|
|
09-26-2009, 09:02 AM | #89 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-26-2009, 11:48 AM | #90 | |
Major
62
Rep 1,211
Posts |
Quote:
Any high powered RWD car will have difficulties launching properly in lower gears and putting the power down. Even a Z06 will get killed by a much less powerful STi until 100 mph where it blow past the STi. AWD does launch better in those difficult conditions. All weather traction is what AWD is all about. Who can argue with that? On hot, dry pavement, much like "Top Gear" race between RS4, M3 and C63 shot in Spain clearly showed the M3 killing the RS4 right after 70 mph and putting on 3 - 4 car lengths by the 1/4 mile.
__________________
""A great sounding, responsive, high-revving, naturally aspirated engine is part of the DNA of a thoroughbred sports car. No two ways about it."
- Lamborghini on turbocharging Last edited by 330CIZHP; 09-26-2009 at 12:28 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-26-2009, 02:03 PM | #91 |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
I'm not going to get dragged into an argument on this. I have owned an M3, probably the quickest version (M-DCT) and having driven all the cars mentioned I know that the M3 is the quickest but the difference isn't that dramatic, not the 3-4 car lengths on a 1/4mile that you are suggesting. Even the data supplied here states that fact, yet none of you will acknowledge this fact.
Gustva believes that having the races from 50km/h moves the skill involved in launching these cars but the fact is that it switches the advantage away from the awd cars and hands it to the rwd ones. Clearly his loyalities lie with BMW which is understandable being a member of M5board.com. I just know that on the experience I have had the RS4 holds a noticable advantage if the race is conducted from a stand still and the M3 holds all the cards when the standing start is removed. On the track the same thing happens, the RS4 gets a small jump on the exit of the corners and the M3 hauls it in towards the end of the straight. Also on a track versus the road the M3 is better suited to trackwork and is the quicker but on the road it's the RS4 that's best suited for all possible conditions of weather and surface. If you believe your M3 is quicker on the road then you are living in a dream world. |
Appreciate
0
|
09-26-2009, 02:18 PM | #92 | |
Major
62
Rep 1,211
Posts |
Quote:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...mparison_tests Around the Top Gear race track conducted in Spain on a hot dry day, the RS4 was close to 5 seconds slower than the M3 again in hot and dry conditions being driven by The Stig back to back. Besides, every single evidence points to the fact that M3 is substantially quicker: - M3 is 300 lbs lighter than the RS4 - Makes more power to the wheels due to less drivetrain loss. - M3 has shorter gearing while RS4 has a lower final drive so their gearing advantages are negligible. That translates to a huge advantage of power-to-weight ratio for the M3. On a dry pavement, M3 is the substantially quicker car both in a straight line and around a race track. On a wet, cold and snowy pavement, the RS4's AWD gives it a good advantage. Let's just leave it at that.
__________________
""A great sounding, responsive, high-revving, naturally aspirated engine is part of the DNA of a thoroughbred sports car. No two ways about it."
- Lamborghini on turbocharging |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-26-2009, 04:38 PM | #93 |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
I think you are making the classic mistake of taking the US magazine results to heart and ignoring the rest of Europe. The reason I say this is because all US results include the customary 1ft rollout which falsely make the results misleading. The reality is that when rollout is removed both car cross the line near enough with identical figures and again your 3-4 car lengths are wrong.
At the 150mph mark I am sure the M3 will be ahead on almost all races but from 0-150 the distance would be closer to the 3-4 car lengths you suggested for the 1/4mile discipline. On average the RS4 will do the 1/4mile in 13seconds and will do this time all day long, regardless of whether it's dry or wet. On the otherhand an M3 will vary greatly between runs, even in the dry. Removing rollout shows this up even better. I don't see anything you are saying that changes my opinion that the two cars are very close in performance. |
Appreciate
0
|
09-26-2009, 05:17 PM | #94 |
Captain
50
Rep 783
Posts |
My previous car was an RS4 (EU spec) - in stock trim it felt disappointingly slow, definitely quite a bit slower than my M3 DCT when it was stock.
