PDA

View Full Version : RS4 to target BMW M5



tailpipe
October 27th, 2004, 14:10
There is an article in this week's Autocar Magazine on the new RS4. It shows the black mule we've already seen that may or may not be an RS4 prototype lapping the Nordschliefe.

It confirms what I think we can now regard as fact: the engine is an extremely exotic development of the current 4.2 litre V-8 engine as used in the S4, A6 and A8 models. THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO TURBOS - but don't worry because the naturally aspirated development they intend to put in it will punch harder than Lennox Lewis on steroids and has quite a few trick bits that really lift its game. Moreover, it revs well beyond 8,000 rpm to deliver a healthy 425 bhp. Performance is above and beyond both existing RS4 and RS6 models, with 0-100 kph achieved in under 4.9 seconds and a top speed limited to 250 kph. Apparently, quite a few kilogrammes have been shed but it still weighs in at a flabby 1600 kg. The article reports that a 6-speed manual box will be offered as standard with the option of DSG box, although the latter seems to be speculation rather than fact.

I spoke to someone at Audi about this article and can tell you that it only tells half the story. What you need to know is that the new RS4 is not merely designed to blitz the BMW M3 or Mercedes-Benz C55; it's true target is the new M5. This is the reason why they've chosen a high-revving naturally aspirated engine. It's a development of the existing 4.2 engine because this is a proven motor and therefore a much more reliable start-point for tweaking.

By contrast, the new engine in the BMW M5 has not yet been perfected. Even though the car has been announced, its release may actually be delayed because they are having all kinds of problem with reliability - there is talk of engines detonating and so on. Of course, they'll get it right, but my sources tell me that it is far from production ready as things stand.

The new RS4 will be Audi's top-of-the-line sports car until the new RS6 arrives and therefore the engineers are doing everything possible to make it absolutely fantastic - including hiring some of BMW's best engineers to complement Audi's own home.

You may remember another recent article that reported Audi believes there are better ways to deliver performance than a sheer horsepower battle. This car should prove that. Let's hope so.






:rs4kiss:

steve
October 27th, 2004, 14:19
Sounds very good. I do hope the weight will be kept as low as possible. Still I'd like to see turbo's on an RS... but this NA rocket will be pretty good I guess:rs4addict

7:53 RS6
October 27th, 2004, 14:33
Tail, do you know any thing on its suspension?

Benman
October 27th, 2004, 16:59
Originally posted by tailpipe
Apparently, quite a few kilogrammes have been shed but it still weighs in at a flabby 1600 kg.

:rs4kiss:
I wouldn't be too harsh about the target weight. If in fact it does weight in at 1600kg than that would mean it weights less than the old RS 4 (by over 100 lbs), and with the trend towards car continually weighing more and more I'd say job well done.

Ben:addict: :rs4addict

P.S. consider the M3 CSL weights over 3200lbs and if you added 4 wheel drive you won't be far off from 1600kg!

Nordschleife
October 27th, 2004, 18:47
Originally posted by 8:29 RS6
Tail, do you know any thing on its suspension?

Revised DRC.

'Better' brakes - not holding my breath.

Only new 6 speed manual gearbox.

Now only the engine is ahead of the front axle.

Designed to be America friendly.

R+C

Benman
October 27th, 2004, 19:05
Originally posted by Nordschleife
Revised DRC.
R+C
Sounds interesting.

Erik
October 27th, 2004, 19:05
Originally posted by 8:29 RS6
Do you know anything on its suspension?

I'd like to see the "magnetic ride control" system (i.e. adjustable) that has been showed on exhibitions. Since some Chevys have it already it shouldn't be rocket science.

Anyone coming to Geneva with us? :D :rs4addict

QuattroFun
October 27th, 2004, 19:26
Sounds nice, I also have (too?) high hopes but...

First, we can all do the power-to-weight math and it more or less tells us that the above mentioned speccs will not make even the RS4 sedan version a new M5 slayer as regards straightline acceleration times - especially not in 0-160kmh (M5 less than 10s) & 0-200kmh (M5 some 14s). If the RS4 gearing is close to that in the S4 and if we optimistically suppose the weight claim is true, then other things being roughly equal (such as traction/power loss to wheels etc) the new RS4 should do 0-200kmh at somewhere around 16s - i.e. a tad below current M3 territory.

Second, I for one am sceptical about 1600kg in the real world although I surely hope I am wrong. The current S4 sedan is supposed to come in at 1660kg EU unladen (no stereo and other things probably). Not a single real world example is this light with the gas tank filled - the lowest test figure I have seen is 1730kg and mine is 1735kg. The RS6 was also well over 100kg above the claimed weight in all speccs I have seen whereas the M3 CSL truly weighs 1450-1490kg. If they put in 19" wheels, a beefier transmission, brakes and suspension and maybe also more electrical machines/electronics they have to undo 50-80kg of added weight vs the S4 just to keep it at par - changing the bonnet and front side panels to aluminium undoes only 30-35kg. So there really has to be maybe ceramic brakes (too expensive) or many other panels in lightweight materials (again, expensive) to in net terms shed 60kg on the S4.

I know, I am a pessimist and what do I know about what Audi truly plans - but number crunching at least comes some way into analysing the plausibility of all claims/hopes floating around. But, again, I hope I am proven wrong and that the Rs4 is the perfect vehicle for less than 8min Ring laps even in my hamfisted hands...

Finnus
October 27th, 2004, 22:32
I also don't see how the specs given by Tailpipe create an M-5 slayer. At an "under 4.9" 0-100kph, that's potentially less than the advertised 4.7 for the RS-6 (which I've come to believe can only be achieved in an as yet unknown perfect environment) and the 4.7 advertised for the new M-5.

Nordschliefe, what is, "Designed to be America friendly.
" ?

Finnus


:addict:

Nordschleife
October 27th, 2004, 23:06
Originally posted by Finnus

what is, "Designed to be America friendly." ?


you tell me, but I fear for overly comfortable suspension to cope with pot-holed roads, high ground clearance, icebox aircon, 'comfortable' seats, gear ratios set for 1/4 mile times, cheap to service and simple exhaust.

R+C

A418TQTip
October 30th, 2004, 01:48
Originally posted by Nordschleife
you tell me, but I fear for overly comfortable suspension to cope with pot-holed roads, high ground clearance, icebox aircon, 'comfortable' seats, gear ratios set for 1/4 mile times, cheap to service and simple exhaust.

R+C

Yeah, right. Blame it on the US market...

Folks, ALL car companies are getting more and more on the soft side.

That's particularly true when it comes to BMW and Audi. M and S/RS cars became "status" symbols. In order to appeal to soccer moms and "badge seekers", these cars are getting soft and lacking soul. Shareholders don't give a damn. All they care about is profit.

I just wish someone would go back to basics... I'm pretty sure my next car will be an EVO MR or a WRX STi.

Edit: We didn't get the B5 RS4 in the States. Still, Quattro used to sell a suspension upgrade, right? Why? The stock suspension was overly comfortable?

Nordschleife
October 30th, 2004, 18:53
Originally posted by A418TQTip
Yeah, right. Blame it on the US market...

Folks, ALL car companies are getting more and more on the soft side.

That's particularly true when it comes to BMW and Audi. M and S/RS cars became "status" symbols. In order to appeal to soccer moms and "badge seekers", these cars are getting soft and lacking soul. Shareholders don't give a damn. All they care about is profit.

I just wish someone would go back to basics... I'm pretty sure my next car will be an EVO MR or a WRX STi.

Edit: We didn't get the B5 RS4 in the States. Still, Quattro used to sell a suspension upgrade, right? Why? The stock suspension was overly comfortable?

Fortunately, for those of us who like cars, the US market is becoming less important for the world's car manufacturers.
Am I being harsh on the US, no, just realistic. Porsche is still the exception in that the US market is very important, for the others the several European markets and China are much more significant in agregate, prices are maintained and currency risk is avoided.
Why does this matter, mostly because in an automotive sense, the US is on another planet, different rules about everything, from safety, to emissions to measurement standards, different expectations about service and warranties, different driving capabilities, different returns on sales.
Almost every really interesting car from leading European manufacturers has not been imported into the US, GT3RS, M3CSL, RS4, RS2, TVR, the list goes on. These cars are good for several reasons, in part because they are not compromised by the requirements of the US market.
If you want really interesting cars hope that they are not Federalised and get an expert to bring them in through the grey market.
Your outlook on the world is entirely UScentric, do try to see beyond the borders of the 48 States and adopt a global view of what is happening in the automotive world. The soccer-mom is a US phenomenon, in the rest of the world the game is football and its played by men, you might have heard of 'the beautiful game'.
Your point about quattro offering alternative suspensions, is entirely irrelevant, their firmer setups are aimed at drivers usually resident in Germany who are able to take advantage of that country's mostly excellent roads, the standard cars have suspension which is too stiff for the US market, so there is usually a selection of suspension set ups available.
I am not knocking the US, nor am I anti-US, I am realistic about automobiles in the US and the ethos surrounding them. As a former Nevada Honor Guard officer, a descendent of a President of the Continental Congress, and the happy son, brother, uncle and main squeeze of US citizens and residents, it would be odd if I were knocking the US, even though it is often very difficult to persuade my European and Antipodean friends and relations that the country has not taken on the mantle of the 'Evil Empire'.
R+C

Artur Costa
October 30th, 2004, 21:08
About the M5 engine having realiability problems is not what you probably are thinking!
The current 5L 507BHP engine has no problems!
The problems as in the engines that produce 30nm more and nearly 550bhp!
I lead to belive that in early 2007 there will be new specs for the M5 and that will be the 5L engine puxed to the max... 550bhp? I think so!

About the RS4 I dont believe it will ever get close to the M5 if they have lesse power! Remeber the quattro is not the way to but horsepower on the ground but only torque!You can see that in the RS6 Vs E39 M5... when the power comes to judgment the M5 is faster and has less 50bhp...

