (what ever r-compound) it would for sure get under 8.09 RS4 time. Still the cars are tested as they where, so as it is RS4 is faster than M5 around the ring:thumb:

7:53RS6,

Are you saying the M5 if it had the same tyres as the RS4 would be even quicker than the M6 which has even better centre of gravity, lighter and shorter wheelbase for better directional changing.

So everyone who has bought an M6 and paid £20K more for the privilege. What a bunch of wallies.:lovl:

Oh yes, and BMW you are even stupider for wasteing all that time and money developing the car when all you need to do was put a set of R-compound rubber on the M5 and weld shut the rear doors.;)

[M&M]

I am interested in your car, what type of BMW is it? To drive any car with slicks on a highway is both stupid and dangerous never mind against the law.

I thought I should just point this out to you.:D

IT's street legal semi-slicks. DOT approved & the works. WTF?

[7:53 RS6]

Yes I did plot them using both graphs, someone was going to, if just to prove that the RS4's engine produces the most torque which it does.:rs4addict



They are as relevant as you comparison races which have to only be done in the dry.:doh: If quattro and all awd system is so inefficient then why does a Porsche Carrera S and Carrera 4S post times within 0.1secs of each other to 100mph. If awd systems lose twice to efficiency of rwd systems than surely the gap would be much greater do you not think or is it just Quattro that is so inefficient proving what we all think that you are anti-Audi and just here to stir.:nono:



I am interested in your car, what type of BMW is it? To drive any car with slicks on a highway is both stupid and dangerous never mind against the law.

I thought I should just point this out to you.:D

Well, he have a point, its on the street or track and not on the dyno one drive. And the AWD dont lose to much up to 100. But higher in speed the AWD do get it harder and the lose is bigger here.
I had bit of accelerating from 2gear and up to higher speed today on the way from the drift track, the GT3 Mk1 was in my rear, but it did lose some distance while the 2 and 3 gear was out. I was totaly of ESP(snappy gear box) and shift at shift lights. Well i guess new RS4 will have it hard against CSL, up the gears.

I have posted on forums in sweden that i would like to try(CSL vs RS4), soon some will answer i hope. Last the 26-27 april im going to Gotland track, i know one RS4 will go, we do it ther if not before. So all could see what happens.
Im at track 10 april, still no RS4 have shown even i ask them to come!


And as i said many times before a while back as well some said just reacently in this thread. Cars are allredy been driven in, they do so in the enging bench. There would not make a diffrence if you totly stomp the gas pedal in a new sporty car, it will not destroy. In the same way it will not preform better at a spot km(thats placebo, rather than anything else, im sorry to say)The engin is allredy been driven! I have friends that buy cars and go to the ring brand new just a few km, then spank it:revs: its not like it cant handel it.

[7:53 RS6]

IT's street legal semi-slicks. DOT approved & the works. WTF?
I driven the VLN langstreckepokalrace at the ring in a Khöler race E46 M4, 420hp, totaly stripped out stock BMW Motorsport body and the car at ca 1200kg, on slicks, heavy rain, so what i dident crasch. Still the quallifyng laps was canceld due when 200 cars are at the ring and Gp track driving the 2 tracks in one and rain comming, well 30 cars was total wrecks. Still i did enjoy my self in the rear driven M3:incar: Some AWD cars do crasch as well:applause: Its a real world we live in. On this forum one get the impession the AWD cars dont losse grip, wake up call every one. Still its a safe ride, but that is rear as well. Its not like one go and crasch instant if in rear driven car, it sounds like that on this forum:doh: A well it sounds like rear riven cars are not drivebel in rain, they drive very well in rain.

[M&M]

I agree totally I have some videos of me at our elevation (5500ft) launching in the wet. My times in the wet to 160km/h were faster than an S4 does in the dry. Leadfoot reads too many mags & is just gonna say I'm lying. I find the most important thing is the tyres & easing it off the line just off idle with slow throttle movements. Once you in 2nd gear it makes ZERO difference if its wet or dry, the M3 accelerates the same. It doesn't have enough torque to have traction issues once in motion.

[buyalemon]

Yes new M3 will be faster than RS4, heck the old M3 E46 would be close to RS4 if on the same tiers(not said it would be faster, but it should get close).

( And please do not say that it differ big time among corsa vs cup r-compound, it dont. But it would differ among street tiers vs R-compound whater ever its cups or corsa R-compound, betwen R-compound vs street tiers ther will be a diffrance to talk about. That would hardly be the case r-tiers vs r tiers as cup vs corsa)

So if M5 was not on street tiers as it was, well if it was on R-compound (what ever r-compound) it would for sure get under 8.09 RS4 time. Still the cars are tested as they where, so as it is RS4 is faster than M5 around the ring:thumb:

As someone already said ...wasn't the M6 tested with same tires as RS4?
Both 8,09? ...don't see why M5 would be faster than M6 (If the M6 wasn't tested in shity wheather)!

This sure is the problems with theese ring-tests ...a temp difference of 10C from time to time should make big differences in results!

As far as M3 acc ...my guess will be 15,7 sec 0-200 :0:

[buyalemon]

Ohh ...forgot one thing! Wasn't the B5 RS4 very close the E46 M3 around the ring ...3 sec or so on stock tires?

[Damienr8]

Wow, there is alot of hostility in this thread. I don't have time to contribute but I will state my quick opinion on the upcoming M3 Coupe.

With some facts in hand and alot in the air, i think.

1. Very nice engine specs. A nice High-revving competitor to Audi's 420HP V8.
2. The M3 concept looks a bit ricey, especially in the hood and rear bumper areas.
3. I would hope that the RS5 makes its debut around the same time as the M3.
4. I can't wait for the awesome competition.


For all those arguing about RWD AWD Etc, etc...
There is a car for everyone out there. The characteristics I look for in a car specific to my needs. If I was planning on purchasing (say for instance) a RS4 and someone tells me that I should get the M3 because its .0034 seconds around a track, I would take their advice like a grain of salt. I will not consider a car better than another car because it's .3 of a second faster or looks sexier in black. My opinion on a car being better than another car is based on how well it does what i want it to do.

Thanks, Im off from work to the bar...lol

[Leadfoot]

To the BMW fans on this site, I don't dislike this M3. I just prefer the looks of the RS4 and the S5 much better. As for the engine I commend their achievements, they have produced an engine with a very linear torque band, even more so than that of the RS4 but the bottom line is that the Audi produces more and at lower revs. Originally that was all I stated, that the RS4 was even torquer than the M3, not which produced the most at the wheels. :0:

If I said the fit and finish of the Audi is better will you counter by saying but how will that help it get more power to the wheels. :doh:

My real problem with your postings are that only BMW's rwd system and it's 50/50 weight balance are the way to achieve the best results. Sorry I totally disagree with that, Audi choose the awd (Quattro) route while Porsche with the 911 choose to stick with the rear engined approach all three have their merits but to say BMWs driving train is much better just because it loses less power is silly argument.

With each and every one of them there is a plus and there is a minus, in a front engined rear wheel drive car the plus is better directional change but the minus is less traction, with a rear engined rear wheel drive car the plus is better traction out of corners and in acceleration but the minus is a snappier balance in a corner. With the current Quattro system with the engine so far out front the plus is totally traction and predictable handling but the minus is sooner understeer and more power lose.

I don't doubt that some of you are very good drivers in your own fields but for traction and balance when grip is extremely low, awd is way better than rwd period, ask any rally driver or ice driver, awd is totally turn the sport on it's head because of awd. With rwd when the grip is gone there is no option to shift the power to other wheels that might have some extra grip. I prefer Quattro because of this, am I right or wrong who knows all I know is that I feel more secure with it than without it and that all I need to know.:thumb:

All these arguments are like a pissing contest to see who can fire to further. As Damienr8 so rightly posted there is a car for everyone, I prefer Quattro, you prefer rwd and my good wife prefers her fwd GTi Golf. :burnout:

[skratch]

leadfoot the problems with your grafs are that BMW is using verylight drivetrain and is doing everything in its power to make the most power to the ground...Take a peak at the pdf....BMW shuts off the alterantor to make more power to the ground when your on the gas..

