Motortrend: M3 Wins Again! Still Benchmark for RS5 and CTS-V

[footie]

Originally Posted by 301Bimmer9

If the RS5 is aimed at the M3 and at a higher price tag most consumers would expect it to outperform the M3. I'm not saying the RS5 failed in general but compared to the M3 I can only see those who want something more exclusive purchasing it.

If it is not an M3 type car what type of car is it ? Serious question.

If and when you get to drive an RS5 you will understand why I say it's not exactly like an M3. For a start the transmission is much more refined than the M-DCT in the M3, next is the steering which doesn't quite have the same feel, it's close but the edge goes to the Beemer, then there's the ride, if you pick DRC (which I seriously recommend you do) then you will also notice that it's more polished and refined than the EDC in the M3.

What you have is a Grand Tourer which is remarkably close to the handling of the M3 yet does so without compromising any of it's grand touring ability. So in my opinion it's not a failure at all, just a different approach.

P.S.
If there is one single failure it's the weight, 4000lbs is far too much for a true sportscar but all things considered I think it makes Audi's achievement to get so close to the M3 all the more impressive, also no one can deny that if Audi had given the RS5 a similar weight to the M3 that it would have been not only a better car overall but would have been quicker at everthing.

[piloto]

My philosophy on these comparisons is take the very base car available on which these versions are based, compare them, and the differences you see there are pretty much what translates over to these versions.

So for the US market, compare a "stripper" 328i to a "stripper" A4 to a "stripper" CTS. All three are nice, but very different approaches to the same challenge.

Basically, you'll notice that the A4 is torquey but nose heavy and tends to understeer a lot, the CTS is heavy and you can feel it shifting its heft around and doesn't have a fluidity to its controls and inputs, but it has good power. The 328 while feeling less peppy as the other two, feels lighter on its feet and has more immediate turn in and seems very well balanced during cornering.

Another theory: it's late and I have no idea what the hell I'm talking about.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by footie

If Audi had given the RS5 a similar weight to the M3 that it would have been not only a better car overall but would have been quicker at everthing.

But it is not!



PS: If BMW built the M1 Supercar it would be better than R8 in all ways.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Levi

But it is not!



PS: If BMW built the M1 Supercar it would be better than R8 in all ways.

Very possible. Though I think you will find that the next R8 will be pretty special and even better than before with less weight and more power.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

P.S.
If there is one single failure it's the weight, 4000lbs is far too much for a true sportscar but all things considered I think it makes Audi's achievement to get so close to the M3 all the more impressive, also no one can deny that if Audi had given the RS5 a similar weight to the M3 that it would have been not only a better car overall but would have been quicker at everthing.

Give me a break what a pathetic apologist point of view. That is no different than stating IF the M3 had 50 more horse power it would destroy the C63 AMG. You can make up these what ifs about any near or not to close competitors and they are all nonsense. Such comments are really quite pointless.

[regensburg94]

Definitely agree on the interior comment. The E46 interior was way, way better.

[regensburg94]

Did Angus McKenzie call the CTS-V a "coupay" - like toupe - at 0:52?

LOL

[piloto]

Originally Posted by regensburg94

Did Angus McKenzie call the CTS-V a "coupay" - like toupe - at 0:52?

LOL

He's Australian, and pretty much all other English speaking nations aside from us call them "coupay" instead of "coup." And of course a sedan is a saloon, and the boot is the trunk and the hood is the vert top and the bonnet is the hood, and tire is tyre and color is colour and so on and so forth.

[footie]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Give me a break what a pathetic apologist point of view. That is no different than stating IF the M3 had 50 more horse power it would destroy the C63 AMG. You can make up these what ifs about any near or not to close competitors and they are all nonsense. Such comments are really quite pointless.

Swamp,

Did you even bother to read my post fully or did you just disagree with it because I was the one that had posted.

Please re-read this again.

P.S.
If there is one single failure it's the weight, 4000lbs is far too much for a true sportscar but all things considered I think it makes Audi's achievement to get so close to the M3 all the more impressive, also no one can deny that if Audi had given the RS5 a similar weight to the M3 that it would have been not only a better car overall but would have been quicker at everthing.

