|
|
05-22-2007, 05:14 AM | #23 |
For the love of ///M3
19
Rep 660
Posts |
I do. Forced induction is so well forced. With the M3 you're getting power through a megar-rev range whereas with FI, I can't see the Audi lump putting all its power through until 8250rpm as it currently does. Rats to torque as well. Diesels have a lot of torque but the equivalent petrol car is still quicker.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 07:50 AM | #25 | |
Moderator
7515
Rep 19,368
Posts |
Quote:
Now, if they went with the 5.2L V10 instead, pumped to about 500hp (which is still less than it makes in the Gallardo) - that would be something to drool on! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 07:57 AM | #26 |
Registered
0
Rep 3
Posts |
Pretty sad. I signed up for this forum just to reply to this.
I'm sick and tired of BMW driver's view of VW/Audi as the "other" German car company. A lot of dubbers would much rather own an E30 M3 than their current car. But no BMW owner will ever admit the legacy of any of the Dubaudi group cars. Ever. It comes down to a superiority complex. Once it comes out, BMW drivers on the roads will bow to an AWE chipped S5, or stock one for that matter. The same way they bow to the older S4. IMHO, RWD is the superior drivetrain. But AWD is a great compromise. And to those saying BMW copying Audi............Audi was using turbos in the A4, S4, etc.......... long before BMW ever did for the 335. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 08:14 AM | #27 |
Second Lieutenant
18
Rep 220
Posts |
The porky RS4 manages to expose its front tyre's steel belts after 5 laps round the track, the heavier RS5 (say 1,900 or 1950kg) will certainly worsen the situation.
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 08:27 AM | #28 | ||
Moderator
7515
Rep 19,368
Posts |
Quote:
Actually I think its mostly that BMWs have basically been the better drivers car by most professional accounts, and as verified by most who test drive them. Well, that and the fact that you are on a BMW forum, where BMW's are naturally going to get more props. Its not really that Audi makes bad cars. Far from it. But its no secret that they are chasing BMW in driving dynamics. The OP's comment about moving the engine back for better handling characteristics basically concedes this point. Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 09:22 AM | #29 | |
Major General
374
Rep 8,033
Posts |
Quote:
Also, why do you think many neutral professional reviewers seem to repeatedly arrive at the conclusion that BMWs handle better than Audis on dry paved roads? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 09:41 AM | #30 |
Registered
0
Rep 3
Posts |
Off topic anyway.
Back on......... Why I think this car is better than the new M3? We can't really say until we see track/drag numbers and a true price. Until then, for Audi fans, and M3 fans, all this is mental masturbation trying to justify or refute a car's status. As for older models, the track times are all over the place depending on where you look. On topgear.com, there a LOT of BMW times on their charts and a few VW/Audi times. Comparing like for like competitors, the standard outgoing M3 came in at 1.31.8 and the S4 came in at 1.30.9 Seeing as these aren't done on identical days, let's chalk it flat for the .9 difference. The M3 edges the S4 in base trim by 7 seconds on the Nurburgring. Seeing the S4 in base trim has 265bhp vs. the M3's 333bhp, it was at an obvious disadvantage. The RS4, with 375bhp edges the M3 by 10 seconds. So, it becomes difficult to compare on a trim vs. trim basis on cost and power. The trim levels are just so different as is the power at each trim. BMW at one trim romps the Audi, the Audi in a different trim romps the BMW. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 09:47 AM | #31 |
For the love of ///M3
19
Rep 660
Posts |
LMAO, Audi were using turbos long before BMW were using them for the 335i. Does the 2002 Turbo not predate the Quattro then?
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 10:03 AM | #32 | |
Moderator
7515
Rep 19,368
Posts |
Quote:
Ask the people who actually drove those cars while those times were recorded which car they would prefer to drive everyday. When it comes to sports coupes and sedans in the 30-60k price-range, its likely to be the BMW. If it weren't then when they sat down to write the reviews, they would not rank the BMW ahead of the Audi routinely. If it weren't then, like I said earlier, Audi (et. al.) would not be chasing BMW in driving dynamics, and they would not be boasting about the improved handling due to engine position and better weight distribution of their new chassis. Its more than just a little ironic that Audi is essentially admitting that their cars have traditionally suffered in handling vs. their biggest competitor, but yet some Audi owners are simply not willing to acknowledge this. Personally I hope that the new Audis are excellent - more competition means better prices for everyone. Who would have guessed a few years ago that you'd soon be able tobuy a 300hp BMW sedan for under 40k starting price. We have competition (from the Japanese primarily) to thank for that. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 01:04 PM | #33 | |
Lieutenant
35
Rep 563
Posts
Drives: 2007 E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
|
Quote:
Since power is merely a function of torque and revs, torque is a pretty crucial aspect of performance, and clever deployment of turbos can gain a wide-ranging boost in torque Finally, I don't really understand how you would go about identifying an "equivalent" diesel engine... I don't mean to get argumentative, but I just think it's always worthwhile considering all of the available options - none of us really want to miss out on something cool for the sake of a little blue and white badge do we? Last edited by 13eastie; 05-22-2007 at 01:04 PM.. Reason: typo |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 02:19 PM | #34 |
Major
75
Rep 1,288
Posts |
uhoh..... here it comes.....
- VW is to Audi what Toyota is to Lexus. BMW stands on its own parts and engineering. -If it were all about HP, we'd all be driving Vettes and Mustang GTs -As much as I've always wanted to like Audi's because they seem well-made and have nice interiors... they just do not make sense to me. They don't necessarily accel at any one trait. Unless you live in the "snowbelt." I don't. First time I ever sat in a new VW I said "Wow, this smells just like an Audi" |
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 02:34 PM | #35 | |
First Lieutenant
19
Rep 325
Posts |
Quote:
The reason i think its isnt the best topic / comprison, is because the two cars (rs5 & e92) are in two different classes, FI and NA. why not compare other super cars that are bi-turboed? If the rs5 is going to get 450 hp from 4.2 twin turbo, i think its a let down. Bigger engine, twin turbos and 30 odd hp more. Audi must be really pleased. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 03:20 PM | #36 | |
Reincarnated
245
Rep 4,227
Posts |
Quote:
I agree though, would love to have the Reg Braking come stateside.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2007, 05:11 PM | #37 | |
For the love of ///M3
19
Rep 660
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2007, 01:27 AM | #38 | |
#thatsanicemovebro
202
Rep 3,920
Posts
Drives: E92 M3 LSB/Black 6MT
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
|
Quote:
http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/secret_...sid=701&page=2 |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2007, 02:49 AM | #39 |
Brigadier General
478
Rep 3,044
Posts
Drives: 2011 Dakar Yellow M3, 2018 M5
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Orange County, California
|
he probably thinks the 2002 turbo was made in 2002.
__________________
[ESS VT2-625] [Akrapovic Evolution Exhaust] [KW Clubsports] [OSS Angel Eyes] [Revinora r-CRT Lip] [Vorsteiner Boot] [Challenge Race Diffuser] [See the Build Thread HERE] |
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2007, 04:52 AM | #40 | |
Lieutenant
35
Rep 563
Posts
Drives: 2007 E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
|
Quote:
I didn't actually suggest any kind of motor was intrinsically better for any particular type of driving. My point was simply that to dismiss ALL turbos out of hand is probably a misguided approach. I'm on the waiting list for an M3, and if there were anything about which to be unsure, it would not be the NA motor |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2007, 06:20 AM | #41 | |
Moderator
7515
Rep 19,368
Posts |
Quote:
Not sure where you are coming from anyway, since I did not even bring up interiors - I was talking about drving dynamics. To me it has always been funny how much people care about interiors. I do admit I'm in the minority there, but really I never understood what all the fuss was about. From my perspective they are all pretty much functionally equivalent when it comes to thigs I actually use when driving - the steering wheel, guages, and pedals. Aesthetically, the RS4 might be ahead (to be honest, I am not sure; to me its like being asked by a girl to tell her which dress I like better - i.e. beats the hell outta me. ) but interior aesthetics are way down on my list of concerns when buying a car. But hey, if you want to buy an RS4 because it looks pretty on the inside, that's certainly within your rights. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2007, 07:10 AM | #42 |
Banned
23
Rep 1,356
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2007, 08:46 AM | #44 |
Lieutenant
13
Rep 407
Posts |
I think that you are right. However, I also think that the power of the RS5 (and C63) will speed up BMW's intro of an enhanced M3 - more hp and torque (in addition to the CSL).
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|