The rs4 has more torque on paper yes but to the ground the new m3 will put down more torque and power everywhere.They will also use very agressive gear ratios also.

after all is said and done its what the car puts to the ground that matters.

[skratch]

AND HERE IS A BONE STOCK S3 265 PS:

http://www.rri.se/popup/performancegraphs.php?Flap=Graph&ChartsID=733

what is an s3 rated at stock?The 335s are putting to the ground almost what there rated at the crank

[sticky]

Sticky and M&M,

I will not be drawn into another argument as what ever I or others will say, you and rightly so will be able to counter, such is the objectiveness of the subject and the multiple views on it.

I would like to shown what the difference between the engines with regards to torque band.

BMW M3 vs RS4
1500rpm 285Nm - 340Nm (+55)
2000rpm 330Nm - 370Nm (+30)
2500rpm 360Nm - 400Nm (+40)
3000rpm 380Nm - 400Nm (+20)
3500rpm 400Nm - 400Nm
4000rpm 400Nm - 400Nm
4500rpm 395Nm - 410Nm (+15)
5000rpm 395Nm - 420Nm (+25)
5500rpm 400Nm - 430Nm (+30)
6000rpm 400Nm - 415Nm (+15)
6500rpm 395Nm - 400Nm (+5)
7000rpm 390Nm - 390Nm (+5)
7500rpm 380Nm - 380Nm
8000rpm 370Nm - 370Nm

As you will see the M3 has a very even torque curve which will make it very linear but as you will also see never does the RS4 produce less torque than it and most of the time it produces more, in some cases a lot more.:D

The point that you failed to understand by what I was saying was that the RS4 grips totally unless the conditions are extremely slippy, but even then the grip it will have compared to a rwd car will be about 10 times more. I have tested my S4 to 60mph in the dry and the rain and the only difference in time between to two was only 0.2 seconds, I doubt an M3 will get close to that. You might not be aware but I use to own two BMWs 328i and a 525i and when the road was icy they were the worse cars to drive in these conditions, it might have been the 50/50 weight balance I don't know but I have never experienced anything like it in any other car.

All I was trying to say is quattro has it's merits, you might not like it but it's the better system for traction and all the extra power the BMW drive-train might make over it is immaterial if it can't all be used.:harass:

Here's a small equation showing percentage of power put to the road through the tyres relating to power output.

M3 vs RS4
85% - 75% You're figures based on a dry grippy surface.
75% - 75% Reality when accelerating on a road surface.
50% - 75% Reality figures based on a wet road surface.
15% - 55% Reality figures based on a snow covered surface.
5% - 35% Reality figures based on a icy surface.

Does anyone see a tread.:dig:
You don't get it, if more hp is getting to the tire in the case of the M3 then that means more torque is getting to the tire. The RS4 motor will never put out more torque than the smaller displacement M3 motor as it gets lost in the driveline. The torque figures of the RS4 won't even come close to the 335i. Only when comparing company given crank power charts does the argument hold any merit.

I'll be the first to compare dyno's at the wheels obtained from owners of RS4's vs. M3's as soon as the M3 hits the streets. Crank numbers mean nothing really.

[sticky]

leadfoot the problems with your grafs are that BMW is using verylight drivetrain and is doing everything in its power to make the most power to the ground...Take a peak at the pdf....BMW shuts off the alterantor to make more power to the ground when your on the gas..

The rs4 has more torque on paper yes but to the ground the new m3 will put down more torque and power everywhere.They will also use very agressive gear ratios also.

after all is said and done its what the car puts to the ground that matters.
Ooops, I posted before I saw this, you beat me to it :)

[Leadfoot]

what is an s3 rated at stock?The 335s are putting to the ground almost what there rated at the crank

On turbo cars the likelihood is that they will produce more than the manufacturers claims, the Golf GTi produces in a lot of dyno tests 212hp at the wheels yet the claimed power is 200hp at the crank. This is why I prefer turbo cars over N/A engines.

skratch and sticky are you both thick, no one including me are doubting that the M3 will put more power to the wheels, less diffs means less wastage, but that wasn't the discussion, the discussion was which engine produces to most torque and over the greater range and that answer is the RS4.

If your only argument for every discussion is the drive-train then it's going to be a very boring discussion.

Think about it.

Example.

We discuss 'The Audi S5 looks nicer than the M3' and you reply 'but it's drive-train can't put the same amount of power to the wheels'

We discuss 'The Audi S3 is quicker on the track than a 130i Sport' and you said 'but it's drive-train can't put the same amount of power to the wheels'.

See my point BORING.:boring:

All of you find relevance in the fact that BMW is putting the most power to it's wheels and I agree that there efforts are commendable but you totally disregard the fact that on other than prefect surface conditions not all of this power will ever get to the surface to generate forward motion.

In my country and in a lot of Europe the average rainfall is between 30~50% of the year, that means between 30~50% of the time Audi's inefficient drive-train system will out acceleration BMW's and in a lot of cases by a large margin but in the dry it will lose by a few tenths to a 100mph. The last time I raced anyone be it on the road or track the speed never got above 120mph so where is this relevance to have to final few tenths.

It only relevance is at the drag-strip where the surface is ultra sticky and as I said before this is a pissing contest against people who are only interested in who has the fastest accelerating car and the quickest reaction times. :doh: Very important in picking a everyday mode of transports.

This is the difference between us in the Audi camp and you lot in the BMW camp, we deal in reality, real situations.

[sticky]

On turbo cars the likelihood is that they will produce more than the manufacturers claims, the Golf GTi produces in a lot of dyno tests 212hp at the wheels yet the claimed power is 200hp at the crank. This is why I prefer turbo cars over N/A engines.

skratch and sticky are you both thick, no one including me are doubting that the M3 will put more power to the wheels, less diffs means less wastage, but that wasn't the discussion, the discussion was which engine produces to most torque and over the greater range and that answer is the RS4.

If your only argument for every discussion is the drive-train then it's going to be a very boring discussion.

Think about it.

Example.

We discuss 'The Audi S5 looks nicer than the M3' and you reply 'but it's drive-train can't put the same amount of power to the wheels'

We discuss 'The Audi S3 is quicker on the track than a 130i Sport' and you said 'but it's drive-train can't put the same amount of power to the wheels'.

See my point BORING.:boring:

All of you find relevance in the fact that BMW is putting the most power to it's wheels and I agree that there efforts are commendable but you totally disregard the fact that on other than prefect surface conditions not all of this power will ever get to the surface to generate forward motion.

In my country and in a lot of Europe the average rainfall is between 30~50% of the year, that means between 30~50% of the time Audi's inefficient drive-train system will out acceleration BMW's and in a lot of cases by a large margin but in the dry it will lose by a few tenths to a 100mph. The last time I raced anyone be it on the road or track the speed never got above 120mph so where is this relevance to have to final few tenths.

It only relevance is at the drag-strip where the surface is ultra sticky and as I said before this is a pissing contest against people who are only interested in who has the fastest accelerating car and the quickest reaction times. :doh: Very important in picking a everyday mode of transports.

This is the difference between us in the Audi camp and you lot in the BMW camp, we deal in reality, real situations.


You know, they don't ban you or take your soul for admitting you are wrong. You want to discuss torque yet the drivetrain is some kind of off topic discusison? What don't you get? Gearing affects torque multiplication. More hp to the wheels means more torque getting to the wheels, which would mean that the M3 motor is putting out more torque at every rev range with less displacement compared to the RS4. Not only more hp per liter, but more torque per liter as well. Do you get it yet? How many more people need to tell you this? Is this incorrect torque thinking all that you have to hang on to in order to defend the RS4? It is ok to admit that BMW produces a better v8 and v10, take a deep breath, its ok. This does not mean the RS4 is bad, worse, or somehow not an all around great vehicle.

