BMW M3 vs. Audi RS5

[footie]

Originally Posted by southlight

Tell me what prices you're interested in I'll post them as listed in the German pricelist. Base price is 77,700 incl. VAT in Germany.


Best regards,
south

RS5 German Price List

Items missing from this price list are DRC (due I believe late June, early July) and the flat bottom steering wheel (due third quarter).

[shiggy]

this is sweet...good read too!

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=360093

[shiggy]

Originally Posted by footie

RS5 German Price List

Items missing from this price list are DRC (due I believe late June, early July) and the flat bottom steering wheel (due third quarter).

Hey Footie....just curious and I know you know alot about the RS5....do you know what the % of components that are shared between the two cars RS5 and the S5??

[kero]

at the asking price the RS5 is a joke!

[footie]

Originally Posted by kero

at the asking price the RS5 is a joke!

At what asking price?

If you mean the US, well there isn't one. If you mean Germany or UK, well in each of these markets it's been shown to either be cheaper spec vs spec or little or no dearer.

I say don't assume anything until all the facts are available and you have actually spec each car with what you desire.

[xxe92xx]

Originally Posted by shiggy

Hey Footie....just curious and I know you know alot about the RS5....do you know what the % of components that are shared between the two cars RS5 and the S5??

guess he doesnt like that question

[shiggy]

Originally Posted by xxe92xx

guess he doesnt like that question

LOL....I asked 3 times...no reply!
I figured that would happen!

[footie]

It's not that I don't like the question, it's impossible to get right without all the data available. The engine shares common components but are totally different, likewise the gearbox, the drivetrain, the body, brakes, etc, etc. One thing I can tell you is that there is much more in common with the S5 than the M3 has with the 335i, mainly because it shares a lot more common ground what with both using a 4.2L v8, both offering a DSG, both offering sportsdiff.

The question you should be asking is what systems are making the RS5 special compared to the S5.

Frankly I couldn't care less if you think that is a relative question or not, hack I don't even care whether you like it, dislike it or hope you never see one but I will smile to myself when you finally see some test figures and realise that this is one serious piece of machinery that is capable of beating the M3 and understand that I was right all along.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by footie

capable of beating the M3

For you, but not for all. Even if it is faster, I don't care as it is AWD and not RWD. Others would speek about the manual transmssion. And surpose the M3 was faster than the RS5, you would anyway like the RS5 more. So all this is relative.

[shiggy]

Originally Posted by footie

It's not that I don't like the question, it's impossible to get right without all the data available. The engine shares common components but are totally different, likewise the gearbox, the drivetrain, the body, brakes, etc, etc. One thing I can tell you is that there is much more in common with the S5 than the M3 has with the 335i, mainly because it shares a lot more common ground what with both using a 4.2L v8, both offering a DSG, both offering sportsdiff.

The question you should be asking is what systems are making the RS5 special compared to the S5.

Frankly I couldn't care less if you think that is a relative question or not, hack I don't even care whether you like it, dislike it or hope you never see one but I will smile to myself when you finally see some test figures and realise that this is one serious piece of machinery that is capable of beating the M3 and understand that I was right all along.

Geez Footie...relax mate...you take things WAY too personally!
I was just curious what was the % of parts shared between the two cars. Just looking at the two cars the sheet metal looks identical in both cars....
with comments like this, im starting to question your age...you sound very young...say late teens...early 20's.
keep smilin mate...everything is fine...Audi's are great cars.

[x838nwy]

Without taking sides, I personally think the RS5 will be/is capable for giving the M3 a run for its money. Think about it, Audi has spent ages developing it - photos of mules have been around since 20008 and it would be crazy for them not to benchmark it against the M3. Besides, they've put it nearly at same price as the M3, right?

It may have only 444hp (or something like that) but I really would reserve judgement as to how fast it will be around the track. We should bear in mind that the GT-R, for example, has a great deal less hp and more weight than many of the cars it can murder on a track (AND straights in many cases). So comparing cars just on spec/weight might not be all that valid, specially with the awd trickery these days.

As to percentage of parts shared between the two (RS5 and S5), I don't think anyone outside of Audi's engineering dept. can tell us that and to be honest, it shouldn't really matter. I have no idea how many parts Evo's and Sti's share with your garden variety Lancers and Imprezas, but to say they are similar to their siblings for that is to over-simplify matters. Besides, tuners like MTM have been putting monster powers on the S5 chassis without too much problem (500+ IIRC) so things should be good strength-wise.

As for sheet metal stuff, personally I think the S5 looks great and it would not do anything good to make the RS5 look significantly different. From what I've seen (just pics, sadly) there's probably nothing different between the two other than the retractable spoiler in the RS5 and some front/rear bumper stuff the gains from which are... well... to be demonstrated.

The only thing I have against actually buying an RS5 would be the fact that while it might be benchmarked against the M3, it's the CURRENT M3. In a couple of years time, we'll see the new M3 and I doubt BMW would make it any slower so investing in an RS5 right now (and taking delivery sometimes late 2010, may be) might not be the best of moves. Unless you really, really, like that shape.

[mixja]

For my thinking, we have the C63 which makes considerably more torque and more power than the RS5, weighs probably only 50-75kg more than the RS5 (or actually the same as the RS5 using official figures), yet an M3 DCT can put up a fight and hang with the C63 in a straight line, and is faster around the track.

So we have the Audi RS5 with torque much closer to the M3, less power than the C63 and an AWD system that will have more power loss than a RWD. I think it all adds up to a car that will be very close to the M3, but not a car that will beat it considerably like how Footie makes out.

[footie]

Originally Posted by mixja

For my thinking, we have the C63 which makes considerably more torque and more power than the RS5, weighs probably only 50-75kg more than the RS5 (or actually the same as the RS5 using official figures), yet an M3 DCT can put up a fight and hang with the C63 in a straight line, and is faster around the track.

So we have the Audi RS5 with torque much closer to the M3, less power than the C63 and an AWD system that will have more power loss than a RWD. I think it all adds up to a car that will be very close to the M3, but not a car that will beat it considerably like how Footie makes out.

Either us guys invent things or you simply don't listen, the RS5 won't destory the M3 as you are claiming I have stated.

I think on numerous occasions I have said that the 'Competition Package' has been put together to keep the M3 in touch with the RS5 in relation to track times. The RS5 acceleration figures (unofficial) are closer to that of the C63 which means it is slightly ahead of an M-DCT M3. Track times on the ring are expected to be between 7:55-7:59 depending on conditions and rubber used at time of test, which I might add is roughly 10s better than the M3 depending on whether it's using CUP+ or PS2. Where the RS5 will really score over the M3 is in it's ability to cover ground extremely quickly, yet safely.

Overall, whether it's in acceleration, handling, braking, in-gear times, economy, emissions, in fact everything will be that little bit better than the M3 which when all of this is taken into consideration proves that Audi have indeed produced a superior car.

[LIKEWATER]

Originally Posted by footie

Either us guys invent things or you simply don't listen, the RS5 won't destory the M3 as you are claiming I have stated.

I think on numerous occasions I have said that the 'Competition Package' has been put together to keep the M3 in touch with the RS5 in relation to track times. The RS5 acceleration figures (unofficial) are closer to that of the C63 which means it is slightly ahead of an M-DCT M3. Track times on the ring are expected to be between 7:55-7:59 depending on conditions and rubber used at time of test, which I might add is roughly 10s better than the M3 depending on whether it's using CUP+ or PS2. Where the RS5 will really score over the M3 is in it's ability to cover ground extremely quickly, yet safely.

Overall, whether it's in acceleration, handling, braking, in-gear times, economy, emissions, in fact everything will be that little bit better than the M3 which when all of this is taken into consideration proves that Audi have indeed produced a superior car.

AND, that's the thing that turns me off about Audi.
Why can't they release their competitive product when BMW, Mercedes and now even Lexus does. Those three release their products at about the same time and go head to head balls out. Audi waits until the others, (namely the M3) are at the near end of their life cycle to compete with these vehicles and then claim superiority.... They had 3 plus years to study the others and get it right. What is that ?

