Deciding between an E90 M3 and RS4

[footie]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

I can deal with attitude, but I'm not sure why I'm getting it from you.

I was genuinely curious about Audi overrating anything, so I asked for evidence, and apparently that pissed you off. It's OK, I guess, but that's a mightly short fuse you're running around with.

I did a recall search, and came up short, which would tend to indicate that those cars didn't make it to the U.S.

That would of course explain why I hadn't heard the news.

Bruce

It seems that it only applied to European cars (i.e. first production runs) but as it was only present at the very top end of the rev range most owners probably didn't know a thing about it so this might explain the lack of chat on forums. I believe it was fixed as services were done (most likely) but I'm unsure if by the word 'recall' he meant it was public knowledge, probably only in service bulletins.

Remember this isn't a noticeable fault like the DCT is suffering, or the engine failures that occurred to the E43 M3s, this is something that didn't affect the day to day running of the cars one single bit.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

...and apparently that pissed you off. It's OK, I guess, but that's a mightly short fuse you're running around with.

@Bruce:assumption is the mother of all fcuk ups.

Anyway, glad you admit.Thanx.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

@Bruce:assumption is the mother of all fcuk ups.

Anyway, glad you admit.Thanx.

Bruce is a mellow guy and usually rubs only one person up the wrong way.

[Robin_NL]

[Irb Digital]

I didn't think it was over rated(by audi), I just feel that for the price, the car is slow.

[attila]

It is very interesting to see how different the perception is of certain brands in different countries.
BMW is very highly regarded in the US (with reason) but in Europe Audi is just as highly regarded if not more. (they are equal at least)
I know for example that no respectable person would buy MB in Hungary because MB is regarded as a gypsies car.
I think the general opinion of the brand is influencing people who has no first hand experience with a given car.
(Just a side note.)

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by attila

It is very interesting to see how different the perception is of certain brands in different countries.
BMW is very highly regarded in the US (with reason) but in Europe Audi is just as highly regarded if not more. (they are equal at least)
I know for example that no respectable person would buy MB in Hungary because MB is regarded as a gypsies car.
I think the general opinion of the brand is influencing people who has no first hand experience with a given car.
(Just a side note.)

Alright, making more generalisations:
Here in the Netherlands the brand BMW stands for:Reckless Driving Arrogant Bastards, discotheque owners(though our prime minister drives a 760Li LOL)
Mercedes stands for Bob the Builder Realestate guys
Audi for the sensible choice but not yet on par with BMW and Mercedes(positively or negatively spoken)
Saab/Volvo/Jaguar:Lawyers/Dentists/Architects whoever wants to be different.

etc etc.

[BRDHNTR]

They are two totally different cars to drive. I test drove both before I decided on the M3. I just didn't feel that the RS4 was worth the $72K sticker (or even $5K off that). The steering was heavy like the S8. It was very fast through some tight backroads (the only thing that scared me was the speed warning going off while really pushing the car in a 25mph zone), but the car had so much grip coming out of corners that it didn't feel like you could take it to the limit.

The M3 was going just as quickly up these roads but the acceleration felt more brutal and the steering felt more neutral. It was definitely more "scary" to drive and that gets the adrenaline pumping.

My M3 is parked for the winter, but if I had gone with the RS4, I would be driving it now (with snow tires!).

[jaeS4]

I don't know why people are saying that the RS4 is slow, considering how close the performance figures are with the M3. Granted the M3 is quicker by 0.2 to 0.4 seconds, but i don't think that constitute the RS4 as being slow. On a road course on the other hand have shown how much quicker is the M3 around a track with twisties just by example of that episode from Top Gear when they compared the e92 M3, C63, and RS4 and the RS4 was 4 seconds slower than the M3. But then again, it is about 300lbs heavier with the AWD system. Other than that, all of the other mag comparison i've seen and read shows the RS4 is right there with the M3.

[footie]

Most if not all the negative comments for Audi cars seem to come from the States and Canada, don't know if price has much of a bearing on this or whether it's a dealer network problem.

I have owned both brands (BMW & Audi) over the years and wouldn't place the ownership experience of either to better than the other. Likewise the driving experience is different though I would class one better than the other, they are just different.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by footie

It seems that it only applied to European cars (i.e. first production runs) but as it was only present at the very top end of the rev range most owners probably didn't know a thing about it so this might explain the lack of chat on forums. I believe it was fixed as services were done (most likely) but I'm unsure if by the word 'recall' he meant it was public knowledge, probably only in service bulletins.

Remember this isn't a noticeable fault like the DCT is suffering, or the engine failures that occurred to the E43 M3s, this is something that didn't affect the day to day running of the cars one single bit.

This was excessively dicussed on German forums. First dyno results were pretty bad because many dynos couldn't handle the 40/60 split of the RS4 Quattro. Audi then published acceleration numbers as reference, so owners could see if their cars are up to that standards or not. Additionally Audi told what dynos should be used to have a correct result and under what conditions the tests should be performed. That way some owners came to a dyno result well within normal aberration. But some still had problems: I just read of one owner in Germany sueing Audi for his RS4 only having an output of about 360hp. According to this owner Audi now states that the output of the engine only can be determined with it being removed.

That being said: The quite identical engine in the R8 4.2 doesn't seem to be overrated at all.


Best regards, south

[footie]

Originally Posted by southlight

This was excessively dicussed on German forums. First dyno results were pretty bad because many dynos couldn't handle the 40/60 split of the RS4 Quattro. Audi then published acceleration numbers as reference, so owners could see if their cars are up to that standards or not. Additionally Audi told what dynos should be used to have a correct result and under what conditions the tests should be performed. That way some owners came to a dyno result well within normal aberration. But some still had problems: I just read of one owner in Germany sueing Audi for his RS4 only having an output of about 360hp. BTW According to this owner Audi now states that the output of the engine only can be determined with it being removed.

That being said: The quite identical engine in the R8 4.2 doesn't seem to be overrated at all.


Best regards, south

Thanks for this info it basically backs up what I have been told, firstly from a dealer buddy and what I expected from dyno results when using Quattro. I also liked the bit about the only way to know it's output for sure is to have an engine attached to nothing.

BTW I still believe the only true proof of output is to gauge the acceleration figures based on the weight of the car which we already know.

P.S.

Many customers have been disappointed with the R8 as well, even though it seems to perform great against the competition.

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by footie

Most if not all the negative comments for Audi cars seem to come from the States and Canada, don't know if price has much of a bearing on this or whether it's a dealer network problem.

Quite true foot....

Audi in Canada is strongly associated with VW, i.e. dealer network etc.....It is hard to go upscale shackled to the VW brand.

VW and Audi had real big quality problems with the mk4 products, falling windows, electronics etc...

And in the 1980's people think Audis accelerate by themselves and kill people....Audi never recovered from that.

And they are slow and souless (is this my inside voice?).

[Year's_End]

Originally Posted by footie

Most if not all the negative comments for Audi cars seem to come from the States and Canada, don't know if price has much of a bearing on this or whether it's a dealer network problem.

I'm sure it's a bit of both. Unfortunately, their dealer networks are horrible in Florida. I'm not sure about the rest of the states, but over here I would say that there's only about one Audi dealership per every five or six MB/BMW dealerships. Can't say anything about pricing, since I've never inquired about anything except the S5 (which they were stubborn, understandably, considering it was brand new and limited at the time).

[mixja]

Originally Posted by Irb Digital

RS4, overpriced and under delivers. Looks good, but bang for buck, its a dog. The choice is easy, E90 M3.

Gearing is too tall on an MT vs a DCT? It's too tall if you plan on building a dragster, but for streetablity, its damn near perfect. Top gear revs pretty high when cruising, so gearing being too tall is the first I've heard that. Have you driven the car past 3rd gear? Maybe they should gear it like a civic, and keep the top speed around 130. Never mind the 414hp, 6 gears and 170+ top speed capability.

The M3 relatively speaking suffers from weak torque and would greatly benefit from shorter gearing. It's wide power band also means we won't detrimentally sacrifice maximum speeds in each gear by running shorter gearing. IMO the stock MT is only good for the track (albeit rather boring as the tall gearing means you stay in 3rd gear for a lot of time on many tracks) - on the street you have to drive faster to unlock that ferocious top end acceleration you would out of competing cars. In fact, I'd suggest shorter gearing will improve the streetability of the car from a performance perspective - in any given gear you'll have greater acceleration and you'll be able to get into the power band of the M3 faster. This will give the perception to the driver that the car is more responsive - to me the stock M3 MT feels very sedate until it hits around 3500RPM.

The Audi RS4 gearing is shorter, yet same theoretical top speed. The Audi R8 gearing is even shorter again (3rd and 4th gears are very similar to the M3 DCT 3rd and 4th gears), yet same theoretical top speed as the M3. So you can still have the lazy 6th gear for cruising and have shorter gearing in between.

