New M3 no match for RS4/RS5.

[Iceman]

The new M3 have a ultra light 420 hp V8 engine and a Carbon fibre roof and still weigh 1655 Kg.
The RS4 have also a 420 hp V8 + Quattro and weigh 1650 Kg.
If Audi put a RS4+ or leight RS5 on the street the M3 will have no chance what so ever IMHO.

Hans.

[Thrives]

Interesting data points you have there ...

are you sure that that the new M3 will weigh that much?

[Leadfoot]

Hans,

Alas we have forgot to take away the 75kgs that BMW add for driver etc. in their figures, but even so chances are there won't be that much between them in an overall road test.:rs4kiss:

I do reckon the with what I have been told regarding the RS5 engine specs that it will take an M3 CSL to have a chance of working with it and that only with Quattro GbmH's present thinking, we all thought that the RS6 will have 520~530hp and we are now looking at 585hp, the RS5 we reckon will come with 440hp but if the RS6 is anything to go by then expect 480hp.:hahahehe:

[sticky]

Interesting data points you have there ...

are you sure that that the new M3 will weigh that much?
He doesn't know what he is talking about and the M3 isn't on the streets yet. Pretty obvious that the M3 will be lighter than the RS4 considering it gained 50 pounds over the E46. IMHO his honest opinion is worthless.

[sticky]

Hans,

Alas we have forgot to take away the 75kgs that BMW add for driver etc. in their figures, but even so chances are there won't be that much between them in an overall road test.:rs4kiss:

I do reckon the with what I have been told regarding the RS5 engine specs that it will take an M3 CSL to have a chance of working with it and that only with Quattro GbmH's present thinking, we all thought that the RS6 will have 520~530hp and we are now looking at 585hp, the RS5 we reckon will come with 440hp but if the RS6 is anything to go by then expect 480hp.:hahahehe:
Maybe we should deal in fact not in fiction? A lot of people heard the R8 would have more hp. A lot of people heard there would be a DSG in it. A lot of people heard the S5 would have more hp. A lot of people heard this and that. How can you go by the RS6 when the RS6 isn't even confirmed?

[Iceman]

Interesting data points you have there ...

are you sure that that the new M3 will weigh that much?

It states the EU weight of the vehicle is 1650 kg.
But on the footnote you will notice the following definition of EU weight:
1. 90% of fuel tank
2. 68kg passenger
3. 7 kg load.

The petrol tank is ±63 litre, so 90% is 56.7 litre
Petrol weighs 0.737kg/litre @ 16 degrees C is 41.8kg
If you remove the weight of the Petrol, Passenger and Cargo 1650-(42+68+7)= 1533 kg
Curb weight is 1533+42 is 1575kg > depending on the fuel amount of 90%.

Hans.

[Leadfoot]

Maybe we should deal in fact not in fiction? A lot of people heard the R8 would have more hp. A lot of people heard there would be a DSG in it. A lot of people heard the S5 would have more hp. A lot of people heard this and that. How can you go by the RS6 when the RS6 isn't even confirmed?


Was the same thing not said by some of you BMW guys on this very forum about the M3 getting 440~450hp based on past experience with their over the magic 100hp/L from their old M3 engine but what did it end up with.:hihi:

I agree about the S5, I for one thought is would have had more than a 10hp gain, past experience showed the S4v8 getting close to the RS4 Mk1 in power only 30hp down so we predicted the same might happen this time round which would have meant the S5 getting something like 380hp but this wasn't the case. I think the reason being that we were guessing on the normal 1~2years of the previous versions, instead the S5 came out right away.

As for the RS6's power, I trust the person who gave me the figures and unless he is being feed BS which I very much doubt then the figures are correct and like-wise the lap time of the ring :hihi: which will give me a great laugh watching you guys try and work out an argument as to why it's so much quicker than the M5.

[sticky]

Was the same thing not said by some of you BMW guys on this very forum about the M3 getting 440~450hp based on past experience with their over the magic 100hp/L from their old M3 engine but what did it end up with.:hihi:

I agree about the S5, I for one thought is would have had more than a 10hp gain, past experience showed the S4v8 getting close to the RS4 Mk1 in power only 30hp down so we predicted the same might happen this time round which would have meant the S5 getting something like 380hp but this wasn't the case. I think the reason being that we were guessing on the normal 1~2years of the previous versions, instead the S5 came out right away.

As for the RS6's power, I trust the person who gave me the figures and unless he is being feed BS which I very much doubt then the figures are correct and like-wise the lap time of the ring :hihi: which will give me a great laugh watching you guys try and work out an argument as to why it's so much quicker than the M5.
I don't speak for others but how many hp per liter is 420 from a 4.0 liter? Puts it right in that zone doesn't it? Once we see dynos I bet you will find it is very close to 440 hp.

If the RS6 has a twin turbo v10 the power levels will be nothing but impressive. What if it doesn't have two turbos? Let's not jinx it.

[Leadfoot]

I don't speak for others but how many hp per liter is 420 from a 4.0 liter? Puts it right in that zone doesn't it? Once we see dynos I bet you will find it is very close to 440 hp.

If the RS6 has a twin turbo v10 the power levels will be nothing but impressive. What if it doesn't have two turbos? Let's not jinx it.

I was pure working out what the increase would be from the old 3.2L M3 with 343hp to the new 4.0L M3 with 420hp, lots here said it would be putting out a lot more especially with lot the F1 technology that is meant to be in it. Don't get me wrong, the new M3 engine is a very impressive piece of kit, but I wouldn't said it's that much if any better than the RS4 engine.

As for the RS6, yes we will see.:hahahehe:

[Leadfoot]

It states the EU weight of the vehicle is 1650 kg.
But on the footnote you will notice the following definition of EU weight:
1. 90% of fuel tank
2. 68kg passenger
3. 7 kg load.

The petrol tank is ±63 litre, so 90% is 56.7 litre
Petrol weighs 0.737kg/litre @ 16 degrees C is 41.8kg
If you remove the weight of the Petrol, Passenger and Cargo 1650-(42+68+7)= 1533 kg
Curb weight is 1533+42 is 1575kg > depending on the fuel amount of 90%.

Hans.

Hans,

I was under the impression that Audi didn't include the above things in their figure was this wrong of me?

[Lateknight]

Oh dear. Seems there is a bit more confusion about weights again.

BMW M3 unladen weight is 1580kg (source WCF)

BMW M3 EU weight is 1655kg (EU weight - adds 75kg - dont ask, it just does)

Audi RS4 unladen weight is 1650kg (source : http://www.audi.de/audi/de/de2/neuwagen/a4/rs4/technische_daten.html) Leergewicht means unladen.

Therefore EU weight for RS4 is 1725kg.

Both cars in basic form without additional optional extras.

BMW is lighter by 70kg -or about 1 person- (unless your a bloater)

Consider BMWs use of exotic materials and the Audi has 4WD and is a 4 door saloon (not a 2door saloon/coupe), thats still not a lot of weight difference.

I expect any forthcoming RS5 to be of similar (maybe a little less) weight than the S5. So it will still be heavier than the M3 by about 30/40kg.

[Leadfoot]

Lateknight,

I reckon Audi are through Quattro GmbH getting more and more serious about their performance cars being more than just hi-speed Autobahn machines. They have seen how M division and AMG have improved the public opinion of the rest of the range, increasing the standard models sales because of the media coverage the top models are receiving.

Audi wants and needs this to achieve the sales target it has set itself for 2015, the percentage of M3 sold in ratio to the rest of the 3 series coupe range is very high, much higher than all other brands and this is solely down to media coverage though good reviews. Audi has started with the RS4 Mk2 to take this seriously and all the hi-performance models seems to have two underlining goals, weight and weight balance. The next RS5 will improve on both counts over the S5, quite possible improving the weight by as much as 60Kgs and weight balance by another 1~2 percent.

The M3 has had it too easy for far to long but no longer, the new improved Audi RS range has arrived with a vengeance.

[chiphead]

The Rs5 will be expensive. I'm betting at least $10k USD over the M3. At this point, Audi is pricing itself out of contention. Even with 500+hp what's the point? A Carrera S will run circles around it.

[Iceman]

The most inportend thing to do for Audi is loose weight for the RS5, at leased 200 Kg on the S5's weight.
Futher introduce Valve-lift and give it 450 hp.

