Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood
It was the first time sportauto tested a 17"wheel equipped 335i, at least, that's what they are saying in that comparison. The E90 335i did it in 1:17.0 so that's quite good. The S4 was 0.3 sec faster but the 335i won the test. 18m slalom the 335i was .6kmh faster with 67.6kmh...
Accelleration figures 335i: 0-100kmh:5.4 0-160kmh: 12.3 0-200kmh:20.5
which is a bit faster than a 335d ROFLOL 
The price as tested for the 335i: 58769,- euros(base 41850,-)
Audi S4 3.0SC as tested: 67110,- euros(base 50850,-)
still about 8500 euros difference.... |
The 335i E92 time of 1:17.8 was also on 17" alloys and by the way your time is wrong for the E90 335i, the time is actually 1:18.0 which is 1.3s slower than the S4.
Also that was a manual 335i so I would expect it to be quicker than an auto 335d.
The S4 and the 335i when identically equipped are both around the 54k euros, I check this out myself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood
The weight balance better should be F45/55R than F55/45R like many Audi's have.
To each his own but weight balance is a very important thing for me because I want a car that does the handling well, not just only having a lot of torque/HP. Fun isn't a straight line for me. Just like a normal or low kerbweight is better than a heavy elephant...
That's why a 580BHP RS6 is 9 out of 10 times slower on a track than our 'torqueless' 4.0 V8 equipped M3...
And I know why.
|
In all honesty why are you comparing an M3 against an RS6? The RS6's competitors are the M5 and E63 not the M3, when against it's rightful rivals the RS6 is quicker and that is down to a number of reasons but neither it's weight or weight balance is hindering it of achieving it's goal which was to dominate that sector.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood
And yes I know as a DD I'm not every day on the track, but I know BMW's engineering is 'right'(only their elephant weight) and I don't live on the Northpole or near gravel roads either...
For me I prefer a Caterham R500 to a Veyron and keep the change thank you very much.  |
On the track I too would pick the Caterham, but in any other situation then the Veyron would get my vote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood
I used to own a 270BHP Audi S3(Haldex fwd bias), tracked it a lot, and you know what? On snow it was fun, wet roundabouts it was not:understeer. The Subaru Impreza I had before that S3 was much better in terms of sharpness agility and handling...so yes I've got some experience with awd/turbo cars. The world is bigger than Northern Ireland and the USA, especially on the internet.
About your TTRS thing: That's your opinion, footie, not mine. Could be a great car but I do not like the looks of it. |
If you owned an S3 then you should know that it has to be driven totally different to the like of the M3, barrel into a corner too hard and no amount of throttle will stop it from understeering. Also the S3 can only shifted up to 50% of the power to the rear so oversteer is near enough impossible unless on snow or ice.
I know the world is a big place and neither NI or the USA isn't at it's centre.
I know it's only my opinion about the TT-RS and few people on here will probably agree with me. But if I am right we will see some great times both on Hockhenheim and the Nurburgring, times which will more than match it to the likes of the M3. It might do things differently but result that always speaks volumes.