[jml]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Quite true foot....

Audi in Canada is strongly associated with VW, i.e. dealer network etc.....It is hard to go upscale shackled to the VW brand.

VW and Audi had real big quality problems with the mk4 products, falling windows, electronics etc...

And in the 1980's people think Audis accelerate by themselves and kill people....Audi never recovered from that.

And they are slow and souless (is this my inside voice?).

Audi has really been a damaged brand in the US up until the B5 platform. The dealers were shared with VW, and absolutely horrid. I remember waiting months for a service appointment for my B5 S4, and then being told Enterprise auto rental was only two blocks away and an easy walk, but not included.

Today, I can get into my BMW dealer with a days notice and they drop me into a 335i loaner with a fresh starbucks coffee in my hand. I do end up visiting the dealer a lot in M cars, but at least it is easy.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by mixja

The M3 relatively speaking suffers from weak torque and would greatly benefit from shorter gearing. It's wide power band also means we won't detrimentally sacrifice maximum speeds in each gear by running shorter gearing. IMO the stock MT is only good for the track (albeit rather boring as the tall gearing means you stay in 3rd gear for a lot of time on many tracks) - on the street you have to drive faster to unlock that ferocious top end acceleration you would out of competing cars. In fact, I'd suggest shorter gearing will improve the streetability of the car from a performance perspective - in any given gear you'll have greater acceleration and you'll be able to get into the power band of the M3 faster. This will give the perception to the driver that the car is more responsive - to me the stock M3 MT feels very sedate until it hits around 3500RPM.

The Audi RS4 gearing is shorter, yet same theoretical top speed. The Audi R8 gearing is even shorter again (3rd and 4th gears are very similar to the M3 DCT 3rd and 4th gears), yet same theoretical top speed as the M3. So you can still have the lazy 6th gear for cruising and have shorter gearing in between.

OK point taken.(irl the 6MT was faster than the DCT remember Chris Harris' test?) But then the RS4 V8 felt less torquey and way slower than my E90 M3 6MT. I also once accellerated against a blueish Audi RS4 V8 in my former 335i with me having 2 more people onboard. RS4 was doing it's utmost to pass me and beyond 140mph he did....at last...

[mixja]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

OK point taken.(irl the 6MT was faster than the DCT remember Chris Harris' test?) But then the RS4 V8 felt less torquey and way slower than my E90 M3 6MT. I also once accellerated against a blueish Audi RS4 V8 in my former 335i with me having 2 more people onboard. RS4 was doing it's utmost to pass me and beyond 140mph he did....at last...

I owned a 335i (stock AT) prior to my RS4 - the RS4 was definitely quicker across the board, except between 1500RPM and 3000RPM. That said, my RS4 was modified and in stock trim I wasn't happy with the RS4's performance given the price.

I'm not saying the RS4 is quicker than the M3 - there is enough evidence that the M3 is the quicker car, my big sore point with the M3 is the manual transmission, especially having experienced the fabulous RS4 transmission. To me it's such a critical component of the overall equation that I personally cannot overlook when it comes to the M3 MT.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

OK point taken.(irl the 6MT was faster than the DCT remember Chris Harris' test?) But then the RS4 V8 felt less torquey and way slower than my E90 M3 6MT. I also once accellerated against a blueish Audi RS4 V8 in my former 335i with me having 2 more people onboard. RS4 was doing it's utmost to pass me and beyond 140mph he did....at last...

I can't say if it's a typical RS4 that your mate owns but the examples I have driven all felt to have more torque than either my M3 or any others I tried before hand. There is no doubt that the M3's top end felt the stronger but it felt like swings and roundabouts, with one probably pulling ahead at the start of each gear (RS4) and the other (M3) pulling this advantage right back as they would both push towards the red line.

This opinion of mine seems to mimic what Autocar got when they tested both cars.

Originally Posted by jml

Audi has really been a damaged brand in the US up until the B5 platform. The dealers were shared with VW, and absolutely horrid. I remember waiting months for a service appointment for my B5 S4, and then being told Enterprise auto rental was only two blocks away and an easy walk, but not included.

Today, I can get into my BMW dealer with a days notice and they drop me into a 335i loaner with a fresh starbucks coffee in my hand. I do end up visiting the dealer a lot in M cars, but at least it is easy.

