RS4 vs M3?

[buyalemon]

Is there anyone who's got any tests between RS4 vs M3? ...searched everywhere ...finding tests against every other sportscar exept the most interesting rival!!

//Magnus

[Josers4imola]

see some side by side RS4 vs M3 in my home page in this link

http://www.rs4-imola.com.br/downloads.htm :rs4addict

cheers

[buyalemon]

Been there great page!! ...but it whould be more interesting if an independent magazine have done some tests!

//Magnus

[Erik]

By sport auto

http://www.track-challenge.com/main_e.asp?useframe=comparison1d_e.asp?Car1=10%26C ar2=2

[BigCountry]

surprising,
i don't think i've ever seen the M3's times that high. usually 0-100 alone is at least below 5.

cheers

[Erik]

Originally posted by BigCountry
usually 0-100 alone is at least below 5.


Please quote those sources...

[buyalemon]

I've seen 4,8 sec in auto motor & sport (sweden) in the test against the new S4 ..but they never say what kind of equipment they used. I think 4,8 is bullshit anyway ..!

//Magnus

[BigCountry]

BMW M3 – 4.7
http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html

BMW M3 – 4.7
http://www.live2cruize.com/bmw_m3.htm

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://www.bmwworld.com/models/m3h1.htm

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://www.babez.de/bmw/m5.php

BMW M3 (coupe) – 4.8
http://www.westgermanbmw.com/showroom/mseries.html

BMW M3 – 4.7
http://members.shaw.ca/a.tang/new.htm

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://bmw.jbcarpages.com/3series/2002M3/index4.php

BMW M3 – 4.7
http://www.import-heaven.net/specs_bmw_m3.shtml

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://www.ssip.net/m3.php

BMW M3 – 4.7
http://www.supercarstats.com/car/exotic-stats/bmw_e46_m3.shtml

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://www.m3forum.com/m3forumcgi/reviews/review.pl?Action=view&pid=3

BMW M3 – 5.0
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/1113200310434.pdf

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://www.supercarsite.net/e46_m3_coupe.htm

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-64453.html

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://www.dealtime.com/xPR-BMW_2003_BMW_M3~RD-91737394820

BMW M3 – 4.8
http://www.new-cars.com/2003/bmw/bmw-m3-coupe-specs.html


Seems the problem is the cabrio is a full half second slower than the coupe. Car and Driver is a very reputable auto magazine here in the states - and its test showed the lowest yet, at 4.5. (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=4227&page_number=1).

Just some data for thought,
cheers

[Erik]

60 mph is just 96.5 km/h ;)

[Nordschleife]

Erik

Make this guy the web site Librarian - he obviously likes reading reviews.

Unless they have been brought up in America, nobody can understand the obsession with the drag strip and what a bunch of magazines have to say about a car.

R+C

[Audihead]

Let me get this straight Nordo, now your insulting a whole country of auto enthuisiasts. You really need to check youself. People in other countries around the world also write car rags and enjoy them also. You need bench marks for evaluating performance. What, are we just going to take the company's claims for granted? You've never read a magazine, and then your interest was peaked? Yes a lot of things are subjective, but you put enough of the numbers together, you have a pretty good idea of how things stack up. That is information anyone could use. :idea:

:s4addict: -Audihead

P.S. I don't like drag racing.

[BigCountry]

Originally posted by Nordschleife
Erik

Make this guy the web site Librarian - he obviously likes reading reviews.

Unless they have been brought up in America, nobody can understand the obsession with the drag strip and what a bunch of magazines have to say about a car.

R+C

Nords,
if you're trying to poke fun at me, please just say it to my face - honestly. I don't know what you're getting at with that comment. After all, given the choice i'd easily take the statistically "slower" car - the M3, but thats just one yankees personal preference. Based on a bunch of magazines?... keep telling yourself that.

Erik,
I realize that difference, thanks, i just attempting to show you how i thought it was closer than the article indicated. After all, alot of those same sources put the RS4 at around 4.9 to 60 (mph), so all in all they're both just plain fast.

but by the way, how much does that 3.5 km/h hour effect the time do you think. I'd be surprised if it was any more than .2 at most, but i could be wrong. Just wondering,

thanks,
cheers,

[Nordschleife]

Audihead

I haven't insulted a country, Drag Racing is an American sport, like Quarter Horse racing, the rest of the world does not understand the American obsession with it. Most Americans do not understand the rest of the world's obsession with 'the beautiful game' either, it cuts both ways.

Fixating on 0-60 times is taken to excess lengths. Believing anything written in most car magazines is like believing in the tooth fairy. Not so long ago several of the US car magazines banged on about how Chevrolet had exagerated the then new Corvette's 0-60 time. Not a single journalist could duplicate the published factory figures. So the Project Manager went out in front of the journalists and duplicated the published performance figure. It wasn't pretty, but it does serve as a reminder of how much hogwash is written in the name of information.

When you drive the car, can you tell the difference between 0 to 100 kph in 4.9 secs and 0 to 60 mph in 4.8 secs? Its these kinds of differences that a lot of people are fixating over. In reality, unless trying to set a benchmark figure, most people can't notice the difference between say 4.7 and 5.2, without repeated runs. most people actually perform 'rolling starts', unless they are indifferent to their car's well being. However, this is often not the case in the US, I believe that BMW has seen fit to disable the launch control feature on US cars. Were the 0-60 time obsession not a peculiarly American obsession, I doubt they would offer this feature in the rest of the world.

To point out differences is not to criticise.

R+C

[bilbozilla]

As an American with subscriptions to several car magazines, no offense was taken at the comment made by R+C. I too cannot figure out what the American obsession is with 0-60 times. I am constantly asked at gas stations what the 0-60 times on my car are. I tell them to check the back of road and track.

I thought the comments were well put.

[Nordschleife]

Bilbo

But you are from SF, most 'muricans would find YOU odd. Can't think why, lovely city.

R+C

[Erik]

Originally posted by BigCountry
but by the way, how much does that 3.5 km/h hour effect the time do you think. I'd be surprised if it was any more than .2 at most, but i could be wrong. Just wondering,


I can be wrong but I can't remember seeing an M3 below 5 secs to 100 km/h. Still it is a very fast car.
If there is a gear change in between (don't know if there is) you'd be surprised how much difference it makes.

Myself I prefer performance 0-200 km/h or even 0-250/300 km/h if it's a really fast car (if it has to be in a straight line).

PS: Drag Racing is quite popular in Sweden as well :rolleyes:

[bilbozilla]

Originally posted by Nordschleife

But you are from SF, most 'muricans would find YOU odd. Can't think why, lovely city.


My wife, my kids, and the local auto dealers seem to like me.

[A418TQTip]

Originally posted by Nordschleife
Audihead

I haven't insulted a country, Drag Racing is an American sport, like Quarter Horse racing, the rest of the world does not understand the American obsession with it. Most Americans do not understand the rest of the world's obsession with 'the beautiful game' either, it cuts both ways.

Fixating on 0-60 times is taken to excess lengths. Believing anything written in most car magazines is like believing in the tooth fairy. Not so long ago several of the US car magazines banged on about how Chevrolet had exagerated the then new Corvette's 0-60 time. Not a single journalist could duplicate the published factory figures. So the Project Manager went out in front of the journalists and duplicated the published performance figure. It wasn't pretty, but it does serve as a reminder of how much hogwash is written in the name of information.

When you drive the car, can you tell the difference between 0 to 100 kph in 4.9 secs and 0 to 60 mph in 4.8 secs? Its these kinds of differences that a lot of people are fixating over. In reality, unless trying to set a benchmark figure, most people can't notice the difference between say 4.7 and 5.2, without repeated runs. most people actually perform 'rolling starts', unless they are indifferent to their car's well being. However, this is often not the case in the US, I believe that BMW has seen fit to disable the launch control feature on US cars. Were the 0-60 time obsession not a peculiarly American obsession, I doubt they would offer this feature in the rest of the world.

To point out differences is not to criticise.

R+C

Well, this is one of those cases where I have to say: to each their own... ;)

I, for one, am all in favor of the twisties... :D


Buyalemon,

As far as the M3 x RS4 comparo goes, they're totally different rides IMHO... Except performance, they don't have much else in common... Plus, you guys can get the CSL in Sweden, right? Performance-wise, that would make more sense - although I suspect the "mainstream" M3 would beat the RS4 around a track... Dunno...