On a dynapack dyno my RS4 only put down 320WHP whereas my DCT put down 370WHP with just air filter and crank pulley. Even once my RS4 was chipped with full exhaust system (Milltek Down Pipes and Exhaust), I still felt the stock M3 DCT was on a par in terms of low to mid-RPM torque and was stronger at high RPMs. The only thing better about the RS4 is looks (subjective), its gearbox (although I prefer DCT over manual in either car) and potentially AWD (depending on where you live, lifestyle etc). The RS4 being AWD has a natural advantage off the line in any standing start acceleration comparison, but the fact the M3 can negate this advantage prior to the quarter mile indicates to me it is a significantly quicker car...I think the Carrera 4S is "close" to the M3 in performance (with the M3 being slightly quicker, really a drivers race), but not the RS4... |
Appreciate
0
|
09-26-2009, 09:04 PM | #95 | |
Colonel
97
Rep 2,415
Posts |
Quote:
To be honest, this is a useless argument. I am with you 100%. At least you post non-biased facts...rather than just "I love my M3...it's the best thing ever" biased opinions. But what do you expect on an M3 forum. As for the 335 beating the RS4s... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 01:06 AM | #98 |
Colonel
97
Rep 2,415
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 04:39 AM | #99 | ||
Moderator / European Editor
1499
Rep 6,755
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
Best regards, south
__________________
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 06:16 AM | #100 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
Also the problem with most people is they view dyno reading as gospel which isn't always the truth with some awd systems. I am more inclined to believe the results from someone like MTM who's dyno was design to work with awd and by people who can read the data properly. If people want to believe that quattro loses much, much more power through it's awd system than BMW's rwd setup then why should I put them right. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 06:30 AM | #101 | |
Moderator / European Editor
1499
Rep 6,755
Posts |
Quote:
Best regards, south
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 06:45 AM | #102 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
On a different subject, you haven't commented on the output of next M5 and what you reckon the next M3 will have. Any reason for this? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 06:54 AM | #103 |
S0THPAW
8716
Rep 7,846
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 08:01 AM | #104 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
If it's ability to cover ground quickest on back roads (well the types we have in the UK) then the order would by R8>RS4>M3>S4>335i. If you believe otherwise then your dreaming. P.S. The Jag is a pure joy to drive, totally different to the M3 but more rewarding as a daily drive, I would also say that it's dratically better than either a 535d, A6 3.0TDi or the equivalent Merc. And I can say without fear of being proved wrong that it will hold it's money far better than my M3 did which was eye wateringly bad and frightening in equal measures. Only advice I can give is don't change after a year. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 10:43 AM | #105 | |
Captain
15
Rep 645
Posts |
Quote:
I also drove 2 Cayman S's and would place them equal or above the M3.
__________________
2013 Audi S6, Ibis White
2008 E90 M3, Jerez Black, Black Nappa, Brushed Aluminium, 6-speed, Premium, Tech, Cold Weather *sold* |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 11:11 AM | #106 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
Interested to see you have the same opinion as my own that give modest tweaks it could easily rival the M3. And you are so right about the Cayman, anyone who has driven the latest Cayman with agree with you, Porsche's finest hour of late. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2009, 03:32 PM | #107 |
Banned
121
Rep 2,097
Posts |
Ok so now we're talking about "tweaking" I'm glad you brought that up. lol. Now its over..
M3>R8>335>RS4>S4>A4>328i A modded M3 will murder anything in Audi's stable and a tuned 335 will be close behind. Therefore it will ruin the audi guys day.. I speak from experience. AWD - RWD it doesn't matter as long as both cars are in proper working condition and you're not driving in 1ft of snow then BMW will always wax Audi. |
Appreciate
0
|
09-28-2009, 07:57 AM | #109 | |
Major
35
Rep 1,034
Posts |
Quote:
with bolt ons the m3 won't beat an R8 and wont even come close to the R8 5.2, or RS6 |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-28-2009, 09:24 AM | #110 |
Major
62
Rep 1,211
Posts |
Actually, the 4.2L V8 R8 runs very similar times to the M3. Only slightly faster bone stock. A modded M3 will beat a stock R8 (again, V8).
__________________
""A great sounding, responsive, high-revving, naturally aspirated engine is part of the DNA of a thoroughbred sports car. No two ways about it."
- Lamborghini on turbocharging |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|