Audi TT-RS, is it a true M3 rival?

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by Neil McRae

no it wouldn't it would be about helping other car owners get the most out of what they have.

Gearheads love to talk about cars..that includes comparing cars. There's no need to get emotional about it.

We also have DIY threads,if you don't like the way a thread is going just avoid it,it's not like you're being forced to participate.

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by southlight

Let me see if that makes sense: You say Audi boards are closed minded as the people there only can praise their cars. Now we're bothering Footie for still finding and pointing out weak points of the M3 (we don't have to agree on these points as I wouldn't regarding the regular AWD/RWD argument myself, but also an opinion one doesn't share is valuable to me).
So all you're blaming him for is not being as closed minded as the guys over at rs6.com?
Really makes sense...




Best regards, south

I think what Footie was pointing out as a weak point is questionable,a high revving low torque engine is a good thing.
The M division had to go out of its way to make this engine the way it is because when you increase HP you also increase torque,usually a 400+plus HP engine would have 400+ lb-ft of torque.
So should people just take anything footie considers as weak point as gospel?
The E92 has some weak points too like its weight...not its engine tho.I guess that makes me closed minded and Footie is going to save us by helping us determine what he thinks are the weak points of the M3.

We've never heard of Audi prowess's on the track either.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

So should people just take anything footie considers as weak point as gospel?
The E92 has some weak points too like its weight...not its engine tho.I guess that makes me closed minded and Footie is going to save us by helping us determine what he thinks are the weak points of the M3.

I'm citing my former comment again and just for you:

Originally Posted by southlight

(we don't have to agree on these points as I wouldn't regarding the regular AWD/RWD argument myself, but also an opinion one doesn't share is valuable to me).

Where exactly did it say what you made out of it? It didn't at all. I take it you just wanted to be cynical.




Best regards, south

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by southlight

I'm citing my former comment again and just for you:

Where exactly did it say what you made out of it? It didn't at all. I take it you just wanted to be cynical.




Best regards, south

You wrote:
"Now we're bothering Footie for still finding and pointing out weak points of the M3..."
I take it you just wanted to be cynical too.

[footie]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

I think what Footie was pointing out as a weak point is questionable,a high revving low torque engine is a good thing.
The M division had to go out of its way to make this engine the way it is because when you increase HP you also increase torque,usually a 400+plus HP engine would have 400+ lb-ft of torque.
So should people just take anything footie considers as weak point as gospel?
The E92 has some weak points too like its weight...not its engine tho.I guess that makes me closed minded and Footie is going to save us by helping us determine what he thinks are the weak points of the M3.

We've never heard of Audi prowess's on the track either.

I won't comment of Audi products here or their track history, to do so would only fuel the belief that I am an Audi Fanboy and add to this current hype.

But since you are talking BS about hp and torque I will address it. Capacity or should I say the amount of air that can be forced into the cylinder at moderate engine speeds is the only deciding factor in relation to how much torque is produced, that is why turbo engines regardless of capacity produce decent amounts of torque.

My opinion on lack of torque only applies to low to moderate engine speeds, especially throttle response at these revs and this is solely down to BMW's choice of making the engine produce it's hp and torque at higher than normal rev limits for the capacity. I never ever said it was a bad engine, but it could have been better as a daily commuter.

Be objective with your comments please.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

You wrote:
"Now we're bothering Footie for still finding and pointing out weak points of the M3..."
I take it you just wanted to be cynical too.

Funny, now you're splitting hairs. It's no problem that you skipped the bracketed part directly next to the one above. Such things happen.


Best regards, south

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by southlight

Funny, now you're splitting hairs. It's no problem that you skipped the bracketed part directly after the one you now cited. Such things happen.


Best regards, south

What do you mean by we're bothering Footie for still finding and pointing out weak points of the M3 ? So Footie's weak points using your disclaimer aren't necessarily weak points after all? Sounds to me like you talk from both sides of your mouth.

I hope you don't think disagreeing with Footie is bothering him.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

What do you mean by we're bothering Footie for still finding and pointing out weak points of the M3 ? So Footie's weak points using your disclaimer aren't necessarily weak points after all? Sounds to me like you talk from both sides of your mouth.

I hope you don't think disagreeing with Footie is bothering him.

Ok, let me rephrase it: Footie is entitled to his opinion, so is everybody to disagree. That's not bothering him.
However, trying to bash him and calling him a fanboy instead of dealing with his reasoning is bothering him.

So it's fine to discuss and to disagree about certain points of the car. This thread came to a point where discussing the matter was replaced by trying to personate footie as devious or hypocritical. I hope you don't think acting like that is well. You surely don't and I didn't mean you at all with my initial comment.

Is it any clearer now?


Best regards, south

[ruff]

Footie,

Mate, you are a fine addition to this forum; a forum that has been lacking informative posts for the better part of a year. No need to be embarrassed about your high regard for Audi. Their Motorsport record speaks for itself. Their new V10 R8 puts anything BMW has ever built or planning on building to shame. The R8 is the real successor to the M1, the car BMW should of built years ago, before the M Division magically transformed itself into the Marketing Division. Attacks on either side of an argument, usually stem from vanity, insecurity, and lack of an educated counter argument.

[footie]

Thanks Ruff for your support.

[swamp2]

Foot, my record in criticizing BMW, M and the M3 is clear. There are a few sore points, I've stated them time and time again. But yes my strong admiration remains for the M line. It is not blind subjectivity but based on an alignment of my values and aesthetic with their products.

Your record on bashing BMW, M and the M3 is clear. Perhaps you most infamous statement one one very early in the days of DCT when it was just released and your comment was something like "look they totally f$%^ed it up". A strong, powerful and conclusive opinion that turned out to be completely premature and completely incorrect. This is one example of dozens.

