BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > M3 (E90 / E92 / E93) > M3 vs....
 
GT Haus
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-21-2009, 02:20 AM   #23
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Netherlands
80

 
Robin_NL's Avatar
 
Drives: AW 1M , Assetto Corsa
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands, Europe


Posts: 4,692
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
I was assuming that we were comparing like with like. You can't really compare a basic 335i with an S4, for a start there is a numbers of features that are standard on the S4 which are optional extras of the 335i. Even the basic 335i you were using wasn't one equipped with the M/Sport bodykit for heaven sake.

Either way this isn't that important, the thing I'm excited in is the fact Audi have another alternative which is more than a match for another BMW which can only be a good thing for us the consumer.

ams & sportauto tested the 2 cars like how they are. Who are YOU to say they cannot? They did it. Period.
The 335i wasn't exactly basic to start with, it was the luxury version. And still the 335i wins (without M body/sports package) in Sportauto carmag. Do you read at all, or are you typing like hell and pushing 'enter' before you even think, footie?

I'm just correcting you, because misinformation isn't right on a forum like this. The S4 is way more expensive EVEN if the 335i is loaded...
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 02:48 AM   #24
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
460

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK


Posts: 5,351
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Driver72 View Post
470 hp from 4.2 liters?
Not without forced induction on a road going production car.
That would be an amazing 112 hp per liter NA

My guess it IS a tweaked version of the 4.2 liter in the RS4 but expect it to be in the 430-435 hp range at most.
Add that to the lighter RS5 platform and it would make it a pretty quick car.

A TT V10 just won't sell very well here in the states, would make the car too front heavy as well.

However, two small turbos on the 4.2 liter making 5-6 psi boost would make that one heck of an engine and car.
But I'm sure it would require the lower revving 4.2 from the old S4 and current S5.
That would put it in the 450 hp range and a boatload of torque which would be awesome for that AWD platform.
You make some good points. There is just no way the RS5 will be a V10. It will be nose heavy and more of an M6 rival and therefore more expensive. NO WAY will it happen.

Word is now that it should be a N/A V8 hitting ~450bhp. As I showed in the other thread that is absolutely achievable from the V10 in the LP560-4. Then again, Audi have been known to test more than 1 type of engine.

I also agree on the V8 TT route. It would require a lower revving engine, like the S5's V8 but I doubt they will use that. Perhaps they will derive a V8 TT from the RS6's V10 TT. Always been a perfectly good idea, except the front will be heavy again.

For that reason I think it will be N/A V8.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 02:50 AM   #25
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
460

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK


Posts: 5,351
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood View Post
ams & sportauto tested the 2 cars like how they are. Who are YOU to say they cannot? They did it. Period.
The 335i wasn't exactly basic to start with, it was the luxury version. And still the 335i wins (without M body/sports package) in Sportauto carmag. Do you read at all, or are you typing like hell and pushing 'enter' before you even think, footie?

I'm just correcting you, because misinformation isn't right on a forum like this. The S4 is way more expensive EVEN if the 335i is loaded...
Guys lets not get into an argument over cars. I too, like Footie, thought that the 335i sounded like a base model. What's included in the luxury version?

Also, for me the 335i would need the Msport kit. The S4 looks a lot better than standard A4, and the 335i should not look like standard 3 series.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 02:57 AM   #26
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Netherlands
80

 
Robin_NL's Avatar
 
Drives: AW 1M , Assetto Corsa
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands, Europe


Posts: 4,692
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
Guys lets not get into an argument over cars. I too, like Footie, thought that the 335i sounded like a base model. What's included in the luxury version?

Also, for me the 335i would need the Msport kit. The S4 looks a lot better than standard A4, and the 335i should not look like standard 3 series.
the whole bunch of woodtrim/alu/leather/I drive comfy stuff etc.etc.
the price of the M package would have been less...

335i was equipped with 17"alloys and achieved the fastest ever Hockenheim Kurz laptime of all 335i's they ever tested(E90/92auto etc). Sportauto reckons it's because of the same tyrewidth of all the four wheels instead of the 225 in front and 255 at the rear(18")

Anyway, I suppose you're right. Just wanted to stay to the facts. That's all.

And I didn't have the sportkit on my ex 335i because I didn't like it at all(I love sleepers) and I didn't want them to think:Poser, it's not a real M3 at all. Just me.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 03:09 AM   #27
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
460

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK


Posts: 5,351
iTrader: (0)

Guys can anyone confirm weight figures for the M3, RS4 and S5. Right now I've got (kerb) weights of the M3 and RS4 to be 1650kg and 1655kg respectively.

If this is the case, then imagine the RS5 lighter than the RS4 with the new MLP platform (better weight distribution) and more power
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 04:21 AM   #28
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Netherlands
80

 
Robin_NL's Avatar
 
Drives: AW 1M , Assetto Corsa
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands, Europe


Posts: 4,692
iTrader: (0)

The new S4 3.0 supercharged(of which I was talking about in my former postings) weighs a mere 1789kgs(.....) compared to the 1640kgs for the M3 saloon which already is an elephant on wheels in my opinion. A weight distribution of F55.4/44.6R compared to more or less 51/49 for the BMW's and somewhat boring AWD don't make the new (R)S Audis my kind of driving inspired car, though they look GREAT, inside and outside.

I'll never buy one again, for sure, even if it has a thousand BHP.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 04:45 AM   #29
mixja
Captain
United_States
19

 
Drives: 2011 E90 DCT Silverstone
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Beverly Hils, CA


Posts: 783
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
Guys can anyone confirm weight figures for the M3, RS4 and S5. Right now I've got (kerb) weights of the M3 and RS4 to be 1650kg and 1655kg respectively.

If this is the case, then imagine the RS5 lighter than the RS4 with the new MLP platform (better weight distribution) and more power
Audi use a different standard (can't remember the names - I think Audi uses DIN and BMW uses EU) for quoting weight - basically they state unladen weight, whereas BMW includes 70kg for driver, luggage and full tank of gas in their quoted weight. Hence the M3 using Audi's standard would be in the vicinity of 1560kg or so (3432lbs), which seems to agree with what many M3 owners have found...
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 05:06 AM   #30
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
460

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK


Posts: 5,351
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixja View Post
Audi use a different standard (can't remember the names - I think Audi uses DIN and BMW uses EU) for quoting weight - basically they state unladen weight, whereas BMW includes 70kg for driver, luggage and full tank of gas in their quoted weight. Hence the M3 using Audi's standard would be in the vicinity of 1560kg or so (3432lbs), which seems to agree with what many M3 owners have found...
Ah...I remember this now. I knew the difference of 5kg was too good to be true! Still, that means a difference of ~75kg between the new M3 and old RS4. Which isn't too much to be honest and that gap would decrease slightly if we were talking about the M3 Saloon/Sedan.

Can anyone else confirm the 70kg, I understand Audi and BMW use different weight measuring methods, but is the difference definitely 70kg?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 06:19 AM   #31
footie
Major General
No_Country
149

 
footie's Avatar
 
Drives: ????????????
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: BMW M3 will get a V6TT


Posts: 7,507
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood View Post
The new S4 3.0 supercharged(of which I was talking about in my former postings) weighs a mere 1789kgs(.....) compared to the 1640kgs for the M3 saloon which already is an elephant on wheels in my opinion. A weight distribution of F55.4/44.6R compared to more or less 51/49 for the BMW's and somewhat boring AWD don't make the new (R)S Audis my kind of driving inspired car, though they look GREAT, inside and outside.

I'll never buy one again, for sure, even if it has a thousand BHP.
The M3 needs the near 50% weight balance because it's rwd, otherwise it can't put it's power down anywhere near as successfully as it does. You really need to get away from this idealistic belief that 50/50 weight balance is what make a great car because it's BS.

I can understand why you may find awd boring, some people find turbos boring, the same for automatics, I myself haven't totally warmed to the peaky N/A engine in the M3. Point is that there is a car out there from everyone, for you it's currently the M3, for someone else it might be the 335i and another could be the S4.

I personally wouldn't dismiss the S4 or any other car just because of my preference to another form of drivetrain because each application is different. I honest reckon that the TT-RS will be a better driving car than the M3, this might not mean that it will kick the tail out and hold it there for ever because no one drives like that 99.999% of the time, no I reckon it will be better because it's lighter, have better directional changing ability and should feel that bit more special as only a proper sportscar can.

To you the thought of a fwd-biased awd system in a sportscar is absurd and that's your opinion but without trying something then how will you ever know for sure.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 06:51 AM   #32
mixja
Captain
United_States
19

 
Drives: 2011 E90 DCT Silverstone
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Beverly Hils, CA


Posts: 783
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
Ah...I remember this now. I knew the difference of 5kg was too good to be true! Still, that means a difference of ~75kg between the new M3 and old RS4. Which isn't too much to be honest and that gap would decrease slightly if we were talking about the M3 Saloon/Sedan.