Your comments and the ones by TB are so different to how I and probably most customers in the UK find Audi dealers. In fact the main Audi dealership near me also owns VW, Mercedes and BMW dealerships but their Audi dealers gives by far the best customer service. An example of the difference, you walk into their Audi dealers and you are greeted by reception (like all the others) and usually after giving your name you walk around the cars in the showroom. If you do this in the BMW dealers that they own and are not wearing a suit or suitable clothing then you get ignored.

Next example is while you wait at the Audi dealers you get offered a drink (latte for TB ) and a biscuit or cake with either a newspaper or the latest of Autocar or other car mag, in the BMW and Merc dealers you are just left to wait and only get offered something to eat or drink when the sales person takes you to a desk.

All small things but make the whole experience that bit more special. But the nail in the coffin is asking for a test drive when they finally get an M3 in and never being rung back. After knowing for a month that they have a demo car in I ring to see if I could arrange a testdrive and ask to be put through to the saleman who deal with me before hand, he made all the excuses that they were very busy but seriously who many people are buying M3s, this was total bull shit and I told him to stick the car. I decided to go to a different BMW dealer and buy the car there. But this just shows how different two dealers can be, even ones owned by the same family.

Will I be back to an Audi?

Chances are that will happen in 2010 in either an RS5 or TT-RS but I can not say a single bad word about my M3 experience so far, the car is a joy to drive.

[Irb Digital]

There's no glaring weakspot in the gearing, so now we're talking about preference. I love the gearing on the M3, as I feel it best utilizes the power of the motor, which is quite simple since the power band is broad. I also have read nothing but praise from all the magazines and reviews, about how great the transmission is, (gearing included). To say the gearing is so bad, that you wouldn't consider the car is a bit of a surprise, as you're the first person I've heard with a complaint, (drag strip enthusiasts not included).

As far as Audi, in the U.S., Audi has done a great job of rebuilding the name. 10 years ago, the name was about as respectable as Yugo. They really build good looking, well built cars these days though. As far as reliablity I'm not sure, but if they are anything like the VW line, good luck. The employ some decent technology, but aside from the R8, they don't build sports cars. Every one of their "sports" cars is based on a front wheel drive. They attach a awd system and badge it quattro and magically its a sports car now. Sorry, but they don't have this guy fooled. Their cars are heavy, especially at the front wheels and slow. RS4 isn't much slower than a M3 = truth, but it does it with AWD. This is the fundamental flaw for me. More power, and AWD, and more money, and its still slower than a M3 in just about any performance test. This = Fail

Audi makes good eye candy, but to the eye of a true enthusiast, there's much better choices out there. I do like the R8, but I'm still buying something else for the money.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by Irb Digital

There's no glaring weakspot in the gearing, so now we're talking about preference. I love the gearing on the M3, as I feel it best utilizes the power of the motor, which is quite simple since the power band is broad. I also have read nothing but praise from all the magazines and reviews, about how great the transmission is, (gearing included). To say the gearing is so bad, that you wouldn't consider the car is a bit of a surprise, as you're the first person I've heard with a complaint, (drag strip enthusiasts not included).

As far as Audi, in the U.S., Audi has done a great job of rebuilding the name. 10 years ago, the name was about as respectable as Yugo. They really build good looking, well built cars these days though. As far as reliablity I'm not sure, but if they are anything like the VW line, good luck. The employ some decent technology, but aside from the R8, they don't build sports cars. Every one of their "sports" cars is based on a front wheel drive. They attach a awd system and badge it quattro and magically its a sports car now. Sorry, but they don't have this guy fooled. Their cars are heavy, especially at the front wheels and slow. RS4 isn't much slower than a M3 = truth, but it does it with AWD. This is the fundamental flaw for me. More power, and AWD, and more money, and its still slower than a M3 in just about any performance test. This = Fail

Audi makes good eye candy, but to the eye of a true enthusiast, there's much better choices out there. I do like the R8, but I'm still buying something else for the money.

(Mind you I'm a ex 270BHP Audi S3 (Mk1)owner)

[footie]

Some people will never be convinced that awd is the most efficient way to drive quickly. I will not deny that the rwd chassis is usually more enjoyable but not always the case, I have always enjoyed rallying more so in an awd car than rwd.

One car in the Audi line up that did impress me most was the TT-S, I reckon the RS version will be a hoot to drive and could prove to be the next model after the R8 to prove Audi can build sportscars.