E90 M3 or Audi RS4

Both 2008, side by side I know the M3 is quicker but for some reason I really like the simplistic exterior of the Audi. Both great years and have depreciated equally over the years yet remain staples in their category.

Anyone have a tad bit of insight?

This is my first Euro car and while I serve overseas I have been doing a lot of reading. Mainly at how to go about buying one, what to look out for and the maintenance costs. E90 has the actuators and RB, but RS4 has Timing chain tensioner failure and horrible CBU.

Would greatly like to hear anyone willing to chime in! Car would be used for light daily but mainly weekend fun / daddies garage toy.

Thank you!

Of course RS4..

I think the RS4 is known for its DRC issues as well.

ayao wrote

I think the RS4 is known for its DRC issues as well.

This I read about as well. Something I believe could easily but expensively be upgraded and forgotten about.

The heart is where it counts. If that goes out, DRC would be my last concern

TrAcK TRaP Why do you say? Its a beauty in of itself but looking at an overall perspective, wouldnt you say the bimmer shine brighter? I could also see myself doing a track day once a year.

Why would you want a car with an engine that's so far out in front of the axle. instant understeer. M3 is a better balanced vehicle. Watch the old Top Gear video. The M3 destroyed the RS4. It was the slowest around the track.

The only upside to the RS4 is that there were so few it makes them somewhat rare.

May sound simple but go drive both and you will know which one to buy.

TTony wrote

May sound simple but go drive both and you will know which one to buy.

I really wish. Being out of country has left me with a research and youtube obsession. Its the best I can get right now.

Dr. Dre wrote

Watch the old Top Gear video. The M3 destroyed the RS4. It was the slowest around the track.

The only upside to the RS4 is that there were so few it makes them somewhat rare.

Man oh man, how badly I wanted the Audi to be quicker. Quattro system just eating up tyres around every corner. Unfortunately the car is a cow and with much of the weight over the front axles the under steer isnt bad but its definitely there. However, my plans would be very simple at the start. Not sure how much I would actually care.

They are a sight to see but only if you know what youre looking at. That part is intriguing. I wouldnt say the E90 is a dime a dozen but... I see a lot more happy threads which means somethings better about it.

Also, I like the B7 S4. Less power, plagued similarly, but right up my alley.

I work in sales at an Audi store so I have driven a handful RS4's and they are quite amazing machines when you can find a nice example but most are very tired. A few things to consider with this Audi is it is one of their first high revving engines they offered in a street application so it can be a bit problematic and expensive to repair. The main issues I hear about are carbon build up and fuel system problems. To my knowledge the timing chains are not an issue with the RS4 due to it having a few different tweaks to the engine.

Overall they are super cool cars and are nothing like the new stuff we are offering. Not that it is a bad thing they are just very unique.

As far as the e90 M3 I have one myself and if you do not need AWD I would go with one any day over the RS4 just due to the handling and the way the car is setup.

The RS4 is founding and only member of a very exclusive club - small, high-revving NA V8, AWD stick sedans

If I could get my wife to go for a car this old, this is what I'd buy her

But agree the RS4's handling at the limit is pretty bad. Steering wheel is a front wheel tire squeal rheostat. Most people never get close to the limit and you can cure some of it with some rear toe-out

Dr. Dre wrote

Why would you want a car with an engine that's so far out in front of the axle. instant understeer. M3 is a better balanced vehicle. Watch the old Top Gear video. The M3 destroyed the RS4. It was the slowest around the track.

The only upside to the RS4 is that there were so few it makes them somewhat rare.

This.


The biggest issue I see with the RS4 is the massive direct injection carbon buildup. You'd get familiar with removing the intake pretty often.

What I do like of the RS4 is the high revving NA V8, that's awesome. The weight and understeer, not so much. But it's still a solid vehicle, just not as nice as the M3

I was cross shopping these 2 in late 2012 and couldn't find a low milage rs4 so ended up with the e90. Good luck finding an rs4 with low miles.

Richbot wrote

If I could get my wife to go for a car this old, this is what I'd buy her

Perfect car for a girl, or enthusiast that lives in a snowy area or doesn't care for sliding or oversteer.

There was a really nicely set up rs4 at my last hpde, and he kept up pretty well but the front tires just got wrecked on that poor thing.

complexCarlo wrote

Both 2008, side by side I know the M3 is quicker but for some reason I really like the simplistic exterior of the Audi. Both great years and have depreciated equally over the years yet remain staples in their category.

Anyone have a tad bit of insight?

This is my first Euro car and while I serve overseas I have been doing a lot of reading. Mainly at how to go about buying one, what to look out for and the maintenance costs. E90 has the actuators and RB, but RS4 has Timing chain tensioner failure and horrible CBU.

Would greatly like to hear anyone willing to chime in! Car would be used for light daily but mainly weekend fun / daddies garage toy.

Thank you!

The tensioner issue you're referring to plagues the B6/7 S4 not RS4. The RS4 has upgraded components.