Still I would prefer to onw a manual RS4 with 425bhp than a SMG M5.... but I will get used to the idea of no clutch pedal :w:

:rs4kiss:

A418TQTip
October 30th, 2004, 21:58
Originally posted by Nordschleife
Fortunately, for those of us who like cars, the US market is becoming less important for the world's car manufacturers.
Am I being harsh on the US, no, just realistic. Porsche is still the exception in that the US market is very important, for the others the several European markets and China are much more significant in agregate, prices are maintained and currency risk is avoided.
Why does this matter, mostly because in an automotive sense, the US is on another planet, different rules about everything, from safety, to emissions to measurement standards, different expectations about service and warranties, different driving capabilities, different returns on sales.
Almost every really interesting car from leading European manufacturers has not been imported into the US, GT3RS, M3CSL, RS4, RS2, TVR, the list goes on. These cars are good for several reasons, in part because they are not compromised by the requirements of the US market.
If you want really interesting cars hope that they are not Federalised and get an expert to bring them in through the grey market.
Your outlook on the world is entirely UScentric, do try to see beyond the borders of the 48 States and adopt a global view of what is happening in the automotive world. The soccer-mom is a US phenomenon, in the rest of the world the game is football and its played by men, you might have heard of 'the beautiful game'.
Your point about quattro offering alternative suspensions, is entirely irrelevant, their firmer setups are aimed at drivers usually resident in Germany who are able to take advantage of that country's mostly excellent roads, the standard cars have suspension which is too stiff for the US market, so there is usually a selection of suspension set ups available.
I am not knocking the US, nor am I anti-US, I am realistic about automobiles in the US and the ethos surrounding them. As a former Nevada Honor Guard officer, a descendent of a President of the Continental Congress, and the happy son, brother, uncle and main squeeze of US citizens and residents, it would be odd if I were knocking the US, even though it is often very difficult to persuade my European and Antipodean friends and relations that the country has not taken on the mantle of the 'Evil Empire'.
R+C

See, first you say the upcoming RS4 is designed to be "US friendly". Now you're saying the US market is becoming less important...

Funny you should mention Porsche. The 997 is more back to basics compared to its predecessor and guess what? It will be sold here... Go figure...

Let's just agree to disagree.

7:53 RS6
October 30th, 2004, 22:25
__________________________________________________ __

Originally posted by Artur Costa

!You can see that in the RS6 Vs E39 M5... when the power comes to judgment the M5 is faster and has less 50bhp...

:rs4kiss:
__________________________________________________ __

Well, it could have someting to do whit the RS6 and it having a atomatic transmission. And in my experience its onley from say some wher around 400m the E39 is pulling.

Nordschleife
October 30th, 2004, 22:48
Originally posted by A418TQTip
See, first you say the upcoming RS4 is designed to be "US friendly". Now you're saying the US market is becoming less important...

Funny you should mention Porsche. The 997 is more back to basics compared to its predecessor and guess what? It will be sold here... Go figure...

Let's just agree to disagree.

Go drive a 993, a 996 and a 997 Porsche, the latter with PASM, then tell me its back to basics. Quoting (ignorant) journalists and marketing material doesn't cut it. Any 'basics' are simulated, it is an excellent car, but it isn't about basics and I'd rather have a 997 than a 996, but you know you can feel what the car is actually doing far better in a 993 than either the 996 or 997.

There is no conflict, the new RS4 is compromised by being designed for the US market as well as the ROW, and fortunately the US market is becoming less important, so that in the future we might not have cars which fall between two stools, as the present S4 does, for example.

R+C

A418TQTip
October 31st, 2004, 02:54
Originally posted by Nordschleife
Go drive a 993, a 996 and a 997 Porsche, the latter with PASM, then tell me its back to basics. Quoting (ignorant) journalists and marketing material doesn't cut it. Any 'basics' are simulated, it is an excellent car, but it isn't about basics and I'd rather have a 997 than a 996, but you know you can feel what the car is actually doing far better in a 993 than either the 996 or 997.

There is no conflict, the new RS4 is compromised by being designed for the US market as well as the ROW, and fortunately the US market is becoming less important, so that in the future we might not have cars which fall between two stools, as the present S4 does, for example.

R+C

I have driven 993s and 996s. No doubt the 996 is soft compared to its predecessor. Now, is that due to the US market? I don't think so...

I still have to go drive drive a 997, but the new Carrera S lapping the ring 20s faster than the 996 means something to me.

Sorry, but I fail to see how basics are "simulated" in Sport mode, when most of the "defense mechanisms" become far less intrusive...

I never disputed the fact that new generations are getting more and more isolated - see my first post. All I said is that blaming it on the US market is BS. After all, poseurs are everywhere...

QuattroFun
October 31st, 2004, 08:56
The current S4 is in many ways too compromised. However, none of the 6000+ RS4's may have been sold to the US, but it was - whilst a fine car - also very compromised in its basic design and intent (Avant, no real weight saving intended and packed with luxury items) and the RS6 was not exactly a car for purists either although only a 1000 or so of the 8000 produced went to the US.

Being based on the S4/S4 Avant, the new RS4 with perhaps 6000-10000 total sales target is more likely in spirit to be closer to the M3/M5 than the much more focused, expensive and in sales targets more limited M3 CSL - hopefully with some weight savings through lighterweight materials and designs, though.

What possible point would there with an excessively stripped EUR85K CSL Avant with no air con and radio in the first place? A sparetime track car for the family father?

tailpipe
November 1st, 2004, 13:38
Originally posted by Finnus
I also don't see how the specs given by Tailpipe create an M-5 slayer. At an "under 4.9" 0-100kph, that's potentially less than the advertised 4.7 for the RS-6 (which I've come to believe can only be achieved in an as yet unknown perfect environment) and the 4.7 advertised for the new M-5.

:addict:

The specs I quoted will not make the B7 RS4 an M5-slayer. According to Audi, other factors will contibute to this, although quite frankly I've no idea what they're talking about, because the A4 starts out with such an inferior weight balance even before you talk about power-to-weight ratios.

But it might have something to do with this: Audi reckons that the M5 will not be as good as all the hype suggests. Has anyone else heard stories of M5s blowing up on the Nordschliefe during testing? According to my sources at Audi, four or five have had spectacular engine failures at speed.

They also say that the M5 was never meant to have two power settings. (Pressing a button in the cockpit increases the standard horsepower rating of 400 bhp to 507 bhp.) The reason for this is to preserve engine life. As things stand, if you really take it by the scruff of its neck and make it work on a circuit, there's a good chance the engine will blow.

While BMW's engineers try to boost the engine's robustness, the Munich marketing men are adamant that the car must be launched on time. Consequently, there's a good chance that owners of the first year's production will experience more than their fair share of gremlins. More to the point, 400 bhp is likely to be the recommended dose of power. (Besides this, have you seen what happens to fuel consumption when 507 bhp is selected? it drinks like a fish.) More to the point, there is a serious traction problem with that much power in a conventional rear wheel drive configuration.

So Audi reckons the car is flawed and that BMW will need quite a bit more development time to get it to where it needs to be. This is before we also factor in the 5-Series poor performance in recent NCAP testing.

Meanwhile, Audi has chosen to put a development of the tried and tested 4.2 V-8 in the RS4. It is good for 425 bhp with and revs well above 8,000 rpm. Perhaps crucially, it has 4WD to control all that power safely. I'm looking forward to seeing how this story evolves. There is always a risk when you buy a new model in its first year in production, whatever the brand.

quattro
November 1st, 2004, 15:50
Originally posted by tailpipe
They also say that the M5 was never meant to have two power settings. (Pressing a button in the cockpit increases the standard horsepower rating of 400 bhp to 507 bhp.) The reason for this is to preserve engine life.

Na, read this instead.

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=47489

"P500 mode: very agggressive mode for dry service, Cannot drive it in an icy road. P400 is for icy roads, which makes sense. P400 in winter. You have two characters of the M5: summer and winter, comfort and sport, P400 and P500."

:snow: :rolleyes: :snow:

Audihead
November 1st, 2004, 18:10
With the things i'm seeing on the net the next RS4 won't even be able to beat the next M3 much less the M5. They have to get the weight distribution fixed, it's killing the whole concept. Also, they need to lighten the car by about 300 to 500 pounds. If not it will continue to be an also ran. W/O turbos this car will be still-born. At least w/ the old one you could compensate w/ lots of mods.

:s4addict:

tailpipe
November 1st, 2004, 20:11
Originally posted by Audihead
With the things i'm seeing on the net the next RS4 won't even be able to beat the next M3 much less the M5. They have to get the weight distribution fixed, it's killing the whole concept. Also, they need to lighten the car by about 300 to 500 pounds. If not it will continue to be an also ran. W/O turbos this car will be still-born. At least w/ the old one you could compensate w/ lots of mods.

:s4addict:

This is garbage. What makes any high powered RS model superior to an M3 or M5 is quattro 4-wheel drive. It means that more of its power is more usable for more of the time. Right now, the S4 is a much better year-round car than the M3, because it offers better traction, better safety and more predictable characteristics on the limit when conditions are less than bone dry. Yes, 4WD makes the car heavier and a front-end weight bias impairs steering accuracy and the ability to chuck it into corners.

I'd also ask you to remember the impact made by first the RS2, then the RS4 and then the current RS6 when they appeared. They set new benchmarks at the time but today each one remains a deeply impressive machine in its own right. Audi has publicly stated a commitment to producing more focused performance cars and given that the next RS6 is some years away, the RS4 will be the performance flagship. Therefore, I expect the new RS4 to be a stunning machine. Everything I've heard about its engine, (from people intimately concerned with developing it), tells me that it will be hugely impressive. It has been designed specifically to show BMW's V-10 what Audi can do with a V-8.

Will the RS4 be faster in a straight line than the M5? I doubt it. Will it get from A to B on a wet night quicker than an M5? Almost certainly.

Benman
November 1st, 2004, 20:23
Originally posted by tailpipe
This is garbage. What makes any high powered RS model superior to an M3 or M5 is quattro 4-wheel drive.

Will the RS4 be faster in a straight line than the M5? I doubt it. Will it get from A to B on a wet night quicker than an M5? Almost certainly.
I'll add to the latter part, Doubt it. And MOST certainly!:D

Audihead
November 1st, 2004, 21:21
You may think it's garbage, but the truth hurts sometimes. I am an Audi fan, don't get me wrong. The all wheel drive is great for sure. I drive a brand new S4 and i love it. One of the big reasons i bought the S4 over many of it's competitors was value. You got the most for your money. The RS4 has to be one hell of an automobile for people to shell out big $$$$ for it. If it can't out perform the new M3 that's in the works except in inclement conditions for probably 10 grand more what's the point? If it's exclusivity you want, you may get it. Being exclusive doesn't make it good on its own, you have to rock the house. The RS6 did this. I don't know about the M5 comparo either, this car w/ only 425Hp isn't going to cut it. It needs more. If BMW puts the 400Hp V8 in the next M3, this car will get crushed. Sorry guys but i respectfully disagree.

:s4addict:

Erik
November 1st, 2004, 22:23
I don't know how fast the next :rs4addict will be.

All I can hope is that they make it so much faster than the M3 that there is no doubt about it.

I think Audi should have made the RS6 faster than the M5 E39, now it's more up to how puts the pedal to the metal first.

A418TQTip
November 1st, 2004, 22:53
Originally posted by tailpipe
...But it might have something to do with this: Audi reckons that the M5 will not be as good as all the hype suggests. Has anyone else heard stories of M5s blowing up on the Nordschliefe during testing? According to my sources at Audi, four or five have had spectacular engine failures at speed...


Not sure they're counting on the new ring taxi's engine to blow...

Come on, as much as we may want to see BMW failing, they do know a thing or two about building nice cars...


...there's a good chance that owners of the first year's production will experience more than their fair share of gremlins...

That's pretty much the case for every new release. You said so yourself... ;)


More to the point, 400 bhp is likely to be the recommended dose of power. (Besides this, have you seen what happens to fuel consumption when 507 bhp is selected? it drinks like a fish.)

High performance cars are not meant to be gas frugal... ;) That's what diesels and hybrids are for...


More to the point, there is a serious traction problem with that much power in a conventional rear wheel drive configuration.

A co-worker showed me this video of the E60 M5 launching off the line... Didn't seem the car had any problems putting 507HP to the ground and reaching the speed limit real quick...

I say let's just be happy with whatever Audi puts under the hood of the upcoming RS4. I'm sure they won't let us down... :D

A418TQTip
November 1st, 2004, 23:12
Originally posted by tailpipe
This is garbage. What makes any high powered RS model superior to an M3 or M5 is quattro 4-wheel drive. It means that more of its power is more usable for more of the time. Right now, the S4 is a much better year-round car than the M3, because it offers better traction, better safety and more predictable characteristics on the limit when conditions are less than bone dry. Yes, 4WD makes the car heavier and a front-end weight bias impairs steering accuracy and the ability to chuck it into corners.

Still, some have succeeded to show that the M3 is faster than the S4 in the wet...

Tailpipe, I can appreciate the fact that Audi's approach may be the best for you (and all of us), but I must say once again that those things coming out of Munich are also very competent and fun to drive...

See, the M3 is the car they use for the BMW Driver Training in the North of Sweden! It can't be THAT crappy in the snow...


Will the RS4 be faster in a straight line than the M5? I doubt it. Will it get from A to B on a wet night quicker than an M5? Almost certainly.

Let's also hope the next RS4 kills the ///M cars in the twisties as well... :D

Benman
November 1st, 2004, 23:16
Originally posted by Audihead
You may think it's garbage, but the truth hurts sometimes. The RS4 has to be one hell of an automobile for people to shell out big $$$$ for it. If it can't out perform the new M3 that's in the works except in inclement conditions for probably 10 grand more what's the point? If it's exclusivity you want, you may get it. Being exclusive doesn't make it good on its own, you have to rock the house.

:s4addict:

The problem with that is there is no possible way for Audi to know FOR SURE what BMW will do with the new M3. Granted it is rumored and more than likely will get the V8 but all they can go by now is what is available now (take the RS 6 compared to the new M5!). Currently you have the M3 CSL available and the New RS 4 should smear it. Will it beat the future M3? Probably not, but again this is due more to whatever is newer has had more time to be "better".

7:53 RS6
November 2nd, 2004, 00:04
I would be very happy if new RS4 is more comunicating and precice and not alone just fast! I know M will be. To be frank the feal of gearbox in old RS4 was so far from being sporty. And this in my mind do take down the driving joy a bit. And 4wd is having some to say as well. This is intresting to see how the new gearbox of RS4 will feel!. Just that alone I think is is more intressting than if the car go from say 0-100 in 4,5 or say 4,9 or what ever!

Its so much more fun driving M3 E46 at nurburgring than RS4/6 and I hope this was the last time I feel this. And from now RS cars take over or geting close in this feealing. Its not all about speed. RS cars are fast!

Also as importent are how cars are talking to us when using them soft or hard and how things are working in interaction.

I hope the new RS4 feels much more sporty than the my old. In my mind the old did not feal very sport but it was sure fast.

In fact when i think of it the RS6 beeing that heavy and automatic. The porker in some ways feels a bit more sporty then RS4 much of course depending on DRC in RS6 and as a reason not understeear as much as old RS4. And not rolling and pitch as RS4.

Ex when drifting the RS4 it realy rolls before you get it to the point when lose grip and sliding. But RS6 just laying flat it feels before losing grip and sliding and that is totaly more sporty and fun.

Im sure the RS4 will be fast and hopefully sporty!

tailpipe
November 2nd, 2004, 22:26
I think we need to assume for a moment that the Audi people responsible for developing the RS4 are at least half as intelligent as the people contributing to this forum. If I were an Audi product design guy, then I am pretty sure that most of the things we've bitched about have been added to someone's hit list in the engineering department. This is what I would be thinking:

GOAL 1: The new RS4 has to be a better car than existing RS6; (which, if achieved, would arguably make it a better car than the E39 M5 and the current M3 and M3 CSL.)

Therefore, RS4 would need the following attributes:
1. Firmer chassis - Check (Most tests seem to concur that the torsional rigidity of the B6 A4 chassis is an improvement over A6 chassis used for RS6)
2. Better ride and handling - Check (Suspension revisions to B7 A4/ S4 have been universally praised for improving these elements)
3. Improved weight distribution to improve steering - Check (new S4 has engine mounted 4 cm further back making steering much sharper)
4. Higher power-to-weight ratio - Check (425 bhp/ 1600 kgs versus 450 bhp/ 1950 kgs)
5. Improved 0-60 mph time (current RS6 does 4.7; therefore would like to see RS4 do it in 4.5 seconds or less.)
6. Top speed - Irrelevant so long as it does 155 mph. (Current RS6 does 175 unlimited, so would like to see theoretical max of 190 mph plus.)

GOAL 2: Make next RS4 better than next M3

Harder because future M3 specification at this stage is pure speculation. However, we know BMW has announced that next M3 will have a V-8 version of current V-10 and offer 400 bhp, (although this may be reduced to 380 bhp to reduce overlap with M5 and possibly increase engine life, if the reported reliability issues prove to be a real problem).

Big unknown here is weight. If I were Audi, I would realise that the biggest potential performance gains are likely to come from trimming the amount of metal used to build the sucker. The S4 weighs around 1800 kgs. Recent reports talk of a weight in the region of 1600 kgs. If I were Audi, I'd shoot for a weight of 1450-1500 kgs, because this is probably what the next M3 will weigh.

The new RS4's engine is a good start in that it doesn't appear to add weight. It's a tuned development of the existing five-valve 4.2 V-8 and there are no turbos (sorry guys!!) or additional components, so it should be no heavier than existing S4 lump

If cost wasn't an issue, (although we know it is), I reckon Audi could reduce the weight by 250 kgs to 1550 kgs. The weight we're hearing at the moment is 1600 kgs, which is substantailly below the S4. But I think more could be shaved off. The really big potential weight saving area would be in the transmission department, but I would utilise exotic materials to shed weight including:
1. Aluminum body panels, doors, bonnet and trunk lid
2. Lightweight sports seats and interior fittings such as carbon fibre for dashboard superstructure
3. Lightweight exhaust
4. Carbon fibre transmission tunnel
5. Titanium/ carbon fibre gearbox and 4WD transmission components
6. Aluminum suspension components
7. Make aircon, electric windows and other creature comforts optional extras.

If Audi can produce a 4-wheel drive car that weighs less than 1600 kgs, has 425 bhp and improved acceleration, braking, ride, handling and steering -, then by any objective standard they will provide us with a stunning machine.

The driver experience of the RS4 would still suffer from the inevitable compromises of a front-wheel drive chassis leading to less driver involvement and understeer versus the more connected driver-expereince of a rear wheel drive and oversteer characteristics of an M3-type chassis. However, the RS4 would be faster point-to-point and an 365-days-a-year supercar that in Avant format can also carry the wife, kids and Labrador.

:rs4addict

Finnus
November 3rd, 2004, 13:01
If Audi can produce a 4-wheel drive car that weighs less than 1600 kgs, has 425 bhp and improved acceleration, braking, ride, handling and steering -, then by any objective standard they will provide us with a stunning machine.

Tailpipe, Well said!

A stunning machine indeed. If Audi engineers do that good a job, I'll probably have to replace my S4 with the new RS4. :rs4addict

Let's hope Audi's checklist matches yours.

Does moving the engine back 4 cm make that much difference? Isn't that less than 1 inch? It seems it would take more than that ...

Finnus
:addict:

quattro
November 3rd, 2004, 14:02
1 inch = 2.54 cm

So about 1.6 inches back. :mech:

Finnus
November 3rd, 2004, 17:54
1 inch = 2.54 cm

Thank you. But does 1.6" make that big a difference in handling? I would think that has a negligible effect.

Finnus
:addict:

Erik
November 3rd, 2004, 18:01
Originally posted by Finnus
Thank you. But does 1.6" make that big a difference in handling? I would think that has a negligible effect.


On the edge there's always a difference. :)
Second place is the first loser.
That's why we pay dear money for the S/RS badge.

tailpipe
November 3rd, 2004, 20:13
Originally posted by Finnus
Thank you. But does 1.6" make that big a difference in handling? I would think that has a negligible effect.

Finnus
:addict:

One of the major negative criticisms of the B6 S4 chassis is quality of steering due to the amount of weight over the front wheels. By moving the engine rearwards just a fraction, the overall weight balance between front and rear is improved. While 1.6 inches is pretty insignificant, it is enough to significantly improve steering dynamics - or at least that's what the journalists tell us. (I'll tell you myself when I've driven the B7 S4). Clearly the B7's steering is still unlikely to be in the same league as a BMW M3, but is at least better than before.

The difference between an S4/RS4 and a BMW M3/ M3 CSL is the Audi understeers and the BMW oversteers. The advantage for Audi is safer, more predictable handling on the limits, but less driver involvement. The advantage for BMW is a fantastic driving experience but less predictable and safe handling on the limit. In choosing between the two cars, you have to decide which is your priority.

This maybe an over-simplification of the differences, but last winter my M3 scared me enormously. What a friend was able to do safely in his RS6 inspired me. On a dry track in the height of summer, sure the M3 is a driver's delight - and hats off to BMW for making it so - but in the real world, on a dark, unknown and icy road, the S4/ RS4 is where I prefer to be.

