BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > M3 (E90 / E92 / E93) > General M3 Forum (E90 + E92 + E93)
 
European Auto Source
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      09-18-2007, 06:01 PM   #1
Jason
Administrator
Jason's Avatar
United_States
7934
Rep
16,976
Posts

Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Cars in Action review: M3 vs. RS4

scans from greggb


Name:  1a.jpg
Views: 3197
Size:  232.4 KB

Name:  2a.jpg
Views: 3181
Size:  243.3 KB

Name:  3a.jpg
Views: 3141
Size:  213.8 KB

Name:  4a.jpg
Views: 3135
Size:  285.0 KB

Name:  5a.jpg
Views: 3073
Size:  259.9 KB

Name:  6a.jpg
Views: 3044
Size:  221.3 KB

Name:  7a.jpg
Views: 3034
Size:  235.4 KB

Name:  8a.jpg
Views: 4252
Size:  316.8 KB

Name:  9a.jpg
Views: 4377
Size:  323.5 KB
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 06:21 PM   #2
the_stranger
Captain
the_stranger's Avatar
India
14
Rep
926
Posts

Drives: e92 M3 6MT
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lafayette, IN

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
0 - 100KMPH in 5.6 sec??? Must be a joke.
__________________

2008 e92 M3 6MT AW/BLACK (SOLD)
2009 e92 M3 6MT AW/FR
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 06:25 PM   #3
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
117
Rep
8,034
Posts

Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

0-100 kph @5.6s. Huh? 1400m altitude, is that it?
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 06:25 PM   #4
savage.ulm1
First Lieutenant
savage.ulm1's Avatar
Italy
28
Rep
398
Posts

Drives: M3 E92
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Italy

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by the_stranger View Post
0 - 100KMPH in 5.6 sec??? Must be a joke.
Possibility?

1)they are not able to drive
2)it is a joke
3)high altitude ??
definitively ridicolous... (0-200km-h 19,7 sec.????????)
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 06:30 PM   #5
savage.ulm1
First Lieutenant
savage.ulm1's Avatar
Italy
28
Rep
398
Posts

Drives: M3 E92
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Italy

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
0-100 kph @5.6s. Huh? 1400m altitude, is that it?
possible?! At 1400 mt. you loose probably the 25% of your power..correct?
for sure at 5000mt you have half power on aspirated engines...
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 07:04 PM   #6
Giles
New Member
1
Rep
22
Posts

Drives: E93 M3 Silverstone
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SA

iTrader: (0)

Joburg Altitude is 1,750 metres - it saps a fair bit from the power. Usually guys in SA test cars at Sea Level but not always. Kyalami is an ex F1 track in Joburg.
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 07:12 PM   #7
Giles
New Member
1
Rep
22
Posts

Drives: E93 M3 Silverstone
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SA

iTrader: (0)

There has been another comparative test with the RS4 done in Top Car magazine also done at altitude in Johannesburg.

M3 0-100km - 5.41 secs
RS4 0-100km - 5.73 secs

But then claims ambient temperature on RS4 run was 6 degrees Celsius warmer, so concludes results are very simllar. I don't have a scan of the Top Car article, but the conclusion is as follows:

"if it rained every day and I had to suggest a performance car for my brother, it would be the RS4. It's solid, confidence inspiring, extremely quick and safe. It's a choice made with the head. The M3 however is the more emotive of the two and the car I would buy for myself. It's a choice made with the heart. Put simply, its more rewarding to drive and epitomises what a sports saloon is all about .... excitement.
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 07:26 PM   #8
WenHan
Enlisted Member
Canada
1
Rep
45
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vancouver

iTrader: (0)

5.6secs??sounds like 335
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 07:39 PM   #9
gasman
Member
gasman's Avatar
17
Rep
505
Posts

Drives: 08 RR Sport SC, 08 AW/FR M3
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Antonio, TX

iTrader: (0)

Well, given that this was done at approx. 5000ft above sea level you can expect at least a 15% loss of power.

Air Density decreases at a rate of 2.9% - 3.0% for each 1000 ft. of elevation above Sea Level.
Naturally Aspirated: Atmospheric Pressure 14.5 psi
Atmospheric Pressure @ 5000feet = 12.2 psi
Pressure Loss = (14.5 - 12.2) = 2.3 (2.3/14.5) = 15.8% @ 5,000 feet


Above based on standard Atm pressures at different elevations.

Last edited by gasman; 09-18-2007 at 07:48 PM. Reason: calculation
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 07:41 PM   #10
herbz
hi
United_States
28
Rep
838
Posts

Drives: '86 325e
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: outside boston MA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by WenHan View Post
5.6secs??sounds like 335
yeah trim a second off that and maybe youll have a point there buddy
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 07:57 PM   #11
bulletproof
Private
bulletproof's Avatar
United_States
4
Rep
90
Posts

Drives: 09 E92 M3
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New Hampshire

iTrader: (0)

Couldn't they have picked some more recent supermodels? I mean, they're comparing two brand new sports cars to some outdated 80's supermodels here.

And which one is supposed to be Cindy Crawford?
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 08:13 PM   #12
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
93
Rep
4,227
Posts

Drives: 02 Maxima SE
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: IL

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by gasman View Post
Well, given that this was done at approx. 5000ft above sea level you can expect at least a 15% loss of power.

Air Density decreases at a rate of 2.9% - 3.0% for each 1000 ft. of elevation above Sea Level.
Naturally Aspirated: Atmospheric Pressure 14.5 psi
Atmospheric Pressure @ 5000feet = 12.2 psi
Pressure Loss = (14.5 - 12.2) = 2.3 (2.3/14.5) = 15.8% @ 5,000 feet


Above based on standard Atm pressures at different elevations.

Yes, unfortunately looking at this roughly 65hp decerease if I move to the Rockies.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 09:36 PM   #13
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
236
Rep
10,257
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Nice

Nice review. Good to hear how many miles and how much effort went into this test. I liked the supermodel analogy although they could have used much more recent models. I am most impressed by how close the subjective scoring numbers are comparing the two cars. It again makes me think, given when the cars were designed, BMW should have been able to move farther ahead than they did. Other things that stood out to me:
  • M3 really out brakes the Audi consistently.
  • Suprised by the besting the RS4 gave the M3 in overtaking times.
  • Not suprised that the M3 continues to best the RS4 cornering speeds, so much for the Quattro "pitch", again.
  • I continue to be disappointed by all the steering feel comments. This guy clearly played around with all of the settings and put the steering in its sport setting.
  • Also disappointed by all the negative comments about the clunks and noise from the rear dif. in normal everyday (non-track) driving.
  • Did anyone else notice 26 mpg (US) in "country" driving with a range of 419 mi. YES! (might make that a new topic).
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 10:16 PM   #14
Keto
Lieutenant Colonel
Keto's Avatar
United_States
22
Rep
1,590
Posts

Drives: F80 M3
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: WHO DAT NATION

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2015 BMW M3  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by gasman View Post
Well, given that this was done at approx. 5000ft above sea level you can expect at least a 15% loss of power.

Air Density decreases at a rate of 2.9% - 3.0% for each 1000 ft. of elevation above Sea Level.
Naturally Aspirated: Atmospheric Pressure 14.5 psi
Atmospheric Pressure @ 5000feet = 12.2 psi
Pressure Loss = (14.5 - 12.2) = 2.3 (2.3/14.5) = 15.8% @ 5,000 feet


Above based on standard Atm pressures at different elevations.
Thankfully I live about 2 feet above sea level. OWNZJOO!
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 10:18 PM   #15
Keto
Lieutenant Colonel
Keto's Avatar
United_States
22
Rep
1,590
Posts

Drives: F80 M3
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: WHO DAT NATION

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2015 BMW M3  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Nice review. Good to hear how many miles and how much effort went into this test. I liked the supermodel analogy although they could have used much more recent models. I am most impressed by how close the subjective scoring numbers are comparing the two cars. It again makes me think, given when the cars were designed, BMW should have been able to move farther ahead than they did. Other things that stood out to me:
  • M3 really out brakes the Audi consistently.
  • Suprised by the besting the RS4 gave the M3 in overtaking times.
  • Not suprised that the M3 continues to best the RS4 cornering speeds, so much for the Quattro "pitch", again.
  • I continue to be disappointed by all the steering feel comments. This guy clearly played around with all of the settings and put the steering in its sport setting.
  • Also disappointed by all the negative comments about the clunks and noise from the rear dif. in normal everyday (non-track) driving.
  • Did anyone else notice 26 mpg (US) in "country" driving with a range of 419 mi. YES! (might make that a new topic).
I still can't decide what is causing the wide variety of steering feel reviews. Admittedly they trend toward the negative. I also wonder what the point is when the feel is subjectively worse but the car corners better, especially when some reviewers imply the steering feel problem is only when you're not turning.
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 10:38 PM   #16
JEllis
Brigadier General
JEllis's Avatar
104
Rep
4,982
Posts

Drives: E36 M3, E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SD CA/Yuma

iTrader: (4)

I really have problems respecting Magazines that are not willing to delcare a winner. This guy to the easy way out...

Jason
__________________
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic14547_7.gif
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 10:44 PM   #17
JEllis
Brigadier General
JEllis's Avatar
104
Rep
4,982
Posts

Drives: E36 M3, E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SD CA/Yuma

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
I still can't decide what is causing the wide variety of steering feel reviews. Admittedly they trend toward the negative. I also wonder what the point is when the feel is subjectively worse but the car corners better, especially when some reviewers imply the steering feel problem is only when you're not turning.
I have the same concerns...

Yet, the fifth gear review said the new car feels better when turning that the old gen...

So its back and forth now with the steering

Jason
__________________
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic14547_7.gif
Appreciate 0
      09-18-2007, 11:23 PM   #18
GregW / Oregon
Commander-In-Chief
United_States
162
Rep
7,750
Posts

Drives: 2015 M4 Coupe, 2012 ML350
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lake Oswego, OR

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
Mileage

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2;1422049[*
Did anyone else notice 26 mpg (US) in "country" driving with a range of 419 mi. YES! (might make that a new topic).
Yeah, but 14.25 mpg City. Depends on the exact conditions, but I get 17+ suburban/urban in my E46 M3.
__________________

Greg Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
2015 M4 Coupe - Silverstone/Sakhir/CF
2012 ML350
Appreciate 0
      09-19-2007, 02:27 AM   #19
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
236
Rep
10,257
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Back and forth?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEllis View Post
I have the same concerns...

Yet, the fifth gear review said the new car feels better when turning that the old gen...

So its back and forth now with the steering

Jason
Without doing an exact count of the reviews and their opinions on the steering I can defiitely say it is not "back and forth" (if by back and forth I read you correctly in meaning somewhat evenly split). I would say 90% of the reviews have strongly criticized the steering half or so mention the feel near straight (very slight steering input angles) and the other half mention the over-boosted nature of the steering. I think I can remember only about 2 out of 20 (really rough) than have overall praise for the steering. Some have even gone so far as to call it "terrible" or "completely numb".
Appreciate 0
      09-19-2007, 03:34 AM   #20
esquire
Colonel
esquire's Avatar
United_States
60
Rep
2,801
Posts

Drives: 2011.5 Dakar Yellow M3 Coupe
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Orange County, California

iTrader: (0)

the title of this magazine is hilarious to me: "cars in action"


lol.
__________________

[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
      09-19-2007, 04:26 AM   #21
JEllis
Brigadier General
JEllis's Avatar
104
Rep
4,982
Posts

Drives: E36 M3, E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SD CA/Yuma

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Without doing an exact count of the reviews and their opinions on the steering I can defiitely say it is not "back and forth" (if by back and forth I read you correctly in meaning somewhat evenly split). I would say 90% of the reviews have strongly criticized the steering half or so mention the feel near straight (very slight steering input angles) and the other half mention the over-boosted nature of the steering. I think I can remember only about 2 out of 20 (really rough) than have overall praise for the steering. Some have even gone so far as to call it "terrible" or "completely numb".
I am referring to all the latest full tests. I am leaving out the first look tests that took place in spain. Plus, I guess I was givving Fifth Gear a little more weight....

Jason
__________________
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic14547_7.gif
Appreciate 0
      09-19-2007, 09:35 AM   #22
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
360
Rep
14,364
Posts

Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

I have no idea where Colesburg is, but I would definitely choose Claudia Schiffer.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:31 PM.




m3post
m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST