|
|
07-12-2007, 01:46 PM | #46 | |
Reincarnated
249
Rep 4,227
Posts |
Quote:
You can only be KING if you blow away the competition? So tell us who the new KING is?
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 01:47 PM | #47 |
Brigadier General
1056
Rep 3,170
Posts |
wouldn't pay too much attention to autoexpress, autocar.co.uk is the better weekly car mag IMO.
remember that the previous generation e46 M3 CS beat the RS4 in EVO mag, a highly respected mag here in the UK. So I am waiting until the end of the month to hear their opinion. cheers Last edited by dazzapb; 07-12-2007 at 02:22 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 03:42 PM | #48 |
Private First Class
39
Rep 171
Posts |
Like most males, I like to read my car mags when sitting on the throne - you know the score, it's the only time you can get some peace from the kids and the wife asking you to put the rubbish out
Anyway, I wouldn't wipe my AR$! with Autoexpress, let alone read it on my throne. When I am king, sitting on my throne, EVO is my read. That's what I am waiting for |
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 03:52 PM | #49 | |
Conspicuous consumption
99
Rep 1,183
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 04:22 PM | #50 | |
Major General
427
Rep 6,968
Posts |
Quote:
I think you misunderstood him. All he said is he felt the new M3 doesn't stand out amongst the competition anymore. He didn't say there is a new king. Whether or not there is a new king or everyone is on the same level are two different issue. It's up to the antagonist to prove otherwise. Personally I feel it's a little too early to have a verdict but according to most primarily reviews the new M3 isn't as edgier as the old. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 04:34 PM | #51 | |
For the love of ///M3
20
Rep 660
Posts |
Quote:
Still, when you consider the RS range is the equivalent to the CSL, the RS5 is going to appear mighty tame in comparison, regardless of power. The S and M ranges are the true rivals traditionally.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 05:00 PM | #52 | |
Major
76
Rep 1,217
Posts
Drives: 2014 435i
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SLC
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 05:04 PM | #53 |
Major General
382
Rep 8,033
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 08:02 PM | #54 | |
Major General
382
Rep 8,033
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 08:25 PM | #56 |
New Member
0
Rep 10
Posts |
I don’t care what any magazine says. In the end most of these magazines are in bed with the car manufactures anyway. But I talk from experience. I had a E46 great car. I am the new owner of a RS4..I just love every aspect of this car, the ergonomics, drivability, performance can be driven 12 months out of the year, and most of all, every where I go, I get stopped with a million questions, fingerprints on my window you name it. The fact remains, BMWs are a dime a dozen, there is no novelty in the car anymore. Every fringing body has one. But the RS4, hmm have not seen one in my area of NY since I got my 4 months ago and the exhaust just intoxicating. I can tell you that I see the new 3 series every dam day. I am glad I made the decision I did, I hate pulling up next to someone that is driving my car. In the end you will make your own decision, if you are unsure, go with the RS4, worth the $$ and is cheaper than the BMW.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 08:38 PM | #57 | |
Major General
382
Rep 8,033
Posts |
Quote:
Again, that doesn't mean zip to me. I live in the US. I'll compare the numbers when the US M3 weight is released. The article is simply a driving impression, useful to some, but not to anyone who already knows about the cars. There is no "test" here without instrumented performance comparisons in somewhat controlled conditions. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 08:40 PM | #58 |
Secret Agent
99
Rep 496
Posts |
Audi still state "unladen" weight numbers by DIN standards, not by EU ones like BMW do.
The difference between standards is exactly 75kg (68kg driver, 7kg cargo). So, to compare the numbers you should always: a) add 75kg to Audi weight figures, or b) take away 75kg from BMW weight figures. So, the comparable figures are: by EU standard: 1,655kg (M3) vs 1,725kg (RS4), or by DIN standard: 1,580kg (M3) vs 1,650kg (RS4). The fact: RS4 is 70kg heavier than M3. |
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 08:42 PM | #59 |
Major General
382
Rep 8,033
Posts |
Yeah, you haven't seen one because people are turned off by that hideous disproportioned nose/grill Audi started sticking in their cars a few years ago. For that reason only, I will not buy an Audi. Yeah, the new BMWs are not stunners either, but at least they don't look plain ugly to me.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 10:20 PM | #60 |
Registered
0
Rep 1
Posts |
Whether the RS4 weighs 200kg or 500kg more than the M3
It remains the faster vehicle. It remains the better daily choice for driving. Since my place of employment and residence is not on a racetrack, guess I'll stick with the heavier, um porker as it was called. Better yet, I'll wait for the RS5
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-12-2007, 11:38 PM | #61 | ||
Second Lieutenant
3
Rep 256
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
as far as the article goes, they do a great job of writing about their opinions of both cars but they fail to provide any facts to back them. let's look at the facts, shall we? RS4: 0-200km/h = 16.6 seconds 100-0 km/h = 37m nurburgring laptime: 8:09 --- 151.656 km/h – Audi RS4, 420 PS/1728 kg (sport auto 06/06) e92 M3: 0-200km/h = 15.8 seconds 100 - 0 km/h = 34m nurburgring laptime: to be determined but faster than the 911 carrera S per this article link to article *note* the 997 carrera S laps the nurburgring in 8:05 for reference: 8:05 --- 152.907 km/h -- Porsche 997 Carrera S, 355PS/1461kg (sport auto 05/05), Audi R8: 0-200km/h = 16.2 seconds 100-0km/h = 34m nurburgring laptime: 8:04 --- 153.223 km/h -- Audi R8, 420 PS/1595 kg (sport auto 07/07) from the looks of it the RS4 is not competition for the M3 as far as sheer performance goes...more like the R8 better watch its back. oh and i won't go into how much more the audi costs, but let's just say that the dollar/performance ratio ain't that great for the audi. as far as which car is more daily driver friendly, or whatever the hell that article tries to compare, you're more than welcome to let the RS4 win that one...that's not what an M car is about. have fun with your commuter car
__________________
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
07-13-2007, 03:35 AM | #64 |
Private First Class
16
Rep 119
Posts |
It has come apparent that some are so blinkered on here that they will ignore anything that is written that is even slightly negative about the car - the dealers just love idiots like them - little boys brainwashed handing over all their money....and crying on the way home as they 'drift' round the street corners and realise that they should have bought a 911 afterall.
Others who discuss logically, will drive away their car, having bought it accepting that it re-writes few rules, but that it offers an awesome blend of everyday practicality and performance - they are the ones who will smile for years to come. I know which camp i'm in :@) |
Appreciate
0
|
07-13-2007, 03:53 AM | #65 | ||
Brigadier General
477
Rep 3,044
Posts
Drives: 2011 Dakar Yellow M3, 2018 M5
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Orange County, California
|
exactly.
Quote:
Quote:
confirming what we suspected as obvious - that audi's heavy quattro drivetrain and minimal use of weight saving materials translates to a heavier car, not a lighter one.
__________________
[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
|
07-13-2007, 04:03 AM | #66 |
Lieutenant General
634
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Maturity
Many of the pro-Audi and anti-BMW comments really show the maturity of the posters. I think most folks here, like myself prefer BMW but prefer it because it is typically a better performance car while still offering comfort and a bit of luxury. Also, like most here, I actually LIKE the RS4 a lot. That is a truly fantastic engine and a great looking car. So, first to all of you rude, immature haters with nothing concrete to say besides your little false, teasing, snippets go back and crawl under your rock and let the rest of us
intelligently reveiw and compare both cars and this "review" itself. Based on the 2WD system, the CLEAR, the undisputed weight advantage (apple to apples of course), the much less parasitic drivetrain losses and BER as well the M3 will be putting SIGNIFICANTLY more power to the ground than the RS4. And it's power to the ground to weight ratio (not the crank hp to weight ratio!) really blows the Audi away. Those numbers are M3: 3649/(420*.85) = 10.2 lb/hp, RS4: 3803/((420-5)*.8) = 11.5 lb/hp. This is a 13% advantage and this is HUGE, it is simply BMWs "efficient dynamics". Surely to the uninformed this will sounds like a poor devastated fan boy using math to dispute a magazines flawless verdict. Oh well, math is math, it works and you simply can not beat physics. I am confident in real tests it will out perform the RS4 in almost all speed contests except ones where the 4WD may give it a small jump on the take off. The M3 is going to beat the RS4 in braking, ring time, and price as well. Heck read the review; it already says in so many places that the M3 is a better performance/sports/track car, over and over again. It does suck that there are such poor articles like this they will be haunting us forever, even after some real tests like EVO come out. Last edited by swamp2; 07-13-2007 at 04:25 AM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|