Finnus
November 3rd, 2004, 20:46
Tailpipe,

Thanks for the info. I have already made my decision as you can see below.

I'm sure the 1.6" difference is lost relative to my limited driving skill. A 1.6" difference may make the difference in an extremely small window of performance on the edge &, yes, every performance gain is important. It's just that I would like to see a more significant improvement that would have a more practical and noticeable improvement!

Finnus
:addict:

marks6
March 24th, 2005, 22:47
I realise you can't do a blind test for driving different cars, but one of us on this forum will have to be very good at driving to notice 1.6 inches difference. The BMW and the Audi are great cars in S, RS and M guise. 4 WD will give you an edge in wet or icy weather with the correct tyres and a good driver. However 4 WD will not help you brake faster... and 4 WD on ice with summer tyres doesn't help that much more in bends and anytime you are heading downhill.

In the real world there will be very little difference between the cars other than people's specific preferences. 4 WD helps many of us overcome our deficiencies when driving, we can apply acceleration more quickly knowing the 4WD will help us out. However most racecars that I know of are 2WD and are nearly all RWD... now surely we aren't trying to say they are all wrong? 2WD and 4WD are different experiences and generally have different styles of driving on a track. On a public road there's not a lot of difference between the 2.

For Audi to improve the handling it's not just about shifting the engine back 1.6 inches, it's about lightening the load which is simply too much at present. I'd quite like an RS and a couple of M's from the new range and a months pass to the Ring and a few other circuits to test them. All those in favour please sign up and I'll petition the manufacturers :dance:

R8isGreat
March 25th, 2005, 15:54
I know this is a little late but I just saw this.

Nordschleife wrote
"Fortunately, for those of us who like cars, the US market is becoming less important for the world's car manufacturers.
Am I being harsh on the US, no, just realistic. Porsche is still the exception in that the US market is very important, for the others the several European markets and China are much more significant in agregate, prices are maintained and currency risk is avoided. Why does this matter, mostly because in an automotive sense, the US is on another planet, different rules about everything, from safety, to emissions to measurement standards, different expectations about service and warranties, different driving capabilities, different returns on sales. Almost every really interesting car from leading European manufacturers has not been imported into the US, GT3RS, M3CSL, RS4, RS2, TVR, the list goes on. These cars are good for several reasons, in part because they are not compromised by the requirements of the US market. If you want really interesting cars hope that they are not Federalised and get an expert to bring them in through the grey market. Your outlook on the world is entirely UScentric, do try to see beyond the borders of the 48 States and adopt a global view of what is happening in the automotive world. The soccer-mom is a US phenomenon, in the rest of the world the game is football and its played by men, you might have heard of 'the beautiful game'. Your point about quattro offering alternative suspensions, is entirely irrelevant, their firmer setups are aimed at drivers usually resident in Germany who are able to take advantage of that country's mostly excellent roads, the standard cars have suspension which is too stiff for the US market, so there is usually a selection of suspension set ups available. I am not knocking the US, nor am I anti-US, I am realistic about automobiles in the US and the ethos surrounding them. As a former Nevada Honor Guard officer, a descendent of a President of the Continental Congress, and the happy son, brother, uncle and main squeeze of US citizens and residents, it would be odd if I were knocking the US, even though it is often very difficult to persuade my European and Antipodean friends and relations that the country has not taken on the mantle of the 'Evil Empire'."

Last time I checked Audi sales figures for the US were just a little behind Europe. Let us also stress that the US is a country, Europe is a continent. Also accusing someone of being "US centric" seems like an attempt to divert from the point. Americans are no less US centric than Nordschleife is Euro centric. It cannot be true that the US market has both been ignored and at the sametime altered all European marketing strategies. While it may be true that cars in the US are not the same as they are in Europe, this is based on the manufactures choice. If the American people want a good ride in their car, cold air conditioning, and comfortable seats out of a $70, ooo car, I dont think that is unreasonable. If We are to blame for desiring Luxary out of a $85,000 car, I also think that is reasonable. Nordschleife you are not being realistic. You are only again reveling your bias against the US which you have done on countless other occasions on this site. You refer to adopting a "Global View" but what you really mean is adopt a European view. Anytime the US refuses to adopt this European View we are not being "realistic."
As for the Evil Empire comment, I will once again knock that one up to your ignorance. I say let History be the judge. Let us remove the US from the european scene during the first half of the 20th century and see how things turn out. How quickly do you forget our sacrifice!

LET US NOT EVER ENTER IN TO A POLITICAL EUROPE Vs THE US DEBATE ON THIS SITE!!! I love Europe and will move there in the future.

Benman
March 25th, 2005, 17:12
OK,

I agree that a political debate is not what this forum is about. I don't think however that was the point (I may very well be mistaken). We do have to admit however (as American citizens) that we are biased as to what info is feed to us here in the States. For example, take Josh at Achtuning in Washington.

I got a chance to meet Josh (owner of www.achtuning.com ) last April at the So Cal vs Nor Cal. He imported a beautiful stock Avus Silver RS 4. He then informed me that all told he had spent well over $10,000.00 in Fed "fees" and had spent over an entire YEAR will all the "red tape" issues! That money spent was in addition to the cost of shipping the car to the States!

So what did the US government do exactly to make his car "safer" and "compliant" to our standards? Nothing! There was no reinforcing of the doors and bumpers or making the engine more "emmisions correct", or anything else. Why? Because it is ALREADY as safe as any car sold here! For crying out loud, that vehicle was BORN in a country that knows the owners will have it up to 155 mph (and even above!) on a regular basis! But yet we as American citizens are told that many cars can't be imported to this country due to "safety standards".

Just ask your average friend (that doesn't know about cars) and they will agree to the government propaganda. They will say "oh, that car, yes I have heard of that car, but it doesn't meet our emmisions, or safety standards, etc...". I know this to be true because I have had many conversations with individuals about different cars they would like to see here but can not be imported due to certain "standards" that these cars due not meet.

The relation this has to what Nordschleife said is this: if Audi (or for that matter, any manufacture) has to pay our government money for essentially nothing (becuase there is NO improvement of "safety features") for each car it imports, than there has to be a way they "recoup" there costs, i.e. cheapening of the vehicles.

I have a RS 6 and although I don't overly mind the seats I KNOW what the real ones feel like. I have sat and rode in the real ones while in Germany, and can tell you that those were the ones we should have got. But we didn't. Why? Because we were "told" they didn't meet the FED standards. Really? That's interesting, because nearly the identical seats made their way into the S4 only a few months later. Same EXACT reason we didn't get the Avant. Because Audi didn't feel like spending the additional $4.5 million it would have took to "federalize" the Avant. Why? We already have the S6 4.2 Avant that passed the FED exam. Well, that is because the RS 6 Avant is an entirely "different" model and therefor must be "federalized" all over again (i.e. hand the government money for essentially nothing). So we here in the States don't get the car and then proceed to BLAME AUDI?!? Most main stream people (including myself just a few years ago) don't get it. We think it is because of the manufactures greed but in fact it has much more to due with the governments greed (this is not to say that car manufactures are saints because we KNOW that's not the case).

This is what I gathered from Nordschleife's comments. I am also not bashing the US. I am a direct decendant of George Clymer. He is in fact a signer of The Declaration of Independance. My family has lived in the country since the early 1700's. I like living here but at the same time do not blindly accept the propaganda that is crammed down my throat by the main stream media.

It is a real shame that we do not get the really cool stuff that is offered in other countries. It most likely is going to happen AGAIN with the RS 4. There are many board members here that are both excited and anticipating the arrival of their new "Little Beast". Sadly it will be a compromised Beast just as the RS 6 was. There is already talk of us not getting the seats or the 19" wheels(hmm... sounds familiar:doh: ). What else future owners of the RS 4 will be denied remains to be seen.

Please understand that this is also frustrating with Audi and quattro as well. When I was visiting Neckarsulm, my hostess informed me that the US was indeed the most difficult country in the WORLD to deal with, yet ironically, the cars sent to the US never had any "improvements" over the European counter parts. Just cool stuff that had to be ommited:( .

I hope this post doesn't ruffle any feathers as it is certainly not my intention. Just a rant I suppose. Well... rant's over.

Ben:addict:

Nordschleife
March 25th, 2005, 17:20
All I'll say is, check the Audi Sales figures, the US is about the same as Britain, a tiny country by comparison.

R+C

R8isGreat
March 25th, 2005, 17:36
Im just the opposite, My roots run deep into Gremany and Italy from my father and mother. This is in no way a polemic against Europe. My only point is that Audi is not compromising its European cars because of America. I agree that the US has so much red tape it is impossible to do about anything. But again this has nothing to do with European models in Europe. Hope no offense was taken. Again, this is not about Europeans, it is about some thinking that AMerican red tape makes Audi bad in Europe, and I dont see that.

bilbozilla
March 25th, 2005, 17:44
Originally posted by Benman

Just ask your average friend (that doesn't know about cars) and they will agree to the government propaganda. They will say "oh, that car, yes I have heard of that car, but it doesn't meet our emmisions, or safety standards, etc...".

I don't have any "average" friends :bye2: , but I'm afraid it's the majority of US drivers that don't meet the safety standards. In speaking with local highway patrol, I was told many people feel "safer" in the left lane, as there is only 1 lane of traffic they can run into.

About 10 years ago, I brought in a new out of state car into California and had to pay $600 for an emissions sticker. They didn't run any tests, they just made me pay for the sticker and stick it under the hood. I was now able to register the car in California. 3 or 4 years later, I received a check in the mail from the state for $300, as the "tax" was ruled illegal.

The EPA still thinks that greenhouse gasses destroy the ozone, not to mention the fact that producing hydrogen for the "hydrogen economy" produces as much pollution as burning fossil fuels - they get the hydrogen from natural gas and petroleum.

It sounds like it's time to do some housecleaning in this country.

Benman
March 25th, 2005, 17:45
Originally posted by R8isGreat
Again, this is not about Europeans, it is about some thinking that American red tape makes Audi bad in Europe, and I dont see that.

I agree with you on that. I've only visited Europe and I don't live there, so I can't say for sure, but I certainly didn't see our crap Stateside effecting the quality of products on the otherside of the pond. I would hope that they would continue to make cars the RIGHT way and make America come around. Not the other way!:doh:

Ben:addict: