|
|
05-21-2007, 05:53 PM | #1 |
Registered
3
Rep 4
Posts |
RS4 is the least of the M3's worries
Ok...enough of the RS4/M3 comparisons. The RS4 isn't the competition. If anyone has been keeping up on Audi news, they are going to release the RS5, based on the A5 coupe platform. THIS thing, will give the M3 some headaches.
Key specs: - 4.2L Twin Turbo V8 putting out 450 horsepower and AT LEAST 500 ft/lbs of TQ - front axle moved up 120 mm to allow the engine to be mounted further back thus reducing the horrible oversteer it had. - 55:45 front-rear weight balance - rear-biased Quattro system - modified magnetic ride dampers lifted off of the TT - carbon ceramic brakes lifted off the R8 Only rumored performance times are the 0-60 which is rated at "sub 4.5 seconds" All this for an MSRP of $53,000. Possible M3 killer? Linky: http://www.tuningnews.net/article.php?date=070512a |
05-21-2007, 06:26 PM | #3 |
///M3
42
Rep 348
Posts |
This topic is useless... There's no compitition for the M3! Even Audi or Benz makes a car for $50 grand that will even smoke Ferrari F430, can't compare to M3. Because BMW M3 is a class on it's own.
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 07:05 PM | #4 | |
The World is Not Enough
166
Rep 1,088
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 07:18 PM | #5 |
Major
75
Rep 1,288
Posts |
A big heavy cruiser for $80K.... I can think of a lot of cars in that category.... except they all hold their value better than an Audi. Sorry, not a big Audi fan.....
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 07:27 PM | #7 |
Lieutenant General
341
Rep 16,407
Posts |
Easy on the fanboy rhetoric. The new M3 will be great as always but there is no car that is devoid of a solid competitor.
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 07:35 PM | #8 | |
Second Lieutenant
3
Rep 256
Posts |
Quote:
btw, as a side note, i think the M3 and R8 might not be too far away in terms of performance: e92 M3: 415 horsepower 295 ft lbs torque 3485lbs 1/4 mile: low-mid 12s @ 112-113mph (if we go by what the current M5 runs, using the e46M3 vs e39M5 timeslips as a model. i subtracted a couple mph because the M5s tend to always trap higher than their M3 counter-parts) Audi R8: 420hp 317 ft lbs torque 3450lbs 1/4 mile: mid 12s @ 111-112mph (based on a couple websites that have reported 1/4 mile times for the R8) the R8 has AWD which will probably cause the car to not produce as much power to the wheels (more drivetrain loss). i'd even go so far as to say that the M3 will probably produce higher dyno numbers than the R8. also the R8 is going to be double the base price of the M3 so in that sense they are definitely not in the same class...the M3 is going to be a much less expensive option for what seems to be similar performance. of course we'll have to see what kind of actual performance numbers/laptimes come out when the cars get closer to being released, but from what i can tell they are definitely close. man, talk about magazine racing to the fullest.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 07:59 PM | #9 |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Various
OK the Audi looks good on paper but consider this:
-Drive train loss on RS5 probably in the range of 20%, M3 closer to 15% -Regenerative braking is good for about 5-10 hp -DCT is probably good for an equivalent of 20 hp (very rough estimate for 0-60 / 0-100 / 1/4 mi times) -Weight of RS5 is probably going to be > M3 Add all of these effects up what do you find an "equivalent" rwhp of about 380 M3 vs. 360 Audi. Again this is not a rw dyno number but a number to take into account the relative effects of the above. Add to this a lighter vehicle and what do you have? More delivered power less weight, better power (delivered) to weight ratio. Sure with that much torque and 4WD this thing is going to probably do 0-60 really well but it will not be a very good all around sports car. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 08:16 PM | #10 | |
Conspicuous consumption
97
Rep 1,183
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 08:49 PM | #11 |
New Member
3
Rep 5
Posts |
True that it could be a bigass headache for the M3.. but no way in hell itll be 53,000.
But even if it was at that price, Id go for the M3 over anything :rocks:
__________________
-XkzTreM-
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 09:15 PM | #12 | |
Colonel
753
Rep 2,736
Posts |
Quote:
Quite likely $80K for the RS5; the regular S5 will be over $53! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 09:34 PM | #13 |
Captain
62
Rep 666
Posts |
Doesn't the RS4 start around $65k? The RS5 will be at least $70k base.