[drivendriver]

Originally Posted by footie

Either us guys invent things or you simply don't listen, the RS5 won't destory the M3 as you are claiming I have stated.

I think on numerous occasions I have said that the 'Competition Package' has been put together to keep the M3 in touch with the RS5 in relation to track times. The RS5 acceleration figures (unofficial) are closer to that of the C63 which means it is slightly ahead of an M-DCT M3. Track times on the ring are expected to be between 7:55-7:59 depending on conditions and rubber used at time of test, which I might add is roughly 10s better than the M3 depending on whether it's using CUP+ or PS2. Where the RS5 will really score over the M3 is in it's ability to cover ground extremely quickly, yet safely.

Overall, whether it's in acceleration, handling, braking, in-gear times, economy, emissions, in fact everything will be that little bit better than the M3 which when all of this is taken into consideration proves that Audi have indeed produced a superior car.

Footie,

As I see it, there are basically two problems with all your posts about performance.

The first problem is that your comparison of Nordschleife lap times is not an apples-to-apples comparison. For the M3, you keep referring to the Sport Auto/HVS lap time. For the RS5, I presume that you refer to lap times by Audi test drivers. Look at the times for the GT-R. The HVS time is more than 10 sec slower than the fastest time by Toshio Suzuki. The Porsche time for the GT-R is even slower than the HVS time. So, unless the comparison is made with the same driver, with stock tires, it's kind of meaningless.

The second problem is that you keep alluding to private, unofficial data that's supposedly much better than the data released by Audi so far. Unless you give us more specific information about the data you have and how it was obtained, why should we believe you? And why doesn't Audi just release that information?

Concerning the 0-60 time, let's say we take out 2/10 for the conversion from 0-62 to 0-60. That brings us to 4.4. Let's say we take out another 2/10 because Audi is conservative. That brings us to 4.2. Is that supposed to blow us away? The best time I've seen for the M3 DCT without rollout is 4.3. Now, before you reply that you have private information indicating that the RS5 does much better than 4.2, please read the second paragraph again.

The truth is, all the information about the RS5 that has been released so far (power, weight, 0-62 time) is rather underwhelming. At best, it suggests that the car will be slightly faster than the M3 in the dry, and probably significantly faster in low grip conditions. What it does not suggest is that it will make the M3 obsolete, or that it will make me think "I have to trade in my M3". Again, if you really want to convince us and if you have information that points out to the contrary, then put it out in the open.

You won't convince anybody by repeating "I know I'm right, and sooner or later you will have to admit that I was right all along". It's not about you being right or wrong, it's about information that we have and information that you claim you have.

Concerning the AWD technology, I have no problem believing that it's a significant improvement over older AWD technology and that it will, to a certain extent, mitigate the disadvantages of AWD vs. RWD. The problem is, most people in this forum are quite happy with RWD. If we were not, we would not have bought M3's. From that point of view too, this forum will always be a tough crowd. Maybe you should just accept that.

And this leads me to wonder about your motivation. As you've said many times, you know you're right. Why isn't that enough? Why is it so important to you to convince members of an M3 forum that the RS5 will be superior to their cars? Why do you keep trying when obviously it doesn't work? I just don't get it. You could just wait for all your private information to be made public, find something more productive to occupy yourself in the meantime, and then come back here and rub our faces in it.

[footie]

First off, I completely agree with most of what you were saying though I think you must have misunderstood by suggest on the N-ring time, I wasn't meaning the time set by an Audi testdriver, I meant HvS himself because if I were to tell you the time I have been told that it's actually done in Audi's hands you probably wouldn't believe me.

Next, you say why are these the official times if the car is capable of so much more, well I could argue back saying why did BMW release it's official figures for the M3 at 4.8s when it clearly could and did do better than that, the bottom line is that the acceleration times ARE conservative and everyone should be fully aware of this because even the RS4 with 30hp less, a less advanced and less efficient drivetrain, no dual clutch gearbox and without launch control was capable of matching these times, according to what I have been told you can expect closer to 4.2s without rollout which will mean in the hands of R&T or C&D you will see sub 4 second runs to 60mph. Like I said it will be a bit quicker than the M3 though not hugely so.