Hans.

[Leadfoot]

Hans,

You are ever the optimist.:jlol: The only way Audi could make the RS5 lose 200kgs would be to leave out the engine.:lovl:

For starters BMW as used carbon fibre for it's roof in the M3 and it's only dropped 20kgs off the 335i's weight. Now when you consider that the 335i is using a iron block and two turbos with the piping it makes you wondered where all the weight saving went in to the M3, heck the engine must already weigh less than 20kgs to start with.

So I ask you how in the heck will Audi lose 200kgs?

There is no doubt that manual seats are a sure thing just like the RS4, but there is already quite a lot of alloy already in the front of the A5 to help with the weight balance, adding more alloy to the rear will only change the balance for the worse. I doubt Audi will adopt the Carbon Fibre roof that BMW are using and losing sound proofing will only alienate a lot of customers that choice it because they don't want to go down the noisy route of 997 etc. I think at best 50~60kgs is a possibility but no more than that.

As for the power increase there is still a possibility that Audi might go down the forced induction route for the RS5 or maybe the v10. As yet nothing is set in stone with this car, the launch time window is what will decide which engine will be chosen, if the date is 2008 then chances are it will be the treaked RS4 engine but if it's 2009/10 then anything is a possibility. Either way I agree that 450hp is more than likely the minimum power we will see from this car.

[PeterJohn]

The M3 will be a fast car. And I'm sure BMW will try to make it faster than the RS4, and will succeed. There's more involved then weight/power ratio. Then Audi will respond with an even faster car. So on, so forth... it's what competition is about.

Painting BMWs as loosers doesn't help Audis image. It's not honorable to beat a weaker opponent. If you respect BMW for making some of the best sports cars, and then make a better one, then you can say you've achieved something.

The advantage that BMW has had for a long time is that even the entry level models are designed as sportscars. My heavy, surprizingly economical cruiser can cut corners like a housefly. All BMW has to do the make an ///M is drop in a big engine. Audi neglected this for a long time. The current doctrine is that you can be all you can be if you work hard enough, but the reality is that you need good genes to reach the top. If one leg is shorten than the other, you might be able to train yourself to run above avarage, but you will never in your life beat the world record. With the engine hanging over the front, Audi is not genetically blessed.

Audi is changing its ways, and building 'sports' into the chassis, instead of retrofitting it. However, the RS4 is old school Audi. They've done a great job with it. It is as sharp as the e46 M3, which is nearly fysically impossible, considering there's a V8 where the radiator should be, and a radiator where the number plate should be. Audi has a crack engineering department, no doubt. But the e46 was ready for the museum when the RS4 came out, so it's not an honorable victory. The new BMW will take the next evolutionairy step(s), and be faster. Period.
Maybe not the allrounder, if the marketeers demand another videogamesque-gadget mobile like the M5, but faster nontheless.

The RS5 is a different animal. It is build like a BMW. :hahahehe: A genetic sportscar. But it is bigger than the e92. It's almost the size of a 6series, yet it will get 3series engines. Good for allrounder-ness, but not an advantage is terms of laptimes. BMW is no stranger to saving weight, and the e92 is a better platform to do that than the S5, simply b/c it is a smaller car. So I doubt that the RS5 will dramatically kick the bimmers ass, unless they fit it with an engine from the Quattro GmbH A6 program.

[Iceman]

The 200 Kg is ment sarcastic mate.
I know it's not possible to loose 200 Kg on the weight of the S5.
Futher the V10 will not fit in the engine bay of the A5 body IMHO.
I have take a closer look and there is not much room in front of the V8 engine.
I doubt that they can get the V10 in.
It will be a RS4 V8 engine for the RS5 IMHO with 420-450 hp and i doubt they will go the Bi-turbo way for the RS5.

Hans.

[Leadfoot]

The RS5 is a different animal. It is build like a BMW. :hahahehe: A genetic sportscar. But it is bigger than the e92. It's almost the size of a 6series, yet it will get 3series engines. Good for allrounder-ness, but not an advantage is terms of laptimes. BMW is no stranger to saving weight, and the e92 is a better platform to do that than the S5, simply b/c it is a smaller car. So I doubt that the RS5 will dramatically kick the bimmers ass, unless they fit it with an engine from the Quattro GmbH A6 program.

http://www.audi.de/audi/de/de2/neuwa...che_daten.html (http://www.audi.de/audi/de/de2/neuwagen/a5/s5/technische_daten.html)
http://www.audi.de/audi/de/de2/neuwa...messungen.html (http://www.audi.de/audi/de/de2/neuwagen/a5/s5/abmessungen.html)

http://www.connectxt.co.uk/m3_coupe_catalogue.pdf

These links to both cars prove that apart from width, the two cars are all but identical in size, in fact the 3 series has the slightly bigger wheelbase. But overall the A5 has a small 60mm greater frontal overhang, not something that will really hurt the handling on entry to the corner and with the benefit of quattro will in fact allowing better grip while in the corner and better traction exiting out of the corner and with it's potential power increase over the M3 will again help it down the straight in which it will be accelerating sooner because of the advantage of quattro.

I personally don't think the M3 or 3 series coupe in general is a bad in fact it's more than likely the best rwd coupe of it's size, but like all here on this site who own or have owned a quattro car will agree that Audi make an even better one. You likely said what Audi achieved with it's nose heavy design that was the RS4 is bordering on unearthly so what can they not achieve when these restrictions are no longer in the way.

The mind boggles.:trash:

[Leadfoot]

The 200 Kg is ment sarcastic mate.
I know it's not possible to loose 200 Kg on the weight of the S5.
Futher the V10 will not fit in the engine bay of the A5 body IMHO.
I have take a closer look and there is not much room in front of the V8 engine.
I doubt that they can get the V10 in.
It will be a RS4 V8 engine for the RS5 IMHO with 420-450 hp and i doubt they will go the Bi-turbo way for the RS5.

Hans.

I must admit I haven't looked that close to the measurements of the A5's engine bay, if you reckon it doesn't fit then it doesn't fit. As for going turbo, you and me both have discussed that Audi choosing a smaller 3.2/3.6 v6TT might just be the way to go for the RS5/4. More space though I doubt any less weight but with the added advantage of the extra torque and tuning ability offered from forced induction. I don't expect Audi to choose this route for the RS5 but it's a nice thought all the same. As for the power 420~450hp, if the car isn't released for another two years then chances are that it will have adopted VL by then so an extra 30hp is a given and if it's true that this increases torque over a greater range then this will allow Audi to turn the wick up more on the power without losing to much torque in the process.

[PeterJohn]

I figured the A5 was much bigger. I stand corrected. If it's only wider, then that might actually give it an edge. Especially if the RS5 adds fender blisters.

[QuattroFun]

Better, worse and no match? Based on official and comparable numbers, there is every reason to believe that the still to be released M3 will be somewhat faster than the RS4 beyond 0-60km/h - in 0-200 km/h maybe by 1.5-2s taking the new M3 to dip below 15s. It will most probably also be quite much faster on a tight (i.e. poorly flowing) track like HH ceteris paribus. That is great. But why do somebody then buy a E 63 AMG instead of a M5, a Conti GT instead of a CLS 63 AMG, a R8 instead of a 911 GT3, a RS4 instead of a Mitsu EVO,...

[Leadfoot]

Better, worse and no match? Based on official and comparable numbers, there is every reason to believe that the still to be released M3 will be somewhat faster than the RS4 beyond 0-60km/h - in 0-200 km/h maybe by 1.5-2s taking the new M3 to dip below 15s. It will most probably also be quite much faster on a tight (i.e. poorly flowing) track like HH ceteris paribus.

I agree with you that the M3 will more than likely dip below 15 seconds for the 0-200km/h mark but not to restart an old argument, to say that is 1.5-2s quicker than a RS4 is not true, quite a few tests have got the RS4 below 16 seconds with the best I know of being 15.6s. When all things are considered I reckon when every one of these tests are averaged out between the two cars the difference will be less than 1 second, add in the RS4's ability to post very close to it's best times even in slippery conditions and overall the RS4 is the better performer. As for HH track, the M3 will walk off into the distance. There is nothing the RS4 will be able to do, it basic design flaw only allows it to perform at it's best in free flowing track which are easier to control the weight transference like the ring.

But with the basic design of the A5 it will be a totally different outcome, in basic fwd form the A5 has a 55/45% weight balance, now as the engine doesn't move forward in the quattro version this has to improve the weight balance regardless of how little, reason being the extra weight from the rear diff and the extra strengthening need what will all lead to a better balanced, more predictable and the extra secure car afforded by the quattro system. On top of this add in the extra width of the A5's wheel track front and rear and you have a car more square than the 3 series all of which help directional change.

When every thing is considered between what we know about the RS4, the info known about the M3 and what we expect from the S5/RS5 I believe the gap between the RS4 and M3 will be a lot closer than the gap between the M3 and the RS5. Only time will tell who is right.


But why do somebody then buy a E 63 AMG instead of a M5, a Conti GT instead of a CLS 63 AMG, a R8 instead of a 911 GT3, a RS4 instead of a Mitsu EVO,...

Because some people just want to be different and that is the way it should be.

[QuattroFun]

People want to be different or really are different when choosing their cars - hence better is different? Now, we are all performance car enthusiasts and numbers are not unimportant: they give us a scale and measure of cross-sectional ability and progress over time.

Sure, a 0-200 time of 20s is different than 15s and a Ring time of 8.30 is different from 8.00: we can all feel these gaps from the driver's seat - but 15.3s vs. 14.8s (e.g., new AMS on C63 AMG T vs. M5 Touring) or 8.13 vs. 8.09???

All said, the RS4 is no track car, new new RS5 (whilst surely an improvement) will be no track car - and the new M3 will not be no track car either. You can take them to the track, yes, and some owners will do it more than others and some cars are better over there than others. But, most owners will never track theirs beyond importer days or run stop-light 0-200 GPs all time.

[Leadfoot]

People want to be different or really are different when choosing their cars - hence better is different? Now, we are all performance car enthusiasts and numbers are not unimportant: they give us a scale and measure of cross-sectional ability and progress over time.

Sure, a 0-200 time of 20s is different than 15s and a Ring time of 8.30 is different from 8.00: we can all feel these gaps from the driver's seat - but 15.3s vs. 14.8s (e.g., new AMS on C63 AMG T vs. M5 Touring) or 8.13 vs. 8.09???

All said, the RS4 is no track car, new new RS5 (whilst surely an improvement) will be no track car - and the new M3 will not be no track car either. You can take them to the track, yes, and some owners will do it more than others and some cars are better over there than others. But, most owners will never track theirs beyond importer days or run stop-light 0-200 GPs all time.

You are either reading my mind and some of my post because this has been what I have preaching from the moment I joined. You are so right none of these cars are track cars in the true sense of the word, sure you can take them on the track but always remember to keep a good eye on the mirror for that 1400cc Caterham that has over-took you twice already.:hihi:

Their main use is on the road, that why their results on the ring are better than on other true race tracks. So if we have established that none of these cars are track cars then which is the better on the road, it's here were I feel the advantage some believe the M3 had on the track becomes a lot more shaky. It easier to dismiss a car's shortcoming when most trackdays are run in the dry and their have the added comfort of run-off zones but we all know neither of these things are readily available on the road, this is the place that Quattro starts to make a lot more sense.:brag:

[MPT]

People want to be different or really are different when choosing their cars - hence better is different? Now, we are all performance car enthusiasts and numbers are not unimportant: they give us a scale and measure of cross-sectional ability and progress over time.
As Leadfoot said, some people just want to be different. They don't choose what you as per se think is a logical choise of car. a R8 has got some things a 911 GT3 doesn't have, and the other way around. So it's just silly to say, that the only logical choise of car is "the one with the best performance", as you say (even this can be interpretated when comparing E92 M3 with B7 RS4, hence RS4 has got Quattro, and M3 rwd, and each system serve best in different situations).[/quote]



All said, the RS4 is no track car, new new RS5 (whilst surely an improvement) will be no track car - and the new M3 will not be no track car either. You can take them to the track, yes, and some owners will do it more than others and some cars are better over there than others. But, most owners will never track theirs beyond importer days or run stop-light 0-200 GPs all time.
And this is EXACTLY why some (read: a lot of) people choose Quattro. In real life situations 400+bhp sent only to the rear, is in my eyes stupidity, in cars like M3, M5 etc., especially when you want to drive fast.

Kind regards.

[SuperstarDriver]

how stupid is someone not to see that bmw posted official the specifications about new M3?!!!Look...Iceman is right, i take this specifications from autobild.de:
Karosserie
Länge/Breite/Höhe (leer) 4615/1817/1418 mm
Radstand 2761 mm
Spurweite vorne/hinten 1538/1539 mm
Wendekreis 11,7 m
Tankinhalt ca. 63 l
Leergewicht nach EU1 1655 kg
Zuladung nach DIN 500 kg
Zul. Gesamtgewicht nach DIN 2080 kg
Kofferrauminhalt nach DIN 400 l
Motor
Bauart/Anz. Zylinder/Ventile Zylinder/Ventile V/8/4
Hubraum 3999 cm³
Bohrung/Hub 92,0/75,2 mm
Verdichtung 12,0 : 1
Kraftstoff 98 (95) ROZ
Leistung 309 kW/420 PS
bei Drehzahl 8300/min
Drehmoment 400 Nm
bei Drehzahl 3900/min
Elektrik
Batterie/Einbauort 70 Ah/Gepäckraum
Generator 180 A/2520 W
Fahrwerk
Vorderradaufhängung Aluminium-Zwei-Gelenk-Federbeinachse mit Zugstrebe; kleiner positiver Lenkrollradius, Querkraftausgleich; Bremsnickreduzierung
Hinterradaufhängung Fünf-Lenker-Achse mit Anfahr- und Bremsnickausgleich
Bremsen vorn Einkolben-Faustsattel-Compound-Scheibenbremsen
Durchmesser 360 x 30 mm, belüftet und gelocht
Bremsen hinten Einkolben-Faustsattel- Compound-Scheibenbremsen
Durchmesser 350 x 24 mm, belüftet und gelocht
Fahrstabilitätssysteme ABS, ASC, CBC, DSC; variable M Differenzialsperre
Lenkung Zahnstangenlenkung mit hydraulischer Unterstützung und Servotronic
Getriebeart SG 6
Reifen v/h 245/40 ZR18/265/40 ZR18
Felgen v/h 8,5J x 18 EH2+ IS 29 Aluguß /9,5J x 18 EH2+ IS 23 Aluguß
Fahrleistungen
Leistungsgewicht nach DIN 5,1 kg/kW
Literleistung 77,3 kW/l
Beschleunigung 0–100 km/h 4,8 s
Höchstgeschwindigkeit 250 km/h
Verbrauch im EU-Zyklus
städtisch 17,9 l/100 km
außerstädtisch 9,2 l/100 km
insgesamt 12,4 l/100 km
CO2 295 g/km
Sonstiges
Emissionseinstufung EU4


Yes indeed...BMW M3 will not beat RS4 for sure and RS5 will definetively crap M3 on every racetrack...i just love to see how audi is twisting things that BMW can't handle:D

[Leadfoot]

If Hans is correct the BMW is in fact 5kgs heavier than the RS4 it begs the question how can the M3 weigh so much all things considered?

M3 --- vs --- RS4
doors 2 vs doors 4 = extra weight
rwd vs awd = extra weight
carbon roof vs steel roof = extra weight

I don't know about you but I am lost for words, this is not the BMW of old.

[SuperstarDriver]

of course man, don't you realize yet that BMW SUCKS?!I POSTED THE OFFICIAL DETAILS OF M3 AND AS YOU SEE ALL BMW IS HEAVIER WITH 5KG THAN RS4!!!SWEET...:d

[guessWHO]

RS4 is faster than the new M3, but the new M3 looks fabolous ...

[SuperstarDriver]

yes indeed, but of course is not better lookin than RS4...M3 is super ugly car:)

[PeterJohn]

So how old are you again, SuperstarDriver? :trash:

Empty weight is 1580kg. Ten more than the previous M3, without electrical seats. Not too bad. If the new one has electrical seats as standard, it will actually be a weight reduction.

"EU unladen" weight adds 75kg as it predicts the car "laden" with a passenger (68kg) and bagage (7kg). Leave it to the unelected EU politicians to waste our money making things needlessly complicated. And then call it "unladen", while it is in fact the very difinition of "laden weight". I wonder if they commisioned a survey for a couple of million euros to find out the naked weight of the average driver. Probably.

Anyway, the hole last part of the discussion is pointless, as the M3 carries 70kg less weight that the RS4. A significant number. That is more than the weight difference between a regular Carrera, and what Porsche calls its lightweight model. The RS4 will probably still be able to accelerate faster from a sharp coner, but overall, its at a disadvantage.

BMW is currently ahead of the game. And Audi will have to make an effort to catch up with them. And then it'll be BMW turn again. That's why competition breeds excellence. This fanboy behaviour of some car enthusiasts isn't very charming. Can't you be an Audi fan without hating everything else?

[SuperstarDriver]

noop...should i post you again the official numbers of the new M3?It has 1655Kg more than RS4...look at autobild.de and see for yourself!

[markwm]

noop...should i post you again the official numbers of the new M3?It has 1655Kg more than RS4...look at autobild.de and see for yourself!

Sorry you are wrong. The M3 is lighter by the weight of a person or so....!

However, all this talk of Audi needing to catch up is total fanboy nonesense!! They must be over the moon that with a 2 year headstart BMW could only match the figures of the RS4. The M3 isn't arriving and blowing away the RS4 with it's figures, same HP, lighter, less torgue. RS4 is the benchmark the M3 needs to meet and BMW have met it, not exactly leap frogged it. I think we all knew the RS4 was always going to be heavier.

Let me point you to this video from Top Gear. M3 vs B6 S4, they have the same HP but the M3 is lighter. In a straight line the M3 wins by a cars length. However, when it comes to putting the cars round the track, the S4 is over a second faster. So why would Audi by worried?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Eu5tOSu25C4

Listening to some BMW guys talk you'd think the new M3 is going to wipe the RS4 off the face of the earth. :harass:

[SuperstarDriver]

for me man i understand your statement and respect it but what you didn't know about RS4 is that it will be even faster in the straight line than the new M3...we do not count the corners cause RS4 will kick his butt very very hard:D

[PeterJohn]

noop...should i post you again the official numbers of the new M3?It has 1655Kg more than RS4...look at autobild.de and see for yourself!

1655kg more, damn that's over 3tons.

I went to autobild.de, and they show in the specs that they add 75kg "dachlast". Autobild is European, so they use the EU measurement. They didn't list the "Nutzlast". They don't seem to do that for any car.

Auto Motor Und Sport 06/2006: RS4 weighed in at 1728kg (source (http://www.einszweidrei.de/audi/audirs4limst2006-1.htm)) (again, probably the EU weight with 75kg) On another occasion they even claim 1788kg, though I suspect that has to do with the options.
They also list the new M3 as 1655kg, again with the 75kg.

Car&Driver: BMW e92 M3 DIN weight (non EU) is "just under" 3500lbs, or 1588kg (source (http://www.caranddriver.com/carnews/12774/2008-bmw-m3-coupe-official-photos-info.html)). Their tested weight for the RS4 is 3980lbs, or 1805kg (source (http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/11333/2007-audi-rs-4-quattro-specs-page4.html)). The USA version has heated seats, sunroof,... and such, which explains the higher weight. This is Curb weight without the 75kg.

I'm sure there will be many comparisons between the RS4 and the new M3. It's easy to put a spin on the numbers now, but it won't save the RS4 when it meets the M3 in the real world. It had a good run I guess. Not the legend that the first RS4 was. But an excellent engine, and excellent dynamics. Time for the RS6 to take over the torch. Maybe even an RS5.

[PeterJohn]

Sorry you are wrong. The M3 is lighter by the weight of a person or so....!

However, all this talk of Audi needing to catch up is total fanboy nonesense!! They must be over the moon that with a 2 year headstart BMW could only match the figures of the RS4. The M3 isn't arriving and blowing away the RS4 with it's figures, same HP, lighter, less torgue. RS4 is the benchmark the M3 needs to meet and BMW have met it, not exactly leap frogged it. I think we all knew the RS4 was always going to be heavier.

Let me point you to this video from Top Gear. M3 vs B6 S4, they have the same HP but the M3 is lighter. In a straight line the M3 wins by a cars length. However, when it comes to putting the cars round the track, the S4 is over a second faster. So why would Audi by worried?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Eu5tOSu25C4

Listening to some BMW guys talk you'd think the new M3 is going to wipe the RS4 off the face of the earth. :harass:

I suppose I'm the BMW fanboy. :)

I did acknowledge in my post that the RS4 will still have an edge in the twisties. If you got the impression that in my argument that the M3 will destroy the RS4, your impression is wrong. I'm responding to the title of this thread, which reads "The M3 no match for the RS4". I respectfully disagree with this notion.

The title includes the RS5, and I think the Audi will actually have an egde on the M3, if they put the RS4 motor in this chassis. "No match" is a strong way to put it, but the A5 chassis has serveral advantages over the e92 chassis.

[markwm]

I wasn't aiming my post at you Peter, sorry if it came across that way.

I've heard numerous people already saying 'The RS4 will need a boost to keep up'..'the RS4 will be forgotten'....'will there be an RS4+' etc etc....just nonesense. Just like talk of the RS5 being nonesense given no one knows anything about it.

The figures are extremely close. I would imagine the M3 would be faster in a straight line and be more fun to drive round the track. Same case as always when it comes to 4WD Audi's S & RS cars and BMW's M cars. Different strokes for different folks.

I'd happily drive either, but to me the RS4 is just a far better looking car and that's why I'd choose it.

Here's some side by side comparisons if anyone is interested, interesting pics:

http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133638-1.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133639-2.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133642-3.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133643-4.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133644-5.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133645-6.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133646-7.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133649-8.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133650-9.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133651-10.jpg
http://www.tyresmoke.net/attachments/1133652-11.jpg

[SuperstarDriver]

as i said before better car than the RS4 you will not get, even with the new M3 the supremacy in performance figures and sensations, design and agressiveness he will not be beaten!RS4 IS WORLD CAR PERFORMANCE OF THE YEAR 2007 so BMW f...k off:) And of course the new RS5 Coupe and RS6 Saloon will destroy FOREVER the M division from BMW!I definitively believe that and that's what it gonna happen!

[Goldorak]

My bad, didn't realize the ignore feature was already available. Good riddance.

[Finnus]

the new RS5 Coupe and RS6 Saloon will destroy FOREVER the M division from BMW!I definitively believe that and that's what it gonna happen!

There is no way that is going to happen (and I'm as big an Audi fan as anyone), but why would you even want that? Competition is good!

Finnus

[Leadfoot]

There is no way that is going to happen (and I'm as big an Audi fan as anyone), but why would you even want that? Competition is good!

Finnus

I think destroy is to hard of a word. The RS6 will comfortable beat the M5 if it does have to kind of power I and others have talk about, and we already know that the S6 is capable of matching the M5 in the tight circuit with only 435hp so give the RS6 an open circuit with the kind of straights that can really stretch it's legs and I believe the M5 will not stand a chance.

As for the RS5, until we know about the S5 and it's merits we will know very little about it apart from the fact that it will comfortable out-perform the RS4 in power/acceleration given that it will be at least 1~2 years down the line.

[SuperstarDriver]

i only want to say that BMW will never beat Audi in performance, never, that's all my statement for now!

[chiphead]

I saw the S5 at the NY Auto show and have to say pictures do not do it justice. I was previously leaning towards the M3, but the S5 has an unmistakable muscle car presence to it. The M3 while not on actual display, the 335ci looked more svelte and agile, but less gravitas. I think the younger generation (<25) will go for M3, while older people looking for a realistic daily driver will go for the S5. Audi is approaching CLK/SL territory here.

[OfftheHeZie]

Audi is approaching CLK/SL territory here. That would make me really happy. :thumb:

~Mason

[sticky]

I don't see how they are anywhere near SL territory. There is nothing in common here with the SL.

[Leadfoot]

I agree with the statement that the Audi S5 has moved moved to the CLK territory but is that so hard to understand, Audi don't see the S5 as a rival for the M3, the power it has been given proves as much so that is why they will built the RS5.

[chiphead]

I don't see how they are anywhere near SL territory. There is nothing in common here with the SL.


Nothing in its price range from BMW or MB has the street presence of the Audi coupe. The TT sitting next to it looked like a toy. This is all subjective of course.