__________________
2008 E92///M3 - | Alpine White/Fox Red Extended Novillo | Technology | Premium | Cold | Mods: | 19" Avante Garde | Macht Schnell Filter | RPi Scoops | Rogue SSK | MS Spacers | ACM Test Pipes | ESS Tune | Remus Race | LUX V4 Angels | KW V3 | |
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 09:57 PM | #14 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
175
Rep 1,517
Posts
Drives: E92 335i coupe Black AUTO
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Alhambra, CA
|
Quote:
is it me that car look similiar to e92? damn AUdi always copy bmw style.. wat is up.. i smell law sue lol jk Other thing i want to point out.. the S6 is already 72K base line price according to Edmunds.com .the s4 is already 2007 Audi S4 Available As: Wagon, Convertible, Sedan MSRP: $47,500 - $56,900 . i doubt it is going to be 53K Last edited by LACA335i; 05-21-2007 at 10:15 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 10:03 PM | #15 | |
Reincarnated
245
Rep 4,227
Posts |
Quote:
Any solid evidence?
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 10:18 PM | #16 | |
Registered
3
Rep 4
Posts |
Quote:
It seems as though Audi isn't as worried about the performance of the R8 as much as the exclusivity. The R10 might not even be a huge performer. Either way, Audi is focusing on the car being extremely exclusive. Read this article from Car and Driver: http://www.tuningnews.net/article.php?date=070512a "Only 300 of the $110,000 coupes—which share underpinnings with the Lamborghini Gallardo—will arrive in the U.S. this year. Even though dealerships believe they could sell more, Audi is limiting supply to ensure the car’s exclusivity." "Audi wants dealers to make R8 buyers sign an affidavit before purchase that requires new owners to give an Audi dealership first dibs on buying back the used R8 when they’re done." "Only 109 of Audi’s 267 American dealers will stock the R8. To be eligible, each dealership had to be able to set aside 400 square feet to set up the proper shrine, and be prepared to invest $40,000 on marketing (more than a third of the cost of a single R8)." Sounds a bit over the top if you ask me. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2007, 10:26 PM | #17 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
175
Rep 1,517
Posts
Drives: E92 335i coupe Black AUTO
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Alhambra, CA
|
Quote:
check this out http://www.audi.com/audi/com/en2/models.html .. i believe he refer so called rs5 = A5. coupe.. it is a mixture of A and S together. see the thing is when u click on the site. it was suppose to be A5 and when u click on technology it go to s5.. Very confusing ... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 01:27 AM | #19 |
Major General
374
Rep 8,033
Posts |
another bulky heavy big ass audi that will handle like a boat and won't amount to anything compared to the M3. don't pay too much attention to hp numbers and all that. there is no way that thing can handle like an M3 (unless BMW does something really wrong).
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 02:55 AM | #20 | |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Regeneration
Quote:
-Charcoal filter ~10 hp at the crank -Regenerative braking ~5-10 hp at the wheels We could be looking at about 20-25 less hp at the wheels for the US car, UGH! I suppose this is worst case scenario but since the rwhp is "hidden" and all BMW has to quote is crank hp it is just another way the US gets screwed and gets a slower car, double ugh. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 03:29 AM | #21 |
First Lieutenant
19
Rep 325
Posts |
Why are we discussing the rs5 vs the M3? the rs5 will have 2 turbos stuck on it which instantly takes it out of the same class. A 4.2 with twin turbos producing 450 hp is nothing amazing and shows a lack of innovation. If the M3 is close in test figures i think it would be a clear win for them since the M3 is .2l smaller and no turbos. Look at the csl, 4.8 sec from an engine far smaller than the rs4. isn't it quite obvious bmw is far ahead?
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 04:04 AM | #22 |
Lieutenant
33
Rep 563
Posts
Drives: 2007 E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
|
I would have thought this was pretty obvious... If one is about to part with > £50k for a car it makes sense to consider what else is on offer, doesn't it?
Certainly I don't see why any of the options should be dismissed out of hand for being turbocharged. |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|