I test drove a few RS4's when looking for my First M3. First owner had the carbon buildup issue and that was addressed. 2nd car I looked at the owner handed me all of his service paperwork and there was a note from the dealer stating "carbon buildup likely issue". I can't recall price tag but it wasn't pretty. I could have got stuck with that baby as owner didn't mention it and apparently forgot to pull that bill. Be very cautious as to why someone is unloading their RS4.
Never had a chance to get into any twisties but it did have a tune and some suspension work that was purchased through the dealer. Can't recall what the name of the tune and suspension pieces were but I'm sure someone here will know as it's fairly popular in the Audi world. Nice car but it clearly was not an M3.

a good friend of mine had a B7 RS4, that rear seat is cramped as hell and he dumped his after the carbon buildup and a couple of other gremlins popped up

Friend of mine bought a RS5 at the same time I bought my E90M. This was 4 years ago now. My friend moved on from the RS after a year or so while I continue to enjoy Dat M3...
PS. Btw we did some drag test where the M3 gained a nose or two while the RS was spec'ed to be a tad faster. Both dual clutch.

Is there anyone here that wll agree that the RS4 will out perform the M3 off the line? Most videos I see are from a roll in which the M3 gaps the Audi considerably.

The question still lingers. I know most E9X cars are not plagued by Rod Bearing failure. But the ones that are... is this a once and done repair or is there a high chance that it can happen say within the next 30-50k miles?

Its expensive and for what its worth, the RS4's CBU is less involved and less costly and easily sees the same 30-50k mile interval. Just a little give and take there.

I do believe I will be happy either-way. Right now it could go either way. Just gotta wait and see. Thank you everyone

complexCarlo wrote

Is there anyone here that wll agree that the RS4 will out perform the M3 off the line? Most videos I see are from a roll in which the M3 gaps the Audi considerably.

The question still lingers. I know most E9X cars are not plagued by Rod Bearing failure. But the ones that are... is this a once and done repair or is there a high chance that it can happen say within the next 30-50k miles?

Its expensive and for what its worth, the RS4's CBU is less involved and less costly and easily sees the same 30-50k mile interval. Just a little give and take there.

I do believe I will be happy either-way. Right now it could go either way. Just gotta wait and see. Thank you everyone

Right in the Top Gear episode is a drag race, Hamster launches kind of poorly, though:
That carbon interval seems pretty generous compared to what I was reading on the forums. I've seen people suggest you clean the carbon about once a year or every 15k miles. Those cars have by far the worst carbon build up of any direct injection car I know of. I think I've read it costs about $1k every time, since the manifold is a PITA to get off compared to most DI cars. Also, the stock pads have rivets in them that once they wear down, will gouge the hell out of the rotors (and they are not cheap). Pads would have to be replaced quickly. The rod bearings on the S65 seem to be a do it once and forget about it situation for most cars. There are some questions about the mains, but info is still pretty limited on how concerned you should be about it.

for me,
a true M car is a high rev na motor with individual throttle bodies, great suspension
a true RS car is a turbo, avant, quattro and nose heavy
a true AMG is a huge displacement engine, auto box, and a great highway cruiser

Although the B7 RS4 didn't fit my equation, it still is a great car and i always loved it.
(the only RS4 so far available in the States could be a big reason)

If you don't need awd, go with the e9x m3. I can't think of any reason besides awd to choose an RS4 over a e9x m3. They both have their problems, and respective fixes. I suppose it's just a matter of personal taste, but I think the e90 is a better looking car. The LCI, flared fenders and flared wheel wells give it an aggressive styling, while retaining that classic bmw look and stance. It looks to me almost as if bmw modeled the current f30 body style on that of the e90 m3, which in my opinion makes the e90 m3 look relevant even today. The RS4 unfortunately, just looks dated. The m3 also handles really well, is extremely quick and is a blast to drive! I vote e90 m3!

I almost bought an S5, they are absolutely gorgeous!!! But after finding out it doesn’t perform as good as it looks, I went with my original love the ///M. It really comes down to your expectations of the car, they both are great machines that tax your a$s for repairs...

jaehshim wrote

for me,
a true M car is a high rev na motor with individual throttle bodies, great suspension
a true RS car is a turbo, avant, quattro and nose heavy
a true AMG is a huge displacement engine, auto box, and a great highway cruiser

Although the B7 RS4 didn't fit my equation, it still is a great car and i always loved it.
(the only RS4 so far available in the States could be a big reason)

I agree with your, what makes them true, statements. Besides those characteristics that made them "true", they also differentiated themselves from their competition. In today's market it's all the same, smaller displacement, turbo, and now AWD (in some cases with 2WD capabilities). While I understand why this is happening, I just cannot look at the industry the same as when BMW was creating bespoke engines (S85 and S65) or Mercedes was throwing a 6.2L V8 into the 204 (C class) chassis. Those were the days when German was producing "muscle cars".

Moving forward, it looks like the American's will be the last ones giving us what we want (drivers cars with fire breathing engines).

On a side note going back to your must have characteristics, Audi was truly stealing a page out of BMW's book creating the B7 RS4.