Auto Zeitung comparison-BMW M3 vs. Audi R8 vs. C06

[KresoF1]

Numbers...

Audi R8

0-100km/h: 4.4s
0-160km/h:10.3s
0-200km/h:15.2s
Weight: 1661kg(full tank)
Track time: 1.39,8min

BMW M3

0-100km/h: 4.8s
0-160km/h:10.3s
0-200km/h:15.2s
Weight: 1626kg
Track Time: 1.40,1min

Vette C06

0-100km/h: 4.8s
0-160km/h:10.1s
0-200km/h:15.6s
Weight: 1.44,2min

Now, few comments-tires on R8 were Pirelli P Zero The Hero in R8 specs version and on M3 were new Michelin Pilot Sport Cup +(new version-first cars to receive it are new M3 and 997 GT2, spces for both cars are little bit different but, new Cup + offers better street use and wet roadholding with excellent track potential). Both Hero's and Cup's + are current SOTA in tires development.

AZ stuff claimed that M3 engine is actually better then R8's and that is is currently the best German V8 in production(sorry C63...).

19" wheels were on both R8 and M3.

In current issue German Autostrassenverkher also testes R8, M3 and 997 GT3 on German race track Spreewaldring(more on http://www.spreewaldring.de/) and on this 2.7km track resluts were:

R8 1.37,5min
M3 1.39,2min
997GT3 1.37,8min

Track was partially wet...

[artur777]

Very good results for M3.
It is condierably cheaper and not that bad-performer!

[Mori]

Hmm I would take either one of those cars as a weekend fun car, the P-car would be the first choice though.

[Erik]

Have a look at what tires the M3 had to use

[Leadfoot]

If you are interested in a cheaper semi-trackday car which will be bags of fun at the track then the M3 will be a hard choice to ignore but if you think that the M3 is as capable as the R8 in all disciplines then you will be sadly mistaken, it may be plenty quick enough on the track but the R8 will destroy it on the road and on any track which happens to be damp.

P.S.

No doubt Michelin will be developing Pilot Sport Cup tyres for the R8 so expect the gap to increase again.

[Ruergard]

If you are interested in a cheaper semi-trackday car which will be bags of fun at the track then the M3 will be a hard choice to ignore but if you think that the M3 is as capable as the R8 in all disciplines then you will be sadly mistaken, it may be plenty quick enough on the track but the R8 will destroy it on the road and on any track which happens to be damp.

P.S.

No doubt Michelin will be developing Pilot Sport Cup tyres for the R8 so expect the gap to increase again.

Amen! Give the R8 the same tires and see who's the daddy after that! :king:

[RussianM3_dude]

I don't see what's so special about the RS4 engine. Ok I whole-heartedly commend Audi for growing some danglies and actually meeting BMW head on with a NA engine (witness how they chickened out with the RS6). However it's not a very good engine unless you look at the spec. When I read the brochure, I was like "Wow, off the hizzle fo' shizzle!!!" but in real life it's just not that special except for the fact that it revs like no Audi before it.

The main problem is that it is very linear and one-dimensional. I see no difference in sound or delivery between 5 and 8250 rpm which means that I often shift too early or bounce of the limiter. The engine just doesn't push you to squeeze out every rev like the E46 M3 or a I4 sport bike. Also, there is not that much throttle response, not even close to something like the Ferrari 4.3 or the BMW 3.2 . Also, the direct injection whine just totally ruins the sound. It is weird, on some days I almost don't hear it and only the engine sound, other days their is so much whine, the engine sounds like a blender, complete crock.

It's not an engine with a lot of character. Very competent, but it leaves me cold. I heard the old Arese Alfa GTA V6... now THAT is how an engine should sound and feel. I can only imagine if Alfa had the cash to push it to 100hp/liter.

As for the R8... Audi definetly benefits from lowered expectations and the fact that it's cars are much easier to squeeze performance out of. I think from next year, once Porsche updates their engines... Game over, 911 will be back on top.

[Ruergard]

Ok I whole-heartedly commend Audi for growing some danglies and actually meeting BMW head on with a NA engine (witness how they chickened out with the RS6).

Chickened out? You havn't noticed that there are some plusses with a turbocharged engine that a NA engine can't achieve?

Things like 650nm of torque between 1500 and 6250 rpm?

[Mmm]

Chickened out? You havn't noticed that there are some plusses with a turbocharged engine that a NA engine can't achieve?

Things like 650nm of torque between 1500 and 6250 rpm?

Yeah & that translates to 0-200 in 14.9. With 580hp.

[Ruergard]

Yeah & that translates to 0-200 in 14.9. With 580hp.

I havn't talked anything about performancefigures, but if you wan't to take it to that. Take an M5 and a RS6 out on a road that isnt dead straight, not completely dry.. or why not at wintertime?

[Leadfoot]

I have never before see the influx of BMW disruptors as there has been, since finally Audi have stepped out of the shadow of BMW and putting them in to the shade. Since the RS4 was introduced small voices started to appear which have grown steadily with the R8 and now RS6.

Clearly they don't like their beloved BMW not being top dog.

[Mmm]

I havn't talked anything about performancefigures, but if you wan't to take it to that. Take an M5 and a RS6 out on a road that isnt dead straight, not completely dry.. or why not at wintertime?

Who races in imperfect conditions, really? Is it worth it? And if you win what do you prove? That your car is the imperfect weather champion? Anything can happen in imperfect conditions in any car.

[tazsura]

I don't see what's so special about the RS4 engine. Ok I whole-heartedly commend Audi for growing some danglies and actually meeting BMW head on with a NA engine (witness how they chickened out with the RS6). However it's not a very good engine unless you look at the spec. When I read the brochure, I was like "Wow, off the hizzle fo' shizzle!!!" but in real life it's just not that special except for the fact that it revs like no Audi before it.

The main problem is that it is very linear and one-dimensional. I see no difference in sound or delivery between 5 and 8250 rpm which means that I often shift too early or bounce of the limiter. The engine just doesn't push you to squeeze out every rev like the E46 M3 or a I4 sport bike. Also, there is not that much throttle response, not even close to something like the Ferrari 4.3 or the BMW 3.2 . Also, the direct injection whine just totally ruins the sound. It is weird, on some days I almost don't hear it and only the engine sound, other days their is so much whine, the engine sounds like a blender, complete crock.

It's not an engine with a lot of character. Very competent, but it leaves me cold. I heard the old Arese Alfa GTA V6... now THAT is how an engine should sound and feel. I can only imagine if Alfa had the cash to push it to 100hp/liter.

As for the R8... Audi definetly benefits from lowered expectations and the fact that it's cars are much easier to squeeze performance out of. I think from next year, once Porsche updates their engines... Game over, 911 will be back on top.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/9070910....ototypes-spied

Wow, that's HAS to hurt!

Your beloved BMW...having to twin turbo the M5...what happened dude?!

Taz

[RussianM3_dude]

http://www.worldcarfans.com/9070910....ototypes-spied

Wow, that's HAS to hurt!

Your beloved BMW...having to twin turbo the M5...what happened dude?!

Taz

It's all Audi's fault. Because of their inferiority syndrome, they have to compensate with massive on paper power. Unfortunately most people fall for that. However let's see if it will have turboes after all. I am thinking ///M would rather lose some weight. There has been speculation of a ///M6 CSL and maybe an ///M5 CSL. Loose 200 kilos and it will be as fast as an RS6 as well as way more fun to drive.

[tazsura]

It's all Audi's fault. Because of their inferiority syndrome, they have to compensate with massive on paper power. Unfortunately most people fall for that. However let's see if it will have turboes after all. I am thinking ///M would rather lose some weight. There has been speculation of a ///M6 CSL and maybe an ///M5 CSL. Loose 200 kilos and it will be as fast as an RS6 as well as way more fun to drive.

LOL..inferiority? You crease me up. So Audi now with their massive power have surely turned "inferiority" into Superiority, no?

And why can't the genius's at BMW just wave their wond and produce an extra 80hhp from the NA V10? Must be easy surely?

I would love to see a CSL M6. I doubt they could do it in the M5 though, as this is supposed to be a luxury saloon as well as being a sporty beast. To drop 200kg without dropping such items as air con etc...would be very hard...and completely alienate a huge chunk of clientel.

Taz

[Mori]

Lets face it - everyone picks a car for some reason or other.

I chose the RS4 because:
- I need the Avant
- I want Quattro (saved my life once)
- I driver 30-40K km per year on 2nd grade roads (all year!) and I need the added safety in the snow of awd
- the M5 wasn't loud enough (and the touring wasn't even available then) oh I don't like the styling either
- I love Audi quality inside and out and relative problemless usability

Now - I'm sure people who pick M3s have different reasons - they want a coupe, they like the BMW styling etc.

Quite frankly I don't care which -car- is faster - the driver is what makes the difference anyway. Good bragging rights though.

[RussianM3_dude]

No AWD is banned because it is boring and is a substitute for driver skill. Also, who drives fast in imperfect conditions anyway??????

[Leadfoot]

Anyone who have to listen to pace-notes.

Or had you forgot that and it clear you have never tried or watch a rally as from the driver's seat there is nothing more exciting.

But once again the sort of reply expected from your kind.