You just pull things out of left field of no relevance as if you are somehow making a point. You are using how much rainfall your country gets as a reason for why the audi is better? I assume the last time you raced someone where a few tenths didn't matter it was during a hurricane. You also realize that once traction has been established the AWD now is at a disadvantage don't you?

As for 120+ not being important these cars are produced in the land of the autobahn where it does matter. Can't wait to see what random off topic point you come up with next, perhaps snowfall statistics?

And no, the only relevance is not at the drag strip where it is ultra sticky, I suppose power on the highway doesn't matter, where the car with the higher trap speed pulls harder? There is also something called traction control. Additionally, the abuse on the clutch that would be required for an RS4 to be ahead of the M3 for even a few tenths in the rain would not be something that the average owner would subject their vehicle too, if you really want to bring realiy into it.

[mm1]

Sorry, can you read?

[Leadfoot]

You know, they don't ban you or take your soul for admitting you are wrong. You want to discuss torque yet the drivetrain is some kind of off topic discusison? What don't you get? Gearing affects torque multiplication. More hp to the wheels means more torque getting to the wheels, which would mean that the M3 motor is putting out more torque at every rev range with less displacement compared to the RS4. Not only more hp per liter, but more torque per liter as well. Do you get it yet? How many more people need to tell you this? Is this incorrect torque thinking all that you have to hang on to in order to defend the RS4? It is ok to admit that BMW produces a better v8 and v10, take a deep breath, its ok. This does not mean the RS4 is bad, worse, or somehow not an all around great vehicle.

Sorry, but here is the original statement that started the discussion

You get 85% of the torque at only 2000 rpm and that means that you get a big part of those 400nm below 6000rpm.

Pretty impresiv engine!!!

Nowhere was the drive-train discuss, hello. My reply was to the statement and the one after it.


I think that this car actually has a broader torque cure than the rs4...When they say it makes 85% there talking about low end where from It makes plenty of torque until 7k

You see where I was coming from.


You just pull things out of left field of no relevance as if you are somehow making a point. You are using how much rainfall your country gets as a reason for why the Audi is better? I assume the last time you raced someone where a few tenths didn't matter it was during a hurricane. You also realize that once traction has been established the AWD now is at a disadvantage don't you?.

Explain to me how rainfall and wet road conditions are relevant to make a point for the merits of having awd over rwd. Maybe it doesn't rain in your neck of the woods, but almost everywhere else it does and here is where the extra traction afforded by awd benefits. But what about snow, in most of Europe it snows at least 6~8weeks of the year and in some cases even more, the benefits of awd becomes even more relevant.


As for 120+ not being important these cars are produced in the land of the autobahn where it does matter. Can't wait to see what random off topic point you come up with next, perhaps snowfall statistics?.

Sorry, I thought you where from the US of A and the last time I looked the speed limit there was 70mph. Up to these speeds even the inefficient RS4 will be quicker than the new M3.


And no, the only relevance is not at the drag strip where it is ultra sticky, I suppose power on the highway doesn't matter, where the car with the higher trap speed pulls harder? There is also something called traction control. Additionally, the abuse on the clutch that would be required for an RS4 to be ahead of the M3 for even a few tenths in the rain would not be something that the average owner would subject their vehicle too, if you really want to bring realiy into it.

The relevance of the drag-strip being, it is the only place that will afford a rwd car an equal if not better traction than an awd car, which you rightly said would be putting extra load on the clutch under such a sticky surface. The talk the clutch in normal conditions will be damaged it total crap, I like a lot here have launched my car at 4~5K rpm on many occasions and never did the clutch give any problems at all, unlike some M5/6 already discussed else where on this site.

Unlike some others on these forum, I will not sit back and let you bigoted remarks go unanswered. If I was to get thrown off these forum for that then it would be a very dull place indeed, but the arguments only really started when yourself and others decided to join and start posting. So what does that tell you.

[M&M]

I keep hearing about these indifferent conditions. What happens to RWD's when it rains? DO they dissolve? Funny millions of people around the world seem to make it home in RWD's when it rains or whatever. So let's discuss this "advantage" 4WD has when its wet.

There are 2 ways to look at it. For performance or for safety. For performance in the wet, 4WD IS DEFINITELY BETTER. There is no doubt about that. So if you buy a car for racing in the wet, 4WD is the way to go.

Onto safety in the wet. Well in an emergency where you have the space or time to apply the throttle then 4WD might get you get out via evasive manouevres under throttle.

However, in 99% of emergency situations, there is neither the time nor the space to get onto the throttle. You are hard on the brakes & swerving. Under those conditions 4WD DOES NOT HELP AT ALL. In fact it could be argued that the extra weight will cause longer stopping distances & the extra weight up front will cause the car to be less nimble. If you need to brake hard & swerve around a truck under braking a car with 50/50 weight distribution & RWd might well be more nimble.

You see here's what you don't understand. When you off the throttle your car is a ZERO wheel drive. There is no power going to any wheels. You are free-wheeling and how the car responds depends on the tyres, weight, weight distribution, polar moment of inertia, suspension (camber, castor, etc), suspension geometry, & a whole heap of other factors. All 4WD does is help under throttle to distribute the tractive load to 4 wheels instead of 2. 4WD helps with traction & in an emergency you don't normally need traction.

But yeah, I digress. If you want to buy a car for racing in the wet then 4WD is the best option.

[Ruergard]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ren3HyHs0L0

[skratch]

my statement on the broader torque curve still stands.The M3 has a flatter curve and makes flat tourqe up past 6.5k....Once you throw in the gearing and drivline losses the M3 will have a broader torque curve...

Didnt you post a few days ago that M engines dont make low end or are very peaky and I showed you how flat a s54 torque curve was...

now if you want to engine bench yes,I agree 100% that the 4.2l rs4 makes more torque

but I was talking about the dynamics of the M3's engine when all the factors are at play.

You agree that the M will put down more power and I agree that a bigger displacment engine makes more torque lol

Oh and this is a bench dyno that someone leaked out.I woulnd be suprised one bit if a real M3 puts out more power...We have to wait untill we get real dyno sheets.Then we can see how the low end power is on this engine

[Leadfoot]

I keep hearing about these indifferent conditions. What happens to RWD's when it rains? DO they dissolve? Funny millions of people around the world seem to make it home in RWD's when it rains or whatever. So let's discuss this "advantage" 4WD has when its wet.

M&M, I never said it did. My argument was there is a very valid points for have AWD over the disadvantage of power lose to the wheels.:thumb:


There are 2 ways to look at it. For performance or for safety. For performance in the wet, 4WD IS DEFINITELY BETTER. There is no doubt about that. So if you buy a car for racing in the wet, 4WD is the way to go.

:applause: Hallelujah, finally an agreement and as most countries spend up to 50% of their time with rain one can assume again the AWD has it's benefits. As for racing in the rain, even Formula One doesn't stop racing when it rained, though it does most of the time cause lots more accidents and if memory serves me right AWD cars were banned from there like it has from almost every other form of motorsport.


Onto safety in the wet. Well in an emergency where you have the space or time to apply the throttle then 4WD might get you get out via evasive manouevres under throttle

However, in 99% of emergency situations, there is neither the time nor the space to get onto the throttle. You are hard on the brakes & swerving. Under those conditions 4WD DOES NOT HELP AT ALL. In fact it could be argued that the extra weight will cause longer stopping distances & the extra weight up front will cause the car to be less nimble. If you need to brake hard & swerve around a truck under braking a car with 50/50 weight distribution & RWD might well be more nimble.

Agreed in emergency situations AWD is no benefits at all. But the argument for safety I was applying to was the situation of excessive throttle control where in a hi-powered RWD car the chances of the rear breaking free unexpected is greater and more sudden than in any AWD car so the benefits of AWD mean it's easier for the average to good driver to control and that is what is most important when on the road with other road users about. On the track it's a totally different situation as all the traffic is going only in one direction and with the provisions of run off areas.

[Leadfoot]

my statement on the broader torque curve still stands.The M3 has a flatter curve and makes flat tourqe up past 6.5k....Once you throw in the gearing and drivline losses the M3 will have a broader torque curve...

Didnt you post a few days ago that M engines dont make low end or are very peaky and I showed you how flat a s54 torque curve was...

now if you want to engine bench yes,I agree 100% that the 4.2l rs4 makes more torque

but I was talking about the dynamics of the M3's engine when all the factors are at play.

You agree that the M will put down more power and I agree that a bigger displacment engine makes more torque lol

Oh and this is a bench dyno that someone leaked out.I woulnd be suprised one bit if a real M3 puts out more power...We have to wait untill we get real dyno sheets.Then we can see how the low end power is on this engine

The peak natural of the M engines applied to the old M3 6cylinder engines and the V10, both of which are amazing with the output they provide when one considers that they are in mainstream motors and not supercar exotics. But BMW's M division aren't the only ones capable of producing amazing engines, AMG and Quattro GmbH and just as capable at this. The AMG engine in the Zonda is a masterpiece and so is the one in the Gallardo which was developed by Audi.

I agree that this leaked dyno sheet for the engine was done for the purpose of showing that with the same power as the RS4 the M3 will out accelerate the Audi. But we both know it will be producing more than this as I believe every BMW does, it makes them look like their horsepower is better than other not what is truly the case that they are producing more.

With the likes of EVO now dynoing the cars they test we will see a true reflection of what all cars really produce and we will all benefit for it as none will want to show less than it should.:jlol:

[Leadfoot]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ren3HyHs0L0

I must say that it's a lovely noise, not Ferrari nice but not bad at all.:thumb:

[Alex Kim]

For all the discussion above, I agree with all of you guys. I mean, I don't know that much of the Engine and car technology but I think all of you guys are right. I think it is similar to the question like.. "do you like red candy or blue candy?" .


Both New M3 and RS4 are going to be great car. And I am sure the BMW M division will do something special to their new M3 since it is coming later than RS4.







http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ren3HyHs0L0
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________

Nice sound!

But.. when I turned this video clip on.. with my speakers;; my girl friend was asking me.. "Are you drilling something?" ..................

[skratch]

The V8 from RS4 like i said and almost everybody say in this forum is better than the new V8 from M3 with the same amount of power but less torque and less torque squering in a huge amount of rev like it does in the RS4!We shall not be sacred by the new M3 cause it will not handwell better than the mighty RS4 and especially not be beaten on the race track, time will show that!And then again we all know that RS4 will not be the rival to M3 Coupe but to the M3 Saloon in which the weight will bounce even higher the RS4 to be again the best saloon in the world and shall have to wait to the new RS5 Coupe to beat the crap M3 Coupe and Cabrio for RS5 Cabrio...Audi is like a giant tornado, you see it, you can feel the breeze closely, you can run from it but you can hide, it will surpass your limits in a few seconds...for me guys Audi is like the biggest high-end superstar in car makers, the best of the best in every segment doing everything with the newest and highest technology ever made in a car...Audi is not only a driving machine is a totally different league of performance in every way and even the smallest the tightest and the lowest price model range of Audi will give the pleasure of driving a sportscar!Is amazingly how Audi is launching so mean and beautiful new models to show is NO.1 IN SUPERCARS AND SPORTSCARS MAKER...for ME AUDI IS MY HEART AND I CAN'T LEAVE WITHOUT IT!!!(SORRY FOR OFFTOPIC)

I wasnt going to respond but this is some great entertaiment reading your posts.

[Leadfoot]

Nice sound!

But.. when I turned this video clip on.. with my speakers;; my girl friend was asking me.. "Are you drilling something?" ..................

:doh: Girls, can't live with them, can't live without them.

At least with the sound of the engine we can all agree on something.:cheers:

But is it better than the sound from the RS4.;) Only kidding, no need for a reply to this one please.:thumb:

[3abdo]

No one on this forum is saying that bmw doesn't know how to make cars, even less the M division, we are just trying to tell you guys (sticky and scratch) that most drivers on the road don't know about throtle steering, power brake, oversteer into a corner and not crash... and for all those poeple 4wd or even front wheel drive is much better and safer, and by safer we doesnt mean in a near crash situation because what ever you are driving it depends on your reflexes the other driver reflexes ,the speed... i live in canada a rwd car can only be driven safely around 5-6 months in a year whereas let's say an rs4 will be driven all year. and excuse me but 4.3-4 to 60 considering all the drivetrain losses you are talking about well thats really quick, and you definetly can not say a word about how new audi's handle. the sound the rs4 makes is just glorious. And just one last thing you are in an audi comunity, what kind of response are you expecting, you are better off at the m5 borad...

[7:53 RS6]

As someone already said ...wasn't the M6 tested with same tires as RS4?
Both 8,09? ...don't see why M5 would be faster than M6 (If the M6 wasn't tested in shity wheather)!

This sure is the problems with theese ring-tests ...a temp difference of 10C from time to time should make big differences in results!

As far as M3 acc ...my guess will be 15,7 sec 0-200 :0:
10 C up or down would not make a diffrence, if in normal summer temps, regarding tiers.
Ok let me edit, M5 would whit the same tiers as M6 and RS4 do same laptimes. The small advantages that M6 got over M5(except tiers at that time) well this is nothing that are to differ the to cars on a fast track like the ring. In the same way the small extra edge the 997 GT3 RS got over 997 GT3 is newer going to prove it selv on the ring!!. Still these small things will make a diffrensc at a small track!!.

On the ring the new 997GT3 vs 997GT3 RS cars are the same at 7.48min.
But it takes a kliner tracks to make use of the extra stiff body on 997RS vs 997GT3,as well its wider betwen the rear wheels on RS vs GT3, as well the slightly diffrent offset on the rear rims to make the rear wheels come more apart from each other, to fill the 4.4cm wider body of RS, as well the 20kg less pork on RS vs GT3, as well the rear wing puting pressure to the cars rear and it comes at use in small tracks wher one pull G, one dont pull G on the ring if comparing.

Lap time of 997 GT3 at hockenheim 1.11,7 min vs 997 GT3 RS 1.11,1 min. This diffrence is huge, in racetecnologi its big dollars to spend to cut this time at track.(remember the to cars are on the same tiers, same wide tiers and all! Well all this small extra edge of RS vs GT3 is very hard to make use of when traveling on the ring, due to reasons! There for even a talented driver like Horst cant separate the to cars on the ring. Sure Walter Rhörl will differ the RS vs GT3 slightly even on the ring, but he is developing the cars as well he is:bow: a bit over there. Still 99% of buyers of GT3 RS will never even on a small track make a diffrence if in 997GT3 or 997GT3 RS

So yes my guess is if M5/6 is on the same tiers on the ring, well they do more or les the same time as well.
The edge, the small extra focus M6 is superior over M5, is like the same reasons above GT3 vs GT3 RS, well the edge is not going to show at the ring.


But what happen at the kliner Hockenheim, well M6 is laping in 1.14,4 min on corsa r-compound, the RS4 laping whit the same tiers at 1.15.4!!. Now see M5 at street tiers it lap at 1.16,5 min, belive me, if M5 had same tiers as RS4 and M6 it would cut a second, well same as RS4...as i said the edge M6 got vs M5 is shown not so much on the ring(due to reasons you must by this time know, i mentioned it sevral times now) But it shows on kliner tracks, M5 on same tiers as M6 would never be as fast as M6 at hockenheim. The 50kg less in M6, the lower weight more to the ground etc, will differ on smal tracks not on the ring. Thats why put corsa on M5....yes it would lap as fast as M6 and RS4, at 8.09min on the ring!

As i remember M6 is even more weight than the RS4? I know M5 are, still M5 would be same on the ring and hockenheim as RS4 if on same tiers.
And last M6 is no CSL even it got the roof:thumb: Porky cars are never going to lap fast, still M6 make it great at Hockenheim whe one think of how heavy it is.:revs:
1-2 seconds on tracks like kliner hockenheim is like a total diffrent race classification if it would be racing. All above cars mentioned above in my text, well they would not even drive the same classification if it was race.
The RS kicks as:dig: That would be GT3 RS

[7:53 RS6]

7:53RS6,

Are you saying the M5 if it had the same tyres as the RS4 would be even quicker than the M6 which has even better centre of gravity, lighter and shorter wheelbase for better directional changing.

So everyone who has bought an M6 and paid £20K more for the privilege. What a bunch of wallies.:lovl:

Oh yes, and BMW you are even stupider for wasteing all that time and money developing the car when all you need to do was put a set of R-compound rubber on the M5 and weld shut the rear doors.;)

Well i edited, but read my answer to Buyalemon and tou see, as well see my edit.. I dont think you got any experience of the ring, its more easy to under stand how it works ther, if one driver ther alot, in diffrent cars. Its a pretty specal track, no where to find in the world!
Yes, it could accually hapen that M5 acually could get faster(im not saying it would, but 4sec it would make whit r-c). We are talking 4 seconds here, that do R-compound at least make vs street tiers on the ring. It is 73 bends to drive on the ring, whit r-c it would make a slightly better speed thru these 73 and it¨s done.

It is difficult to say but some where from 4-8-10 seconds depending on many things (what kind of car, etc,etc) r-c could better a street tier. I would say that a rear driven car is to gain more from r-c than the allredy god gripping AWD cars would gain. But R-c on old RS4 avant and im as sure it could gain 4 seconds as well vs the street tiers it was driven on!!!
Remember i dont say it would be faster, but i could happen the M5 could be slightly faster? But quote me on they would fore sure be more or les the same if on same tiers.(that would be regarding the ring and it is special.)

What diffrens do it make if M5 vs M6 was same fast on the ring, not a issu for those customers. Not like its whit the 997 GT3 RS vs 997 GT3 and these cars lap the same on the ring, well that is harder fore some to live whit. But still read my answer to Buyalemon and you will understand it to.

[7:53 RS6]

Ohh ...forgot one thing! Wasn't the B5 RS4 very close the E46 M3 around the ring ...3 sec or so on stock tires?
Yes it was 3 seconds betwean them. Tthe both on street tiers, M3 was slightly faster. Will it never sink in, on the ring most cars will do fine, even a porker like old RS4 Avant, how many times do one nead to mention its a fast track, it dont kill porkercars like a smal track do!!

On kliner Hockenheim old RS4 avant lap at 1.18,2 min vs E46 M3 1.16,3 min.
Now do you at all have a clu what this is proving, do you you have any tracking experience at all?...Do you know how much superior the E46 M3 is vs old RS4 at hockenheim, have you any ide how much 2 seconds is on a small track like kliner hocenheim. Well if not get out on the race track and see for your self.

Even half a second at this smal track is very much. Not to talk about 2 seconds:doh: Well let me remind you that the diffrens on the ring was 3 seconds, the ring is 20.8km. Now look how long kliner hockenhiem is......Rundkurs Streckenlänge: ca. 2.604 Meter. The E46 M3 totaly destroy the RS4 avant on a normal track!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It should hit you that the RS4 Avant is not suited for tracks(except the ring) This is the thing as well whit new RS4, still its way better than old and Audi is geting things right in yeas to come i guess.

CSL 1.13.5min vs new RS4 at 1.15,4 min!! The CSL as well new RS4 is on R-compound, get a grip, 2 second on a short track like this is not even in the same world:revs:

[Leadfoot]

7:53RS6,

Thanks for the clarification as to what you meant regarding the difference between street tyres and r-compound tyres.:thumb:

It was spot on and something I would totally agree with. I believe on the ring makes no more than 3~4 seconds can be gained on a car that has roughly a 8:10~8:20 lap time, so you will understand my disbelief that the current M3 with these tyres would improve it's time to anything better than 8:18, still a full 9seconds off the RS4. You talk about the ring doesn't kill heavy cars, if so why can the M6 not beat the RS4 with so much less power.

Now on a close circuit I would agree that the M3 will get very close to the RS4 with these tyres. Audi RS cars are more for road use than an M cars, this is why Audi choose to go down the AWD route with all the disadvantages it's format has in term of outright performance because of the benefits it gives in real world situations. The RS4 is a compromised design what with the engine out here over the front wheels but this only really becomes a problem like you said on a close circuit where the full limits of tyres adhesion can be explored. But as the S5 is all but here what will it be like on such tracks?. The sign look great what with the new front suspension set-up, steering rake and repositioning of the engine. It might not equal the M3 off the line but it might just compete very closely everywhere else and if so what will this mean for the M3 when the RS5 arrives.

The current range of M models haven't had the ratings of previous M models, the M6 has been said to be way over priced for what you get, the Z4M Coupe has been slated for it steering on normal roads, the M5 has fared better but it too has been beaten on quite a few tests against a much slower/less powerful car (S6). You may disagree but this new M3 has to be very good to win back the customers who have been moving away from the brand to pastures new like that of the RS4 and C55amg. All the sign are good but we know from past experience that the M division can mess things up, just look at the Z4M where the 3.0Sport is so highly rated but the same can't be said about it.

[M&M]

Are you actually saying the RS4 will beat the M3 around a circuit? Forget about it. The M3 will be MUCH faster than an M5 or M6 on every circuit. It is simply much lighter than its bigger brothers with a good power to weight ratio.

The V8 M3 will do CSL times around all the circuits, & if it comes with cups it will beat the CSL times everywhere. It is simply a new car with new technology in the suspension, tyres, diff, tortional rigidity, etc. And it has 80 horsepower more.

THe V8 M3 is a big step up from the E46. I wish it wasn't so, but unfortunately the world moves on & every manufacturer (not just BMW) improves their cars with every new version.

[Leadfoot]

Are you actually saying the RS4 will beat the M3 around a circuit? Forget about it. The M3 will be MUCH faster than an M5 or M6 on every circuit. It is simply much lighter than its bigger brothers with a good power to weight ratio.

The V8 M3 will do CSL times around all the circuits, & if it comes with cups it will beat the CSL times everywhere. It is simply a new car with new technology in the suspension, tyres, diff, tortional rigidity, etc. And it has 80 horsepower more.

THe V8 M3 is a big step up from the E46. I wish it wasn't so, but unfortunately the world moves on & every manufacturer (not just BMW) improves their cars with every new version.

I don't doubt the next M3 will be quite a bit quicker on a short tight circuit than the current RS4, what with the new technology it will be using. But the real deal is will it move the game forward with regards to the road? Everyone here including myself will tell you that the RS4 is an amazingly confidence inspiring car on the road, most of the current M models have failed on this front. Maybe the new M3 will be different, but it will have to be if the reports I have been hearing are true about the A5 and S5, both are meant to be a major step forward over the old A4 and in RS4 form it was an improvement over the E46 M3. Just think what a RS version will be like.:D

[buyalemon]

Yes it was 3 seconds betwean them. Tthe both on street tiers, M3 was slightly faster. Will it never sink in, on the ring most cars will do fine, even a porker like old RS4 Avant, how many times do one nead to mention its a fast track, it dont kill porkercars like a smal track do!!

On kliner Hockenheim old RS4 avant lap at 1.18,2 min vs E46 M3 1.16,3 min.
Now do you at all have a clu what this is proving, do you you have any tracking experience at all?...Do you know how much superior the E46 M3 is vs old RS4 at hockenheim, have you any ide how much 2 seconds is on a small track like kliner hocenheim. Well if not get out on the race track and see for your self.