Regarding my rubbing your nose in it. Sorry but I am only defending my opinion against certain people telling me I am talking crap which I can assure you I am not and in no way am I trying to force this car down their throats. Dismissing something just because it's different is not being very open minded or being objective, this is something that appears to be too common on this forum, regardless of what car it holds favouritism with, preferring the M3 after driving the RS5 is something I openly believe will happen with quite a few people, after all these same people have felt the GTR doesn't offers the same entertainment value that the M3 does but there will be some that will openly admit that even though the GTR is not the same fun it is also one hell of a machine simply because of what it's capable of doing around corners, if the same people come away feeling something similar about the RS5 then I think Audi will have achieved the goal they set out to do.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by footie

Regarding my rubbing your nose in it. Sorry but I am only defending my opinion against certain people telling me I am talking crap which I can assure you I am not and in no way am I trying to force this car down their throats. Dismissing something just because it's different is not being very open minded or being objective, this is something that appears to be too common on this forum, regardless of what car it holds favouritism with, preferring the M3 after driving the RS5 is something I openly believe will happen with quite a few people, after all these same people have felt the GTR doesn't offers the same entertainment value that the M3 does but there will be some that will openly admit that even though the GTR is not the same fun it is also one hell of a machine simply because of what it's capable of doing around corners, if the same people come away feeling something similar about the RS5 then I think Audi will have achieved the goal they set out to do.

I do agree with your opinion, but do not impose it on others. For many here the RS5 cannot be the better car as it is not RWD but AWD. However good the RS5 is, everything ends here.

[footie]

Originally Posted by GhostRideTheWhip

http://forums.fourtitude.com/zerothread?id=4791297

Confirmed for 2012 for US?

Autumn/Fall 2011 and according to what I have heard, there may well be a manual by that time.

I also said a while back that the TT-RS might well go to the States and I would imagine that it too will get the go ahead as production of this model could be stepped up with the RS6 ending production shortly.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

Track times on the ring are expected to be between 7:55-7:59 depending on conditions and rubber used at time of test, which I might add is roughly 10s better than the M3 depending on whether it's using CUP+ or PS2.

There is no data about the M3 time with PS2, just tons and tons of speculation. You should not state this as fact and admit this is your guess.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Levi

I do agree with your opinion, but do not impose it on others. For many here the RS5 cannot be the better car as it is not RWD but AWD. However good the RS5 is, everything ends here.

You see, there is where I seriously argue to the death, your comment that the RS5 can't be better because of it's use of AWD, maybe the wording needs to be changed because can't be 'better' suggests that it's can't be superior and I'm sorry but the RS5 will be superior. Maybe you should say something like, 'for many here the RS5 isn't an option because using AWD means some of the entertainment will be missing'. Now that is something I can agree with and also believe.

But even then I would suggest all doubters to sample it when it does come to the US because I think many will be expecting another RS4 and I can assure you that the RS5 isn't that car.

[footie]

Originally Posted by swamp2

There is no data about the M3 time with PS2, just tons and tons of speculation. You should not state this as fact and admit this is your guess.

Fair point because can I ask you, in your opinion do you think my estimate of the PS2 time is far out?

Please swamp, don't sit on the fence.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by footie

You see, there is where I seriously argue to the death, your comment that the RS5 can't be better because of it's use of AWD, maybe the wording needs to be changed because can't be 'better' suggests that it's can't be superior and I'm sorry but the RS5 will be superior. Maybe you should say something like, 'for many here the RS5 isn't an option because using AWD means some of the entertainment will be missing'. Now that is something I can agree with and also believe.

But even then I would suggest all doubters to sample it when it does come to the US because I think many will be expecting another RS4 and I can assure you that the RS5 isn't that car.

I don't say 'better' in terms of performance but in terms of preference. In other words: The RS5 is better than M3, but I prefere the worse M3 with its RWD.