Can anyone else confirm the 70kg, I understand Audi and BMW use different weight measuring methods, but is the difference definitely 70kg?
Euro Spec RS4 with full tank (no driver or luggage) was weighed in a New Zealand test at 1727kg...

From www.rri.se (curb weights):

07 M3 Coupe - 1611kg
08 M3 Sedan - 1664kg
06 RS4 - 1736kg
07 RS4 - 1728kg

So the RS4 is conservatively ~110kg heavier than the M3 Coupe in reality...
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 06:59 AM   #33
footie
Major General
No_Country
149

 
footie's Avatar
 
Drives: ????????????
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: BMW M3 will get a V6TT


Posts: 7,507
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood View Post
the whole bunch of woodtrim/alu/leather/I drive comfy stuff etc.etc.
the price of the M package would have been less....

Anyway, I suppose you're right. Just wanted to stay to the facts. That's all.
You like to stick with facts, so lets do that and spec each car to identically. The 335i when specced like the S4 works out more than 54K euros so where in my statement does it not sound reasonable. You may conclude that you can buy an 335i without all of this extra stuff but facts are most people do spec beyond a basic car and if you compare a basic 335i to an S4 you will feel and look the poor cousin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood View Post
335i was equipped with 17"alloys and achieved the fastest ever Hockenheim Kurz laptime of all 335i's they ever tested(E90/92auto etc). Sportauto reckons it's because of the same tyrewidth of all the four wheels instead of the 225 in front and 255 at the rear(18")

And I didn't have the sportkit on my ex 335i because I didn't like it at all(I love sleepers) and I didn't want them to think:Poser, it's not a real M3 at all. Just me.
Sportauto already tested a 335i with 17" a while ago and it's time was 1:17.8 I believe so unless it was a shit car which I doubt then please explain how this time round they have got one to smash this time. Oh and BTW what was the time for the 335i, including it's acceleration figures.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 07:03 AM   #34
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
460

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK


Posts: 5,351
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixja View Post
Euro Spec RS4 with full tank (no driver or luggage) was weighed in a New Zealand test at 1727kg...

From www.rri.se (curb weights):

07 M3 Coupe - 1611kg
08 M3 Sedan - 1664kg
06 RS4 - 1736kg
07 RS4 - 1728kg

So the RS4 is conservatively ~110kg heavier than the M3 Coupe in reality...


110kg is considerably more of a difference. I still think the lighter RS5 with MLP and more power will be a great match for the M3. It's just depending on how much lighter/balanced the RS5 will be and what engine they decide to use.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 07:06 AM   #35
footie
Major General
No_Country
149

 
footie's Avatar
 
Drives: ????????????
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: BMW M3 will get a V6TT


Posts: 7,507
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixja View Post
Euro Spec RS4 with full tank (no driver or luggage) was weighed in a New Zealand test at 1727kg...

From www.rri.se (curb weights):

07 M3 Coupe - 1611kg
08 M3 Sedan - 1664kg
06 RS4 - 1736kg
07 RS4 - 1728kg

So the RS4 is conservatively ~110kg heavier than the M3 Coupe in reality...
It's interesting how the M3 actually weighs less than quoted, maybe the same goes for it's output.

The driving experience and how a thing performs should be everyones concern, not weight, weight balance or how many wheels are doing the driving.

P.S.
Lets face it, who hear would turn their nose up at a GT3. It's all about the driving and that is it.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 07:10 AM   #36
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
460

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK


Posts: 5,351
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
It's interesting how the M3 actually weighs less than quoted, maybe the same goes for it's output.

The driving experience and how a thing performs should be everyones concern, not weight, weight balance or how many wheels are doing the driving.

P.S.
Lets face it, who hear would turn their nose up at a GT3. It's all about the driving and that is it.
That's true I guess Footie. Looking at the new RS6 tells us this. Even though it is heavier than rivals, it is more powerful, economical and faster in all respects. It depends how you drive it, which again relates to the driving experience.