The first part of that paragraph was a reference to Audi's failings with the car's weight but an acknowledgement that given such failings it was still an achievement to get this close. In the second part of that paragraph the M3 was only there in reference to it's weight and not to the fact that the RS5 at it's weight would have been better than it, my comment was that at the M3's weight the RS5 would have been a better overall car to the RS5 we currently have.

But as you rightly stated, if the RS5 was at this kind of weight it would indeed have been superior to the M3, but as it isn't and it actually weighs close on 400lbs more I think even you have to admit that as such it's a heck of an achievement. In fact another failing of Audi was to fit the wrong engine, what the RS5 needed was a turbo or supercharged unit instead, then it's awd system could have easily coped with what ever amount of torque Audi seen fit to give the engine and it would have been even further from trying to mimic the M3.

Only my opinion but there you go.

[graider]

Originally Posted by regensburg94

Definitely agree on the interior comment. The E46 interior was way, way better.

i think the opposite. e92 m3 interior with nav looks pretty good and much more comfortable. the seat in the e46 m3 suck badly.

[graider]

Originally Posted by footie

Swamp,

Did you even bother to read my post fully or did you just disagree with it because I was the one that had posted.

Please re-read this again.



The first part of that paragraph was a reference to Audi's failings with the car's weight but an acknowledgement that given such failings it was still an achievement to get this close. In the second part of that paragraph the M3 was only there in reference to it's weight and not to the fact that the RS5 at it's weight would have been better than it, my comment was that at the M3's weight the RS5 would have been a better overall car to the RS5 we currently have.

But as you rightly stated, if the RS5 was at this kind of weight it would indeed have been superior to the M3, but as it isn't and it actually weighs close on 400lbs more I think even you have to admit that as such it's a heck of an achievement. In fact another failing of Audi was to fit the wrong engine, what the RS5 needed was a turbo or supercharged unit instead, then it's awd system could have easily coped with what ever amount of torque Audi seen fit to give the engine and it would have been even further from trying to mimic the M3.

Only my opinion but there you go.

If the rs5 is the same weight as the m3 and has awd and more power. it would be faster no doubt about it.

but i think it is impossible for audi to achieve the m3 weight, event if they take out the awd. the m3 is significantly lighter than competitor such as isf, c63 amg, rs4, rs5. it looked like bmw put lot of effort into the m3 to keep it at 3600lbs and still meet crash test standard and fit 4 real adults with a real trunk. Something the main competitors haven't been able to do so far.

anyway, i saw a black s5 with some kind of exaust the other day. that thing is gorgeous and sounds nice. now I want to buy one. LOL

[MonteCarloM3]

more interesting than the RS5. a tuned TT-RS. fast little sucker

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

Did you even bother to read my post fully or did you just disagree with it because I was the one that had posted.

Yes I read your entire post, more than once. It does not matter if you are critical of the weight. Performing what if's hypothetical comparisons based on radical changes to a car is apologist point of view.

"If the M3 had a better power to weight ration it would be faster", uhhh... OK, brilliant.

[footie]

Originally Posted by MonteCarloM3

more interesting than the RS5. a tuned TT-RS. fast little sucker

Totally agree with you here, I have sung the praises of this little car for quite some time. The RS5 is a technical masterpiece, doing everything amazingly well, especially considering it's weight but ultimately it is this very weight issue that is it's greatest failing. The TT-RS suffers none of this and is the better car IMO for it, plus the fact that it has arguably the best small FI unit currently on sale that is (believe it or not) capable of being tuned to over 550hp and still prove reliable.

When the DSG version gets released you are looking at what I believe is a better car than both the RS5 and M3.

[footie]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Yes I read your entire post, more than once. It does not matter if you are critical of the weight. Performing what if's hypothetical comparisons based on radical changes to a car is apologist point of view.

"If the M3 had a better power to weight ration it would be faster", uhhh... OK, brilliant.

Not much of an apologise but then again such things seldom come from you to anyone and certainly never in my direct.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

Not much of an apologise but then again such things seldom come from you to anyone and certainly never in my direct.

I think you are confused. You did not ask for an apology nor did I offer one. I called your view of the weight issue and apologist point of view, which it is.

Also, recall your history better. I've apologized to many on this forum, both for being rude and for being wrong. I just quickly move along afterwards.

Let's have a lot more discussion on how car X with substantial FI software tuning can/will best cay Y completely stock... Ugh.

[erio]

Originally Posted by footie

Totally agree with you here, I have sung the praises of this little car for quite some time. The RS5 is a technical masterpiece, doing everything amazingly well, especially considering it's weight but ultimately it is this very weight issue that is it's greatest failing. The TT-RS suffers none of this and is the better car IMO for it, plus the fact that it has arguably the best small FI unit currently on sale that is (believe it or not) capable of being tuned to over 550hp and still prove reliable.

When the DSG version gets released you are looking at what I believe is a better car than both the RS5 and M3.

No way. Why would the TT be much different? According to the reviews the TT-RS seems to suffer from the same issues (chassis, disconnected feeling etc.) that the RS5 does, just in a smaller package. Weight was just one of the issues with the RS5. I have obviously not driven the car, but Look at the two reviews in Evo magazine. They don't really favor the car.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evoc...udi_tt_rs.html

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evoc...udi_tt_rs.html

[BMW2011DCT]

Love mine. had an SRT8 300C rode like S%IT. Had a Z06 fast in the corners but my M3 does the same for a little less. Waiting on my New M5(whenever the alocation is available):

[footie]

Originally Posted by erio

No way. Why would the TT be much different? According to the reviews the TT-RS seems to suffer from the same issues (chassis, disconnected feeling etc.) that the RS5 does, just in a smaller package. Weight was just one of the issues with the RS5. I have obviously not driven the car, but Look at the two reviews in Evo magazine. They don't really favor the car.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evoc...udi_tt_rs.html

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evoc...udi_tt_rs.html

I think I say this a lot but you need to drive something before making judgement solely on what others might say. Sure the TT-RS feels more fwd biased than the M3, heck it even feels it more than the RS5 but driven to it's strengths it's probably quicker than both of them, this will especially be true when matched up to the DSG. I'm a big fan of this car because it feels more alive than either of them but needs to be specced correctly with items like magnetic-ride suspension.

The problem is that both the TT and RS5 can't be driven like you would an M3, do so and both will understeer but learn the slow in fast out approach and they are credibly quick machines.

[BMW269]

Wow fast TT-RS. Can't wait for M1, which will be even better/faster, maybe not from 0- km/h, but from 80- km/h. (no I have not driven it).

[SUB-ZERO]

Originally Posted by footie

I think I say this a lot but you need to drive something before making judgement solely on what others might say. Sure the TT-RS feels more fwd biased than the M3, heck it even feels it more than the RS5 but driven to it's strengths it's probably quicker than both of them, this will especially be true when matched up to the DSG. I'm a big fan of this car because it feels more alive than either of them but needs to be specced correctly with items like magnetic-ride suspension.

The problem is that both the TT and RS5 can't be driven like you would an M3, do so and both will understeer but learn the slow in fast out approach and they are credibly quick machines.

footie,

I appreciate your enthusiasm for Audi but the fact is that Audi has had three years to build a car that is better or at least as good as an m3. From initial tests, the RS5 is not even as good as an m3 and is also more expensive.

However, considering technology has progressed in the last three years, I would only assume that some of the parts used in the RS5 may be a bit more refined than the ones in the m3 (i.e., DCT in Auto mode).

I do agree with your statement that the Audi is more of a GT car but I don't believe that was Audi's intention. I believe Audi made a failed attempt to dethrone the e9X m3 and because of this failure, the RS5 has been relegated as a GT car.

The next m3 will be out next year and while I will truly miss the V8, I am sure that BMW ///M will craft another engineering marvel that will in turn, place Audi even further behind the curve.

And if the rumor is true about the next BMW supercar, then the R8 will be put to bed as well!

Cheers!

-SZ

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by SUB-ZERO

The next m3 will be out next year and while I will truly miss the V8.

No, the new M3 will come out in 2013. First the new 3 Series Sedan has to come out, then the Coupé, and only then the M3.

Originally Posted by SUB-ZERO

I am sure that BMW ///M will craft another engineering marvel that will in turn, place Audi even further behind the curve.

That M may be faster, but it will not mid-engine, it will be front engine. It will be the 918 Spyder "rival". It will be a carbon fiber hardtop roadster with 450 to 600 HP.