Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Car and Driver: RS5 vs. M3 and CTS-V

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,050

    Car and Driver: RS5 vs. M3 and CTS-V

    The RS5 is just too heavy to defeat the M3. But it does look like it is making all of its 450 horsepower.

    0-60: RS5 4 seconds, M3 3.9, CTS-V 3.9
    1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 112, 12.4 @ 114, 12.2 @ 118
    0-150: 25.9, 24.6, 22.5
    skidpad: .98, .96, .90
    weight: 4,000, 3600, 4260

    quick summary
    http://killwithfire.blogspot.com/201...bmw-m3-vs.html

  2. #2
    Registered User youry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Braine l'Alleud-Belgium
    Posts
    511
    attention that this M3 has the optional competition package with special suspension. etc...... so now i do understand why its slightly ahead of RS5....
    Youry
    RS QUATTRO
    www.rsquattro.com

  3. #3
    Moderator Ruergard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,029
    The RS5 has the engine, the looks and the gearbox. But it is to heavy...

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by youry View Post
    attention that this M3 has the optional competition package with special suspension. etc...... so now i do understand why its slightly ahead of RS5....
    The competition pack consists of CSL style wheels, lowered, EDC. The only parts that would aid handling arguably would be the lowered springs as the revised electronic gizmos on the the EDC are as I understand it to give less interference at the limit.
    Another thing to keep in mind is that in the UK a fully specced up M3 with Competition pack, DCT and other goodies comes in at £63k, the RS5 is £67k.
    Im okay with that price so long as they discount. Something tells me they wont so expect to see a similar situation to the RS6, great car but incredibly expensive.
    Here in the UK there are not many M3s on the road so for me all things being relatively equal the M3 represents better value for money.

  5. #5
    Registered User JavierNuvolari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Chile
    Posts
    1,830
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruergard View Post
    The RS5 has the engine, the looks and the gearbox. But it is to heavy...
    I am still wondering how could they let it get so fatty...sad really because it is an incredible looking car.

  6. #6
    Registered User BaXRS4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    39
    RS? This car is far away from that... :/

  7. #7
    Registered User youry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Braine l'Alleud-Belgium
    Posts
    511
    welle the wheels are forged and tires more sporty so that itself makes a difference....
    Youry
    RS QUATTRO
    www.rsquattro.com

  8. #8
    Registered User Casey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    47
    I just got my 0-60 mag with the RS5 in it, and i have to agree with what they say regarding the lack of torque in the motor. Clearly at least the performance hasnt suffered, but i want it to have gobs of torque, like the C63. i dont see why you would want less.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •