Sport Auto RS4 Supertest vs. BMW M5

[Erik]

In German, but I guess you can understand the figures :)
I'm surprised. I would have guessed the M5 to be the faster.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v252/patrickwd/rs4-1.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v252/patrickwd/rs4-2.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v252/patrickwd/rs4-3.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v252/patrickwd/rs4-4.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v252/patrickwd/rs4-5.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v252/patrickwd/rs4-6.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v252/patrickwd/rs4-7.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v252/patrickwd/rs4-8.jpg

[Julz RS4]

Thanks Erik for this RS4 article, because I didn't have this one.
:rs4addict

[BigCountry]

How old is this article?

Thats an old model M5, from '99 as well. That car is probably half a second slower than 75% of the M5's on the road now (from 2000-2004). Love to see what the results would be updated.

[Nordschleife]

Originally posted by BigCountry
How old is this article?

Thats an old model M5, from '99 as well. That car is probably half a second slower than 75% of the M5's on the road now (from 2000-2004). Love to see what the results would be updated.

Obviously you are using the "New Math"!

The more recent M5s, with the V8 engine have not been as well balanced cars as their predecessor straight 6 engined model. Faster, yes, balanced, no.

A better balanced smaller car, the RS4, with only 20 horsepower less than the M5 was always going to beat it round a race track.

In most of these tests, the critical performance advantage lies in the tyres.

R+C

[A418TQTip]

Damn, I wish I could read German... :cry:

But from what I gathered, it was a tie, right?

Nordschleife,

I agree with you. New <> Better. Plus, the E39 M5 really is a heavier car.

However, I drove it a couple times and had the opportunity to drive it hard (i.e. not *real* hard around a track though). It seemed pretty well balanced despite its size. I was actually positively surprised since the car felt a lot more nimble than what I would've imagined...

Anyway, I wish I could comment on the RS4. We didn't get them here (although there may be a few in the US - dunno)...

[BigCountry]

Originally posted by Nordschleife
[B]Obviously you are using the "New Math"!
B]

I'm sorry, I think you were mistaken.

First off, the M5 shown is infact an E39, the body style introduced in 1999, and has run through the 2004 production year. Inherent in this, is that all E39 M5's had V8 engines. What i'm saying is that the M5's progressed in performance, most notably after the first production year, by refining the S62 V8 engine further, and remapping the engine programs. This had no effect on the weight distribution, which is infact a nearly perfect 49/51.

Statistical times from this change, decreased the 0-60 times on the M5 from 5.3 (1999) to around 4.7 (after 2000). As this M5 tested was a 1999, seen by the arrangement of front headlights and lack of BMW's "angle eyes", a post 2000 feature, I was merely saying I think a better comparison would infact be found in a newer model year, same basic model, BMW M5.

I fail to see the significance of this, "new math" you speek of, and I feel your argument is heavily based on untrue facts. Not bashing the RS4, I love and respect that car as well.

Enjoy,
Cheers,

[Nordschleife]

Dear Big (if I may be so familiar)

Its the careless use of invented statistics, hurredly qualified in a subordinate clause, that attracted my "New Math" comment.

On both the circuits the cars were tested over, the RS4 was faster. Very shortly after the RS4 was released, quattro offered a handling pack which significantly reduced the lap times.

Having driven both the RS4 and the M5, on the track and on the highway, I have found that the RS4 is quicker over a full lap and from A to B, driving on both completely unrestricted roads and over mountain passes.

The M5 is a very nice car, the new model should be sensational, I doubt it will be much use in the snow, however. In the real world this is a serious consideration.

R+C

[herb]

First off, the E39 was made from 1997-2003, and there never was an 1999 E39 M5. Production of the M5 began in Oct. '99, and was sold as MY 2000. The engine was never changed, and no power was ever added, it remained at 394hp and 369 ft-lbs for all 4 years it was made. The 5.3 sec 0-60 time was a BMW figure announced before the M5 was built, and it was a guess. All the numbers I've seen show the M5, no matter which year, doing 60 in 4.8-4.9 seconds.

Why wouldn't the RS4 win? Its ligter, has a better power/weight ratio, all wheel drive, better brakes, and more torque available sooner. Dont get me wrong, the M5 is incredible, but its got a lot more weight to be thrown around, and is limited with its rear wheel drive. To tell you the truth I was suprised it was that close to the RS4.

-Herb

[BigCountry]

Agreed,

The RS4 is a heck of a fast car. I love it to death, from the day it was released, it has all my respect. I simply was making a coment on what I thought could give the competition between these cars more weight - as many who know me would agree, I like to be the devils advocate.

Otherwise, I do my best to only present the facts, as I know them. Please don't imply this on me unless you can prove me wrong. I have never said the M5 was faster than the RS4, I only said the new model M5's are faster than the old, a proven fact. You seem extremely angried at something, and if it was something I said, than I'm sorry.

Also, totally agreed on the new M5. although the current is a boat in the snow as well. Not much of the BMW forte in general, but i guess that goes with reasons for buying the car,

cheers,

[herb]

lol... sorry, im not angered, I was just trying to present the facts as I know them in the most monotone way, as to allow others to take what they want from them, and not let my feelings get in the way. Im not angry at you, or anything, nor did I mean to come off that way.

'Please don't imply this on me unless you can prove me wrong'
-Im not sure what you meant by this...

'I only said the new model M5's are faster than the old'
- Are you saying that the 2000 M5's are slower than the 2003 M5's?

sorry again to come off angry...

-Herb

[BigCountry]

Ha, sorry Herb,

I actually was refering to Nordschleife's comments - your post must have showed up while I was typing.

anyways, you've got some good points, however, I'm nearly posative the M5 was introduced in '99, as my friend has one. other than that you've got some good points, becuase i agree the engine remained relatively the same with no increase in power. I'm running on stats from my dealer though, and apparently even though the physical output (bhp) never changed, the engine software was upgraded (forgot what else), and the car was indeed faster.

Admittedly, not the best source from a man trying to sell the car to me, and i realize that now. I'd love to know what really happend.

Either way, sorry for the confusion,
thanks for the thoughts,

Cheers,