Even half a second at this smal track is very much. Not to talk about 2 seconds:doh: Well let me remind you that the diffrens on the ring was 3 seconds, the ring is 20.8km. Now look how long kliner hockenhiem is......Rundkurs Streckenlänge: ca. 2.604 Meter. The E46 M3 totaly destroy the RS4 avant on a normal track!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It should hit you that the RS4 Avant is not suited for tracks(except the ring) This is the thing as well whit new RS4, still its way better than old and Audi is geting things right in yeas to come i guess.

CSL 1.13.5min vs new RS4 at 1.15,4 min!! The CSL as well new RS4 is on R-compound, get a grip, 2 second on a short track like this is not even in the same world:revs:

Thanks for the insults ...starting to recognize you more and more :w:

My problem with your theories is when you say "heck the old M3 would as fast on the Ring as an RS4 with same tires"

My point would be, hence the B5 RS4 was only 3 sec behind the M3 ...it would according to your theories also be as fast as B7 RS4 :vhmmm:

So according to you the B5 RS4 would score the sam time as the B7 :applause:

I don't believe your way of calculating, look at the facts ...don't make your own results!

Fact: B5 RS4 was faster than E39 M5
Fact: B7 RS4 was faster than E60 M5
Fact: B7 RS4 equal with 507hp M6 with same tires

The "BMW-clan" inhere starts to look pathetic ...one day it's a video of an RS4 that goes from 50-150 in 5 min! The next thing is that Audis stink around tracks!

[Leadfoot]

The "BMW-clan" inhere starts to look pathetic ...one day it's a video of an RS4 that goes from 50-150 in 5 min! The next thing is that Audis stink around tracks!

I do understand where you are coming from, as Erik would say, 'We need to rise above it' but it's hard.:vgrumpy:

Even the ones who have moved or are going to move from the M models over to the Audi camp are only really here until BMW get back on track again, this you can tell from their posts. :nana:

They are like old men looking back on their youth through rose-tinted glass and thinking how much better things were than was really the truth. :jlol:

[skratch]

shouldnt the s4 and rs4s be compared to the M3 and the a6-rs6 be compared to the M5/6 ?

[M&M]

WTF is the point of comparing M5/M6's to the A4 platform? That's like me comparing the CSL to the RS6. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Oh wait, let me clean up I just spat all over my screen.

C'mon what's next? Comparing an S3 to a 750iL?

The bigger cars aren't as nimble as a lighter car. Simple physics. A4 series compares to the 3-series. CSL is the topr dog & beats Gallardo's around the Ring.

[skratch]

This took some real hard digging up.Here is an official rs4 engine dyno from audi.

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/8835/rs4dynouc6.jpg

Heres the best i could do to compare the 2 from the leaked dyno of the 4.0 M3

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/4650/rs4dyno2yb5.jpg

[buyalemon]

WTF is the point of comparing M5/M6's to the A4 platform? That's like me comparing the CSL to the RS6. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Oh wait, let me clean up I just spat all over my screen.

C'mon what's next? Comparing an S3 to a 750iL?

The bigger cars aren't as nimble as a lighter car. Simple physics. A4 series compares to the 3-series. CSL is the topr dog & beats Gallardo's around the Ring.

Doesn't matter what you compare it to ...RS4 is 13 sec better than E46 M3 ...after 10 laps it would be 2 min behind the RS4!

M5 also got spanked!
Maybe if they have 600 bhp they can keep up?

CSL isn't in production anymore ...soo which BMW should we compare it to??

The new X5 might be faster than an M5??

[M&M]

Doesn't matter what you compare it to ...RS4 is 13 sec better than E46 M3 ...after 10 laps it would be 2 min behind the RS4!

M5 also got spanked!
Maybe if they have 600 bhp they can keep up?

CSL isn't in production anymore ...soo which BMW should we compare it to??

The new X5 might be faster than an M5??

M3 is also out of production. And the RS4 that was tested had Corsa tyres, optional sports suspension + & optional ceramic brakes. Well done on the 13 secs. Pity the M3 is also out of production.

[Leadfoot]

Skratch,

I thought I already did the comparison between the RS4 and the M3v8. Your graph is correct for the power, the M3 keeps increasing right to the very top of it's rev range but alas your torque comparison is incorrect and shows the M3 torque is wrongly placed on the RS4's graph. At 8400rpm the M3 is producing 350Nm not the 375Nm you are showing, in fact with the exception of the lower and middle section where the M3 produces 400Nm the rest is totally plotted in the wrong places.:eye:

Why falsify something to make the M3 better than it really is. :nana: Bad sportsmanship if you ask me.

Nowhere in this tread do you read that anyone doubt's the M3 will be anything other than an amazing engine. But thank-you once again for re-showing that the RS4's engine is even better.:thumb:

It is a sad state of the current BMW range that the only production car you have to turn to is a CSL of 5+ years ago and was only a limited run special when comparing a BMW with the RS4, a car with using your own words 'poor weight balance and an inefficient drive-train'.:lovl:

But lets check out the closest current BMW coupe to the CSL, the Z4M Coupe. It has the CSL's brakes, steering and is roughly the same weight, it's engine is only down 12hp, equals the RS4's PTW and again using your own words produces even more PTW at the wheels and yet with all these years of ever improving technology it can only cover the ring in 8:15. BMW has lost it's magic.:rolleyes:

I previously stated that BMW with the next M3 are playing catch-up and all of the above just proves that. Their beloved straight six can't hack it in the big league any more and have had to move to the 4.0Lv8 to stay in touch or might even move ahead, only time will tell. But with the weight it will be compared to the RS4 and like you say the extra power it will have at the wheels, quite possibly an extra 16% more it should destroy the RS4.

Guys if it only just beat it you will be the laughing stock of this forum. Sorry to remind you of this.:looking:

[buyalemon]

M3 is also out of production. And the RS4 that was tested had Corsa tyres, optional sports suspension + & optional ceramic brakes. Well done on the 13 secs. Pity the M3 is also out of production.

You are just ignoring better knowledge!
M3 was almost even with B5 RS4 ...soo how about that X5?

But if that is the new way of thinking ...the Carrera GT they tested had like 600 bhp, low weight and great tires ....if the RS4 would have that it would be very fast! :rotflmao:

Since the M6 can't beat Rs4 with 507bhp ...the handling must stink?

[M&M]

Say leadfoot, that 8:15 the Mcoupe did. Guess what? It was on normal tyres. SO I guess on Corsas it will be equal to the RS4.

Want to compare Hockenheim times?

[M&M]

Buyalemon, since an RS4 can't beat a 335 with an open diff, I guess the RS4's handling must stink. Now here's some homework for you boy. I want you to discredit ALL These magazines from around the world. Every single one of them please. Maybe you can add some spice like some editor slept with someone else to skew some numbers or something. Hope to hear from you soon.

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/690-1/Driver3a.jpg

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/693-1/Table.JPG

Ok here's Car & Driver. Biggest magazine on planet earth & one of the oldest.

M3 test, 0-60 in 4.5, 13.1 1/4 mile:

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/4227/bmw-m3.html

RS4 test, 0-60 in 4.6, 13.2 1/4 mile

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/11333/2007-audi-rs-4-quattro.html


Italian magazine, note the circuit times:

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/974-1/rs4oc4.jpg

AutoBild:

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/977-1/M3vsRS4.jpg

RS4:

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/965-1/RS4Test.jpg

vs M3's SPort Auto times:

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/979-1/s4test2teil2.jpg





Best Motoring Time attack (quali lap on fresh tyres)

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/753-1/RS4M3x.jpg

And then there's the question of which car thes pro's would you like to take home:

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/751-1/RS4M3w.jpg
http://mmm.os.org.za/d/757-1/RS4M3y1.jpg
http://mmm.os.org.za/d/755-1/RS4M3y.jpg
http://mmm.os.org.za/d/759-1/RS4M3y2.jpg
http://mmm.os.org.za/d/761-1/RS4M3y3.jpg

[sticky]

Skratch,

I thought I already did the comparison between the RS4 and the M3v8. Your graph is correct for the power, the M3 keeps increasing right to the very top of it's rev range but alas your torque comparison is incorrect and shows the M3 torque is wrongly placed on the RS4's graph. At 8400rpm the M3 is producing 350Nm not the 375Nm you are showing, in fact with the exception of the lower and middle section where the M3 produces 400Nm the rest is totally plotted in the wrong places.:eye:

Why falsify something to make the M3 better than it really is. :nana: Bad sportsmanship if you ask me.

Nowhere in this tread do you read that anyone doubt's the M3 will be anything other than an amazing engine. But thank-you once again for re-showing that the RS4's engine is even better.:thumb:

It is a sad state of the current BMW range that the only production car you have to turn to is a CSL of 5+ years ago and was only a limited run special when comparing a BMW with the RS4, a car with using your own words 'poor weight balance and an inefficient drive-train'.:lovl:

But lets check out the closest current BMW coupe to the CSL, the Z4M Coupe. It has the CSL's brakes, steering and is roughly the same weight, it's engine is only down 12hp, equals the RS4's PTW and again using your own words produces even more PTW at the wheels and yet with all these years of ever improving technology it can only cover the ring in 8:15. BMW has lost it's magic.:rolleyes:

I previously stated that BMW with the next M3 are playing catch-up and all of the above just proves that. Their beloved straight six can't hack it in the big league any more and have had to move to the 4.0Lv8 to stay in touch or might even move ahead, only time will tell. But with the weight it will be compared to the RS4 and like you say the extra power it will have at the wheels, quite possibly an extra 16% more it should destroy the RS4.

Guys if it only just beat it you will be the laughing stock of this forum. Sorry to remind you of this.:looking:
Man, its like you are retarded sometimes, if you can't tell the torque and hp curves from the factory graphs you should have stopped posting a while ago.

Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5250. Get it?

What sad state that BMW is in? What are you even talking about? This was an M3 discussion but considering that wasn't enough what do you want to hear now? How the 335i destroys the S cars? How about how the M5/M6 destroy the RS cars? What are you even talking about?

You have no clue what you are talking about, BMW playing catch up, man pull your head out of the sand. Audi is the one that had to go to a V8 in 2 generations of S4's to try to keep up with BMW's inline 6 and couldn't do it. BMW has always been ahead from a performance standpoint, still is, and will be. What is sad is Audi's attempt at a V10 in the S6 and S8 in comparison to what BMW has been able to do. Who is trying to catch who?

[M&M]

Hey Sticky. Í'm afraid we were wrong. I gonna have to concede defeat. The RS4 is indeed quicker than the out of production 1999 E46 M3. It does not matter that it had Corsa tyres, option suspsenion & ceramic brakes. It still did 1:15.8. And that is indeed quicker than the M3's 1:16.3 on normal tyres.

Buyalemonm you win. The RS4 is faster than the E46 M3. Here's the proof:

http://mmm.os.org.za/d/611-2/RS4vsM3.jpg

[buyalemon]

Well ...not waisting more of my time on you ..nothing seems to get in anyway!
Very strange though how BMW is sooo fast exept on their own hometrack Nürburgring!

The japanese test is great ...comparing different times with different drivers :thumb: ...wasn't it you who said their tests were the worst on the planet when the M6 finished 5 min behind??

I've seen the M3 vs RS4 race ...and I know how it ends :rs4addict

I've also seen the fifth gear test :rs4addict

Over and out!

[Leadfoot]

Say leadfoot, that 8:15 the Mcoupe did. Guess what? It was on normal tyres. SO I guess on Corsas it will be equal to the RS4.


Thanks for replying, I was hoping someone would basically say exactly what you did.:thumb:

As you would say 'a much better balanced car with way more power going to the wheels, weighing 155Kgs less, using CSL parts'. Yep, I could live with that. :jlol:

Especially when you factor in that the RS4 has 4 doors, 5 seats, big boot and can be used to travel skiing with four of your mates. Hack I just think that is amazingly thoughtful of Audi to give you some much when BMW can only achieve the same results from a 2 seater sportscar.:lovl:


Want to compare Hockenheim times?

With all that Audi are giving you over and above that of the Z4M, I could also live with it beating the RS4 on a racetrack like Hockenheim where the outer limits of tyres adhesion can be reached in the knowledge that if and when you over step the mark you won't be slammed into a tree or wall.:D

Again it's what's the quickest, what laps the fastest, blah, blah. I live in the real world with roads and weather not on a race track and you think I am a magazine nut.

You see the fruitlessness of your arguments, the only places where a BMW will win is on a closed racetrack and a tight one at that. The sacrifices you are having to accept with the BMW over the Audi shows the superiority of the Audi product. All the performance all of the time without the compromises.:dig:

[M&M]

Well surely a tight track is a test of handling? An open track is a test of grunt down the straights.

Buyalemon & LEadie. Are you guys proud if beating a 252kw E46 M3 designed in the 90's? I can't actually believe you will sit there behind your desk with a smug look all proud of beating a car that's out of production.

The new car is here, the new engine is here. RS4 is gonna' be here for a ferw years & so is the V8 M3. I think it won't be so easy to pick on the little guy with 250kw & then gloat about it anymore. Let the battles begin.

[sticky]

You see the fruitlessness of your arguments, the only places where a BMW will win is on a closed racetrack and a tight one at that. The sacrifices you are having to accept with the BMW over the Audi shows the superiority of the Audi product. All the performance all of the time without the compromises.:dig:

If I hadn't checked the name I would have figured this post came from superstardriver, it is the same level of writing and thinking.

[Leadfoot]

How come, everything isn't in CAPSLOCK.:thumb:

P.S.

Sticky are you still buying your R8?;)

[sticky]

How come, everything isn't in CAPSLOCK.:thumb:

P.S.

Sticky are you still buying your R8?;)
Shift keys are expensive in romania.

My name is still on that list, I'm not taking it off unless I don't like the car or it costs as much as a 911 turbo.

[Leadfoot]

Good reply.:applause:

P.S.

Forgot the tell you all, my brother-in-law has placed his order for the new M3. I think it's number 3 on the dealer's list. I will look forward to sampling and give you my unbiased results.;)

[Leadfoot]

My name is still on that list, I'm not taking it off unless I don't like the car or it costs as much as a 911 turbo.

Now come on tell the truth, you are waiting to see how good the M3 is and will jump ship if it's any good.:hihi:

[Leadfoot]

Well surely a tight track is a test of handling? An open track is a test of grunt down the straights.

Buyalemon & LEadie. Are you guys proud if beating a 252kw E46 M3 designed in the 90's? I can't actually believe you will sit there behind your desk with a smug look all proud of beating a car that's out of production.

The new car is here, the new engine is here. RS4 is gonna' be here for a ferw years & so is the V8 M3. I think it won't be so easy to pick on the little guy with 250kw & then gloat about it anymore. Let the battles begin.

M&M, was it not you that stated the the 252Kw M3 put more power to the wheels than the RS4. Surely that isn't picking on the little guy, I always thought the underdog was the one with the least power so to speak.

And on that front, when I or someone else states that the RS4 is as quick as the M6, you move the goal posts and say but it's in a different class. You like to quote magazine comparisons, well surely the motoring editors are wrong when they compare the M6 vs 997GT3 or maybe the Bentley Coupe vs Aston Martin vs Ferrari 612.

You see what is a fare comparison, these above which where conducted by Autocar or only yours.

But like I say, I deal in the real world with roads and weather and it's here that the RS4 betters all BMWs including the almighty CSL which is great/amazing but only in temperatures above 7degrees.

You will never get it that in this forum we are only interested in cars that are practical, everyday usable and are a total pleasure to own and drive.

[sticky]

Now come on tell the truth, you are waiting to see how good the M3 is and will jump ship if it's any good.:hihi:
I already had an M3, I want to do something different now, which is why I am looking at a 911 or the R8. That is unless the M3 blows everything away and is priced so well to make it irresistable.

Awaiting your unbiased opinion on the M3... quite some time before it hits.

[Leadfoot]

I already had an M3, I want to do something different now, which is why I am looking at a 911 or the R8. That is unless the M3 blows everything away and is priced so well to make it irresistable.

Awaiting your unbiased opinion on the M3... quite some time before it hits.

Yep, it looks like it will be the new year before you'll get to hear it and you know me from my posts I am always unbiased. My remarks on his Z4M Coupe were exactly the same as every other magazines opinion, the bloody thing is fast but the steering is too direct and front suspension too stiff for confidence to blossom.

If the M3 is any good I won't lie, :vhmmm: well OK maybe a little one.;)

[M&M]

M&M, was it not you that stated the the 252Kw M3 put more power to the wheels than the RS4.

Err, I was talking about the E92 M3.

And I never compared an M6 to an RS4. Where did I do that? They aren't competitors. How about if I compare an RS6 to the V8 M3 with cup tyres around the Ring? That's fair isn't it? An A6 platform against a 3-series platform. You get my point? You guys are like spoilt brats. Want to compare your way but when I turn it around you will make some excuse.

[Leadfoot]

So it's us that do odd comparisons, funny that, no comment on the two group tests I referred to then. Again picking what you want to comment on and disregarding the rest.:nono:

Just for the record RS4 do not come with r-compound tyres, well not in the UK anyway. So how many of these tests where conducted on normal tyres? :eye:

Personally I don't think people pick cars in so tight of restrictions as the same body type or size, if so then no one would pick an M3 over a RS4 or vice versus because one is a coupe and the other a saloon. Anyway Car & Driver compared the M5 to the RS4 but you didn't cry foul play when the RS4 won that test. :dig:

The new M3 will more than likely win against the RS4 on the track but you know as well as everyone else on this site that in the real world the RS4 will still be the king. As you would say 'it's OK to admit you were wrong'.:hihi:

[skratch]

leadfoot with all due respect I did not try to make the M3 look like it had more torque.I used MS paint and was hard making it with the tools I had.If your going to complain about what is shown past 8300 IM sorry.I made it a little off and was not my intention...What about the power where im wrong making the M3 have less power in the mid and lower range(hp).This was done in like 5 min to show the numbers together.It is not a 100% acurete dyno.I will be the first to post here REAL dynos of the M3 and then we can compare them.

I alreadt know that the M3 will dominate the rs4 everywhere in the power band and I know that leaked dyno is underrated so even if I was off a little the real M3 engine will have more than what I posted.

[sticky]

Personally I don't think people pick cars in so tight of restrictions as the same body type or size, if so then no one would pick an M3 over a RS4 or vice versus because one is a coupe and the other a saloon. Anyway Car & Driver compared the M5 to the RS4 but you didn't cry foul play when the RS4 won that test. :dig:

The new M3 will more than likely win against the RS4 on the track but you know as well as everyone else on this site that in the real world the RS4 will still be the king. As you would say 'it's OK to admit you were wrong'.:hihi:

I subscribe to car and driver and don't remember an RS4 vs. M5 comparo. Did I miss something? I get every major mag, so maybe I missed it, what month was it?

I also don't get this "real world" thing you talk about. In the real world the faster car is the one that gets the most power to the wheels and has the best power to weight ratio. In the real world everything aligns against the RS4, weight, power, balance, gearing, etc. Maybe what you meant to say was the RS4 has a slight traction advantage from a dead stop during blizzards and hurricanes. Maybe by real world you mean when 3 old ladies need to get in the car and the 4 doors now come in handy. It is getting old now though... I don't think anyone is going to try and change your thinking as you would not believe anything against an RS4 unless it was first hand and even then you would probably say you weren't wearing your glasses. You even tried to argue with a video that showed an RS4 losing to a CSL, as if George Lucas himself designed the special effects to make something like that happen due to the Anti Audi Conspiracy. Might as well save our fingers... your blind love is remarkable though, you really, really love Audi.

[Leadfoot]

I subscribe to car and driver and don't remember an RS4 vs. M5 comparo. Did I miss something? I get every major mag, so maybe I missed it, what month was it?

I also don't get this "real world" thing you talk about. In the real world the faster car is the one that gets the most power to the wheels and has the best power to weight ratio. In the real world everything aligns against the RS4, weight, power, balance, gearing, etc. Maybe what you meant to say was the RS4 has a slight traction advantage from a dead stop during blizzards and hurricanes. Maybe by real world you mean when 3 old ladies need to get in the car and the 4 doors now come in handy. It is getting old now though... I don't think anyone is going to try and change your thinking as you would not believe anything against an RS4 unless it was first hand and even then you would probably say you weren't wearing your glasses. You even tried to argue with a video that showed an RS4 losing to a CSL, as if George Lucas himself designed the special effects to make something like that happen due to the Anti Audi Conspiracy. Might as well save our fingers... your blind love is remarkable though, you really, really love Audi.

I appologise for quoting Car & Driver this was wrong. It is where the test was carried out .

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=119784

Back back to the real bones of your reply.

Here is what I mean by REAL WORLD.

1: Practicality - The fact that the RS4 can match the Z4M Coupe in performance on everything including bettering it around the ring is amazing for what is a big, nose heavy, 4 door saloon, that also ride amazingly well has every luxury one needs and more besides.

You may feel this isn't important but as the 4 door M5 still commands 80% of it's value after the first year but the M6 only 48%, I think you will be in the minority. Clearly showing that the majority look for practicality.:D

2: Everyday Usability - It combines all of this performance in a package that will get everywhere by road in all weather conditions and not be stumped by a 5 degree hill when it's covered in snow or ice.

You again might be lucky enough to own two cars to deal with differing conditions but the majority only purchase one good quality family car and maybe a small run-about if lucky.

3: Usable Performance & Confidence inspiring - It's ability to put it performance to the ground regardless of the surface and if you are use to awd cars you will be aware that as the surface become slippery the more control an awd car has compared to it's two wheel rivals.

Once again you may feel this is not addressed to you as you may feel you are an amazingly good driver, but most people never ever get to go on a track-day to learn the full abilities of their cars and their own skills. For them the confidence afford by awd more than out weighs it's disadvantages, hack most people are stumped on how to get up a slippery slope in a rwd car, never mind ones as powerful as that of the M & AMG models.

If you disagree with these basic points of benefit from awd car then I seriously think you are posting on the wrong website.:thumb:

[Clio16V]

http://www.telegraaf.nl/multimedia/archive/01948/BMW_M3_V8_side_1948651g.jpg

http://www.telegraaf.nl/multimedia/archive/01948/BMW_M3_V8_front_1948681g.jpg

http://www.telegraaf.nl/multimedia/archive/01948/BMW_M3_V8_motor_1948661g.jpg

http://www.telegraaf.nl/multimedia/archive/01948/BMW_M3_V8_int_1948671g.jpg

[Leadfoot]

Thaks god the interior is an improvement over the show car.:)

And I must say it does look better than those first pictures, but isn't as good as the last, I will hold judgement until I see one in the fresh.:)

But it's still no RS4 looker.:rs4kiss:

[tazsura]

Is it just me..or do the tyre profiles look very big/deep? :vhmmm:

I wonder if they will have the 18" and 19" inch option on the wheels like the e46? Car was much better on the 18's. :incar:

I agree with Leadie though, its no RS4 in the looks department! :rs4addict

Taz :wo:

[SuperstarDriver]

it looks ugly enough to make me through away all i have eaten!yakkkk...nasty car and those chairs?!haha...they doesn't compare to RECARO Chairs from the might beloved RS4!Shall BMW be kicked again and again and again by Audi forever...i just wait to krack it up the new RS5 and RS4 Saloon....hmmm, will be the nicest race i ever saw in my life!:D