View Full Version : EVO test TTRS vs Cayman R vs 1M vs 370Z
Joker
May 22nd, 2011, 22:42
Both Cayman and 1M got 5stars, 370z got 4.5stars and the TT got only 4stars (what a surprise). Then there was the lap of the Bedford Autodrome's West circuit. Again Cayman came out on top with a time of 1.25.5 closely followed by the 1M with a very decent 1.25.9 and little further back was the 370Z at 1.27.1 and finally the TTRS brought up the rear with 1.27.3.
Which bags the question how come everyone else is finding the TTRS to be almost as quick as the Cayman R and the 1M to be a far bit slower but somehow EVO bucks the trend, do they know something about the 1M that no one else does or is it more likely that their results are rigged, afterall they have been in BMW's back pocket for several years now, what with their exclusive testing of all future Ms months before launch.
I take this result with my usual bit of distrust. :boring:
Benman
May 23rd, 2011, 01:18
Sadly, I do not believe there currently exists ANY magazine that gives "value free" reporting...
Joker
May 23rd, 2011, 08:10
Sadly, I do not believe there currently exists ANY magazine that gives "value free" reporting...
I remember when EVO first started, it was the most unbiased car mag I had ever read, the TTRS originally posted a lap of 1:26.3 but here it's a full second slower. Oh how things change when palms are greased. ;)
You expect to read a biased review when the magazine's name is AudiWorld or BMW car, etc but these rags are meant to have no ties should have some consistency which isn't the case here.
Benman
May 23rd, 2011, 18:01
I remember that too, hence why I said "currently". Sad really. I think for the most part, the Auto magazine industry has become like the WWF/WWE, very entertaining for some, but you can't count on it being "real".
Let`s be honest to ourselves, I was really looking forward to RS3, but ended up ordering a 1M. If the RS3 had some magic from the RS4 B8 (one of the best cars I have owned), I would go for RS3, but it doesn`t. Somehow it looks like this RS3 is just another marketing car, not a real enthsiasts car, more like S3+.
Regarding EVO, actualy they drove the preproduction RS6 and RS3 aswell. I still think they are unbiased and the best mag in the world there is for performance car enthusiasts.
rks838
May 26th, 2011, 13:25
Conspiracy shmiracy. Evidence for these great sins? Perhaps the driver knew how to drive a few cars better than others, maybe the track wasn't suited to the TTRS. What if one if one of the EVO drivers has a special touch with the 1M, or is a fool with the TTRS? You could assume that Audi is paying the general industry, with this "trend" of TTRS triumphs.
In BMWs back pocket? What if BMW noticed that EVO typically reviews their cars well and said "hey, wouldn't it be smart if we gave our first drives to the magazine that reviews us best? So the market's first impression of our new car will likely be positive?" That's logical, moreso than the "it's rigged" argument.
And btw other magazines also got drives with preproduction M`s, aswell as M enthusiasts.
Joker
May 26th, 2011, 14:36
Let`s be honest to ourselves, I was really looking forward to RS3, but ended up ordering a 1M. If the RS3 had some magic from the RS4 B8 (one of the best cars I have owned), I would go for RS3, but it doesn`t. Somehow it looks like this RS3 is just another marketing car, not a real enthsiasts car, more like S3+.
Regarding EVO, actualy they drove the preproduction RS6 and RS3 aswell. I still think they are unbiased and the best mag in the world there is for performance car enthusiasts.
Have you driven the RS3 or the 1M to be able to make that opinion or are you just listening to what the like of EVO have said?
Yes they did drive the RS3 in pre-production form ................ along with countless other journalists that included all of the UK press pack, in the case of the M5 and 1M they had exclusive rights as first UK magazine, entirely different and most telling in my opinion.
Other magazine have rated the RS3 a superior car overall and all have found the TTRS to be quicker, is the majority wrong and EVO right or is it a case that one magazine have a certain preference to the way BMW do things. Anyway all three cars are very good, the 1M will be most enjoyable to own in it's own right though I know as do the majority of sane people that on any given road it will continue to play second best to either an RS3 or TTRS.
Conspiracy shmiracy. Evidence for these great sins? Perhaps the driver knew how to drive a few cars better than others, maybe the track wasn't suited to the TTRS. What if one if one of the EVO drivers has a special touch with the 1M, or is a fool with the TTRS? You could assume that Audi is paying the general industry, with this "trend" of TTRS triumphs.
If the TTRS vs 1M was like the RS5 vs M3 where either swap places regards to lap times from course to course then I could see this as an occasion where the 1M was quicker but look at the evidence, on every other track where both were tested together the TTRS trumped the 1M yet here it's a full second and a bit slower, this is no small difference and not the mention the other occasion where a TTRS was a full second quicker than this one. Based on the evidence where all other occasions the TTRS was quicker it should have also been quicker than the 1M here too, such a thing would have been in line with other test results where it would post a time slightly slower than the Cayman R. :brag:
In BMWs back pocket? What if BMW noticed that EVO typically reviews their cars well and said "hey, wouldn't it be smart if we gave our first drives to the magazine that reviews us best? So the market's first impression of our new car will likely be positive?" That's logical, moreso than the "it's rigged" argument.
What you are suggesting is basically the same as I am, EVO are showing a preference towards the BMW, in anyone's language that would mean bias towards and in turn BMW giving them preferential treatment by means of exclusivity to new M cars is a carrot that also suggests that EVO are in their back pocket.
P.S.
I haven't a problem with them preferring a 1M over the TTRS, they prefer the behaviour of a rwd but when their results go against the trend to show a car with inferior lap times as quicker then I call it as I see it and on this occasion EVO are bias in the first degree.
A lap time isn`t the only reference to judge a car. Evo is about thrill of driving, and you get more of that in an 1M. I`m actualy a Audi fan, I`ve had E90 M3 and 2x RS4 B8, and RS was better than the M. Allthough the press told us that teh M is the one to have.
I must admit that I haven`t driven RS3, nor 1M, I don`t think there are too many people who have, have you:)?
Joker
May 26th, 2011, 15:04
Which was why I said I haven't a problem with EVO preferring the driving experience of the 1M over the TTRS, such things are very personal. But their lap times here are very suspect in my opinion.
No I haven't driven the 1M or RS3 but I have had plenty of seat time in the TTRS and owned an M3 so I understand the differences in driving experience between these two brands. I know without a shadow of a doubt the experience in either the M3 or 1M will be the more intense but I won't be as quick in either of them compared to the TTRS or most likely the RS3. Now if you want/crave that wild ride experience that driving an M car quickly give you then by all means go for that choice but for me I much prefer being quick and not feeling that at any moment I might over step the mark. Each to their own. :cheers:
I must admit I`m after knife edge experience, and know that RS3 will be much more relaxed. As you say each to their own. If I would buy a car for my wife, it would be an RS3, but she has allready a A4 Avant 3.0TDI Q S line.
Joker
May 26th, 2011, 16:23
I must admit I`m after knife edge experience, and know that RS3 will be much more relaxed. As you say each to their own. If I would buy a car for my wife, it would be an RS3, but she has allready a A4 Avant 3.0TDI Q S line.
Well if you are after that knife edge experience then the 1M will fulfill your requirement to the letter if the comments from every review so far is correct because all of them state it has way too much power vs grip, it will look spectatular whilst trying to drive quickly with that tail sliding around the place but it sure won't be quick.
P.S.
Best not buy the wife an RS3, you wouldn't want her to be the quickest in the family, not good for the old testosterone, six months of that scenario and you'll be firing blanks. :hihi:
Alaric
May 27th, 2011, 22:17
Best not buy the wife an RS3, you wouldn't want her to be the quickest in the family, not good for the old testosterone, six months of that scenario and you'll be firing blanks. :hihi:
I like the 1M. In fact I think it's taken the M3's place as my favorite M-car. I can believe that with a very good driver on a dry track it could post a slightly faster time than an RS3. But in the real world, I think the RS3 will eat it for breakfast. Even the journos who preferred the 1M personally (Car, Autoexpress) admit that. The reviewer in Autocar said that with equally matched drivers, an M3 "wouldn't know which way the RS3 had gone". Admittedly, he then went on to emote about how the M3 was more "fun" but that's not the point here. When even the BMW fans who've driven the RS3 say it's faster in the real world, I think that has to be taken as likely correct.
If I had £40000 to spend on a car for playing with on the track, I'd buy a 1M (well, I would if the Boxster didn't exist) but for real life (with weather and families and dogs) there's no contest. It's got to be the RS3. And it truly is an amazing machine! 0-60 in 4 seconds FFS (achievable every time without wrecking your transmission) :hey:. As the road test report at MSN said "You'll leave your passengers gasping!" Car and Driving just called their review: "Shock and Awe". I think that sums it up!
Joker
May 27th, 2011, 22:38
^ This is why I think magazines like EVO and their journalists aren't living in the real world, they are preaching to such a small audience that it's unreal. Of course the 1M will be the more entertaining to drive on a track and if you've got the skill but who spends all their time at the track and how many of us really have the skill to drive any of these cars to their limit. The difference between Audi and BMW is that Audi acknowledge this fact and design their cars to be more forgiving and with limits that are more approachable, sure they aren't as thrilling but at least you have more of a chance to drive them like they were meant to be driven.