I really do like Audi's they make some fine cars. To me their strongest points are motors, interiors and fit and finish. I like Nissans as well - the GT-R especially .

I think all of the reasonably open minded folks here (lots of them, IMHO) welcome criticisms of BMW/M/M3 and praise of other brands. It is just odd to many of us how much you focus on these.

Cheers.

[footie]

Well swamp, when your last car happened to be an Audi I suppose I still have an interest in them. Sorry I didn't read the rules and regulations and this wasn't allowed.

P.S.

I don't take back that statement about the gearbox because at the time they had f#cked it up. But please swamp, read a lot of posts regarding the gearbox and you will find numerous comments from unhappy owners at the time, are you picking fault with them.

[Sticky]

Originally Posted by Neil McRae

no it wouldn't it would be about helping other car owners get the most out of what they have.

Right, so we can have 50 more DCT threads. Helping people with DCT all day just sounds super!

[Sticky]

Originally Posted by southlight

Let me see if that makes sense: You say Audi boards are closed minded as the people there only can praise their cars. Now we're bothering Footie for still finding and pointing out weak points of the M3 (we don't have to agree on these points as I wouldn't regarding the regular AWD/RWD argument myself, but also an opinion one doesn't share is valuable to me).
So all you're blaming him for is not being as closed minded as the guys over at rs6.com?
Really makes sense...


Best regards, south

It does make sense if you read the thread, this one and that one. You must have missed the part where I said his tone and attitude since then has significantly changed.

Before the M3, Footie actually suggested BMW was ripping off the RS4 completely. He actually suggested the RS4 was a superior perfomer. He said the RS4 had the same horsepower as the M3. It doesn't due to the drivetrain losses, but these were all things he was wrong about but due to the Audi bias and having an Audi at the time, he put forward. He REEKS of Audi bias, get it? As other have seen, there will always be an Audi slant to his posts and threads, like this one. The TT-RS being an M3 rival, are you kidding me?

Footie is one of my best buds btw, does not mean we can't disagree.

[Sticky]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

What do you mean by we're bothering Footie for still finding and pointing out weak points of the M3 ? So Footie's weak points using your disclaimer aren't necessarily weak points after all? Sounds to me like you talk from both sides of your mouth.

I hope you don't think disagreeing with Footie is bothering him.

+1, Audi guys are sensitive. Coincidence Audi is the most popular car brand in the gay community? Possibly Feel free to disagree, regardless of what others say. Healthy disagreement is much better than ignorant agreement.

Regardless, you are spot on regarding your assessment of Audi's track prowess (or lack of.) The first car they produced without the majority of weight in the front is the R8, which is just a parts bin car ripped off from Lambo anyway.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

Well swamp, when your last car happened to be an Audi I suppose I still have an interest in them. Sorry I didn't read the rules and regulations and this wasn't allowed.

I have no idea whatsoever what that means... As you know there are no rules here about posting about other brands. For petes sake we are in the M3 vs. section... and it ain't much fun to talk about M3 vs. John Deere.

Originally Posted by footie

I don't take back that statement about the gearbox because at the time they had f#cked it up. But please swamp, read a lot of posts regarding the gearbox and you will find numerous comments from unhappy owners at the time, are you picking fault with them.

I don't take fault at folks who praise other brands nor criticize BMW. Again the point I was making was simply the prevalence of both in your posts. Most folks have observed this trait of yours. It is not immoral, illegal, or against any rules, just odd, that's it. Well it nto quite it, it obviously gets you into trouble in terms of attention and arguments, but again what can you expect on an M board.

Furthermore, the M-DCT was never "completely f&^%ed". Sure there have been unhappy owners, but more accurately I would say very happy owners who can't settle for a hair off of perfection, hence lots of whining, myself included.

[footie]

Full details of the new Audi TT RS have leaked onto the internet.

The document is intended for German dealerships and confirms that the fastest TT will get a 2.5-litre five-cylinder supercharged and turbocharged TFSI engine producing 335bhp and 332lb ft of torque.

Power for the Audi TT RS will be fed through a six-speed manual gearbox to all four wheels through Audi’s Quattro system, with a bias towards the rear wheels.

Audi claims that this will propel the car to 62mph in 4.5 seconds and return more than 28mpg on average.

There are no details disclosed about whether the Audi TT RS will lose the standard TT’s magnetic dampers in favour of more track-oriented suspension nor whether ceramic brakes will be an option.

The Cayman-rival Audi TT RS will arrive earlier than previously expected. Both the roadster and coupe TT RS will be launched in summer next year, so expect UK models to hit the showrooms before the end of 2009.

Our spy shots show that the Audi TT RS will gain a deeper front splitter and rear diffuser. A black grille with an aluminium surround will also add to the aggressive styling.

The leaked document does not specify prices, but expect to pay around £45,000 for the Audi TT RS coupe and a further £2000 for the cabriolet.

This info have surfaced from Autocar. Don't know when it was released but 335hp and 332ft/lbs should make for an exciting driving experience, especially if the weight is kept well below the 1400kg mark. Can't find out anything about whether it will come with DSG.

[attila]

I hope the base price will be below $55K in the US. The 28mpg is very very impressive.

[Year's_End]

This is for Southlight http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=227746

[southlight]

Originally Posted by Bimmer Loyalist

This is for Southlight http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=227746

I'm sorry to annoy you.


Best regards,
south

[footie]

Originally Posted by southlight

I'm sorry to annoy you.


Best regards,
south

Yeah South, don't let it happen again.

Regards,

Footie

Previously known as the 'Black Stig'
Part time test driver for Nissan's GTR project. and head of VAG marketing worldwide

[Year's_End]

lolololol