I think the RS5 will be a winner looking at Audi's recent past performance models.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 08:27 AM   #37
J08M3
Major General
United_States
102

 
J08M3's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 M3 COUPE
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NEW YORK


Posts: 6,012
iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stunnerable View Post
Whatever... if it has AWD then.. BORING!!
Yep... the main reason I have a ///M instead. If they made that thing rear wheel drive I might consider one.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 11:20 AM   #38
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Netherlands
80

 
Robin_NL's Avatar
 
Drives: AW 1M , Assetto Corsa
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands, Europe


Posts: 4,692
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
You like to stick with facts, so lets do that and spec each car to identically. The 335i when specced like the S4 works out more than 54K euros so where in my statement does it not sound reasonable. You may conclude that you can buy an 335i without all of this extra stuff but facts are most people do spec beyond a basic car and if you compare a basic 335i to an S4 you will feel and look the poor cousin.



Sportauto already tested a 335i with 17" a while ago and it's time was 1:17.8 I believe so unless it was a shit car which I doubt then please explain how this time round they have got one to smash this time. Oh and BTW what was the time for the 335i, including it's acceleration figures.
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 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.


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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
To you the thought of a fwd-biased awd system in a sportscar is absurd and that's your opinion but without trying something then how will you ever know for sure.
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.

Last edited by Robin_NL; 01-21-2009 at 11:44 AM.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 12:08 PM   #39
footie
Major General
No_Country
149

 
footie's Avatar
 
Drives: ????????????
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: BMW M3 will get a V6TT


Posts: 7,507
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Hood View Post
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 View Post
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 View Post
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 View Post
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.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 12:20 PM   #40
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Netherlands
80

 
Robin_NL's Avatar
 
Drives: AW 1M , Assetto Corsa
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands, Europe


Posts: 4,692
iTrader: (0)

The laptime was 1:17.0(best 335i KK Hockenheim lap ever for Sportauto) for the E90 335i, not 1:18 footie. Ever read the article in Sportauto?It's in front of me....0.3 seconds slower, NOT 1.3!That's why you keep lying to yourself about the bloody 335d vs 335i man!


[edit censored sorry]

You really think you are god? I'm an atheist.

And I damn well know how to drive a S3 but if understeer occurs earlier than the Impreza. Do I really have to explain you everything?

Last edited by Robin_NL; 01-21-2009 at 12:39 PM.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 12:30 PM   #41
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Netherlands
80

 
Robin_NL's Avatar
 
Drives: AW 1M , Assetto Corsa
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands, Europe


Posts: 4,692
iTrader: (0)

WTH am I in these stupid threads about lame Audis anyway?(Just correcting footie on his misinformed postings...) My bad, won't happen again. Sorry guys.

fwiw:SPORTAUTO mag ISSUE 1/2009, the newest. E90 335i laptime 1:17 and the first on 17"wheels. A E92 335i did it in 1:17.8 and a E90 335i in issue 8 2007 1:18.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 01:02 PM   #42
footie
Major General
No_Country
149

 
footie's Avatar
 
Drives: ????????????
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: BMW M3 will get a V6TT


Posts: 7,507
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Sorry RH for getting it wrong, just looked upthe the info I could find and the only E90 time I could find was the 1:18.0.

I never said I was God but since you asked......

Neither was I telling you how to drive, only explaining how the S3 was different to the M3 and why it's prone to understeer more.

P.S.

I was sure I read that the first ever supertest of the 335i was the E92 and the lap time on both tracks were with 17". But if I am wrong then forgive me.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 01:09 PM   #43
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Netherlands
80

 
Robin_NL's Avatar
 
Drives: AW 1M , Assetto Corsa
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands, Europe


Posts: 4,692
iTrader: (0)

It's alright man. This is their first 17"wheel equipped 335i doing that 'powerlap' at Hockenheim according to Sportauto. The other ones were with the 225/255 18" wheels and 1:17.8 and 1:18....

BACK ONTOPIC sorry.
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2009, 03:44 PM   #44
Year's_End
RWD only.
United_States
319

 
Year's_End's Avatar
 
Drives: '08 E92 335i
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St. Pete, FL


Posts: 12,326
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
That's true I guess Footie. Looking at the new RS6 tells us this. Even though it is heavier than rivals, it is more powerful, economical and faster in all respects. It depends how you drive it, which again relates to the driving experience.

I think the RS5 will be a winner looking at Audi's recent past performance models.
Chris Harris said the RS6 was a bore of a drive, but a damn fast one at that.
__________________
E92 335i: Space Grey|Coral Red|Aluminum Trim

Future Ride: 2015 Mustang GT Premium |Guard|401A|PP|Recaros|6MT
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:15 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST