BMW M3 vs. Audi RS5

BMW M Power Mexico · 02-22-2010, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hks786

RS5 is 10 full seconds quicker around the ring than RS4. Enough said.

I'm sure you know this from personal experience. And that "makes it" a lot faster than the R8 with the V8 engine (which barely beats the M3 on the ring BTW).

///FCB · 02-22-2010, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BMW M Power Mexico

I'm sure you know this from personal experience. And that "makes it" a lot faster than the R8 with the V8 engine (which barely beats the M3 on the ring BTW).

+1

hks786 · 02-22-2010, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BMW M Power Mexico

I'm sure you know this from personal experience. And that "makes it" a lot faster than the R8 with the V8 engine (which barely beats the M3 on the ring BTW).

I know from a good source. R8 is totally different class from M3. RS5 will be faster than M3.

shiggy · 02-22-2010, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by footie

I doubt anyone should have worried by the potential rival to their beloved M3, after all it's just another rival that may or may not be better.

One thing I will advise you is that if you seriously think it's 0-60mph times is going to be 4.6s in reality then your lights are on but nobody is in. I'm confident that it will do a 4.2s without rollout. Guys it will be quicker than the M3, of this I am certain but it will not feel like the M3, it will be amazing in it's own right in the same way as the GTR is, but it won't feel like a rwd which means it won't appeal to the purists among you. So even if it came to the US it probably wouldn't be an alternative to your M3 anyway.

no reason to question their intelligence Footie!...dont get so defensive if someone on here does not agree with you or thinks/knows the M3 is better....this is a BMW forum...so there will be many of us who beg to differ.

chill out big shooter!

H Bomb · 02-22-2010, 08:38 PM

i would just take a used R8 for the 90k to be honest at that price

Quote:

Originally Posted by ///Metak

The logic is that the RS5 would be more than anyone would be willing to pay. Would you pay $85-90k for one? I sure wouldn't. I would rather have the outgoing M5/M6 with that sweet V10, but that's just me maybe. Or something over in Proscheland. Or an M3 with the extra $$ in my wallet.

NOTE: The S5 is already priced very close to the M3, yet lacking the same level of performance.

shiggy · 02-22-2010, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ///Metak

The logic is that the RS5 would be more than anyone would be willing to pay. Would you pay $85-90k for one? I sure wouldn't. I would rather have the outgoing M5/M6 with that sweet V10, but that's just me maybe. Or something over in Proscheland. Or an M3 with the extra $$ in my wallet.

NOTE: The S5 is already priced very close to the M3, yet lacking the same level of performance.

+1

JC919 · 02-22-2010, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hks786

RS5 is 10 full seconds quicker around the ring than RS4. Enough said.

Definitely a let down in the looks department

tnt007 · 02-22-2010, 10:20 PM

M3 has a better weight distribution than the RS5. RS5 engine is sit way infront of the front wheels axles, very bad engine location, just like a front wheel drive car.

330CIZHP · 02-22-2010, 10:59 PM

It is not a matter of whether RS5 is better or not than the E9X M3.

It is guaranteed that it is better in just about everyway otherwise Audi would not even be releasing the car if it could perform a 414 HP 4 year old platform. It makes no sense if someone believes somehow magically it will be inferior in anyway to E9X M3. Just not going to happen unless BMW aggressively updates the engine etc.

The main question is how big the gap will become, which could have easily been narrowed with the competition package and added horsepower in the S65, yet BMW decided to go the easier and cheaper way out.

With the F30 becoming a boring and bland turbocharged low-revving car, I think RS5 will still soldier on with a glorious, sonorous race-bred engine giving hope to racing heritage in road caars.

H Bomb · 02-22-2010, 11:51 PM

that is just it who cares how much power it has, and in fact if it had similar or equal to the M3 now i would have more respect for Audi then BMW just bc they still are making a NA engine vs taking the popular route and going boring turbo blah blah. since when did BMW M do whatever everybody else did?? if they did that we would of had turbos and SC's long time ago in the other M's. it is truly sad to see that concept go out the window. and sad bc it will be the last BMW i buy bc of that.

however i am a true manual fan and it looks like this car will only be video game paddles so i will be looking for a clean used R8 then instead

BMW269 · 02-23-2010, 01:29 AM

What if the RS5 came with the 4.0l V8 TFSI, 480 Hp and 620 Nm? TheRS5 has no chance against the next M3 F30. But even now there is going to be this Alpina B3 S Biturbo with 400 Hp and 540 Nm. The Alpina B3 Biturbo is already so faster than S5 and very close to M3. What about the other?

footie · 02-23-2010, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnt007

M3 has a better weight distribution than the RS5. RS5 engine is sit way infront of the front wheels axles, very bad engine location, just like a front wheel drive car.

What if I told you it doesn't behave like a fwd car?
What if I told you it doesn't behave like any other front engined quattro car?
In fact what if I told you that when combined with it's specially programmed sportsdiff it behaves much, much closer to that of a rwd car?

Are you interested yet?

smmmurf · 02-23-2010, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by footie

What if I told you it doesn't behave like a fwd car?
What if I told you it doesn't behave like any other front engined quattro car?
In fact what if I told you that when combined with it's specially programmed sportsdiff it behaves much, much closer to that of a rwd car?

Are you interested yet?

If you told me all those things, I would not be surprised and I would continue to believe that you work for Audi marketing and/or still have sour grapes.

Do you have an account on AudiWorld yet? The forum is that way ---------->

BMW269 · 02-23-2010, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hks786

RS5 is 10 full seconds quicker around the ring than RS4. Enough said.

RS4-------->7:58 min
so
RS5-------->7:48 min
nearly as fast as
R8 V10----->7:44 min ???

footie · 02-23-2010, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smmmurf

If you told me all those things, I would not be surprised and I would continue to believe that you work for Audi marketing and/or still have sour grapes.

Do you have an account on AudiWorld yet? The forum is that way ---------->

Surely it's common knowledge that I have praised the M3 far more than I have ever complained about it. Two issues I have had with the M, a) the lag of the DCT and b) the lack of torque low down. The rest of the car was simply brilliant so why this belief of sour grapes??????????????????

I am passionate about 3 brands, Audi - BMW - Porsche, but ultimately I prefer awd over rwd so at times my posts might give the impression I am pro-Audi but that is only because I prefer awd and to take this further I prefer quattro to x-drive. I also prefer FI to N/A which I suppose up to now means I am less of a lover of M cars but the future is looking rosier and with the possibility of a Kers awd setup coming I can see me back to the brand in the not to distance future.

footie · 02-23-2010, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levi

RS4-------->7:58 min
so
RS5-------->7:48 min
nearly as fast as
R8 V10----->7:44 min ???

No, this time of 7:58 wasn't achieved by Sportauto which is what was being hinted. The official Sportauto time was 8:09 so take off 10s and you have 7:59. Personally I think it will be a little quicker than this if the weather holds up but only by a couple of seconds.

Unofficially and in the hands of an Audi test driver? Wouldn't you like to know.

smmmurf · 02-23-2010, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by footie

Surely it's common knowledge that I have praised the M3 far more than I have ever complained about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by footie

I am passionate about 3 brands, Audi - BMW - Porsche, but ultimately I prefer awd over rwd so at times my posts might give the impression I am pro-Audi but that is only because I prefer awd and to take this further I prefer quattro to x-drive. I also prefer FI to N/A which I suppose up to now means I am less of a lover of M cars but the future is looking rosier and with the possibility of a Kers awd setup coming I can see me back to the brand in the not to distance future.

AWDiworld ---------------------------------------->

footie · 02-23-2010, 02:31 AM

^^^^^^ Good one

OK, you doubt me, that's fine.

BMW269 · 02-23-2010, 02:48 AM

Less than 7:59 min is not that fast. I stil would have expected more. Do you know the Ring Times of M3 Competition or M3 GTS?
Well, would you like the next M3 F30 if it had 3.0l I6 FI with 450 Hp and 550 Nm, and with the new xDrive system of X6 M or even better?

footie · 02-23-2010, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levi

Less than 7:59 min is not that fast. I stil would have expected more. Do you know the Ring Times of M3 Competition or M3 GTS?
Well, would you like the next M3 F30 if it had 3.0l I6 FI with 450 Hp and 550 Nm, and with the new xDrive system of X6 M or even better?

Probably yes to the above with the possible exception being the x-drive system, it seriously isn't that great and against this latest generation of quattro is very much old hat. I would much prefer a Kers system controlling the front axle with all the engine's power driving the rear.

Now this would be the perfect setup in my eyes.

P.S.
No times for the M3 'Competition Pack' and the 7:59 is a guesstimate only.

graider · 02-23-2010, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smmmurf

If you told me all those things, I would not be surprised and I would continue to believe that you work for Audi marketing and/or still have sour grapes.

Do you have an account on AudiWorld yet? The forum is that way ---------->

i think just let the man speak his opinion, there is no right or wrong here. audi is nice and there current line up is nice. bmw need to step up and it will all benefit us.

frenchM3dreamer · 02-23-2010, 10:54 AM

it's funny to see you guys getting so excited about a car that almost nobody has driven (except Footie maybe

) and just speculating on handling, numbers, lap times...
i think Audi and BMW target 2 slightly different markets, especially when it comes to the M brand...
I'm sure the RS5 will be a bad ass car, regardless of whether it outperforms the M3 or not (which, like it was said before, it should since Audi had 4 years to get it right...)
but then, some of you/us are die-hard Audi / AWD fanboys and will get the RS5... some are Bimmer boys and will get the M3... and some have $ 70K or more to spare without any particular preference, will test-drive both and take the one they prefer...
what's wrong with that???
there's more to a car than just the numbers, dont you think?
Also, i'm curious to know how Footie has so much info on it...

not saying that in a bad way, just saying it must be nice and frustrating at the same time to have info that others dont have (at least from what i read) but not being able to share it...

Cheers guys!

02-22-2010, 10:20 PM	#30
tnt007 Enlisted Member 0 Rep 48 Posts Drives: black e92 dct m3 Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: houston iTrader: (0)	M3 has a better weight distribution than the RS5. RS5 engine is sit way infront of the front wheels axles, very bad engine location, just like a front wheel drive car.
	Appreciate 0

02-22-2010, 10:59 PM	#31
330CIZHP Major 62 Rep 1,211 Posts Drives: BMW 330 CI ZHP Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Calgary, Alberta iTrader: (0)	It is not a matter of whether RS5 is better or not than the E9X M3. It is guaranteed that it is better in just about everyway otherwise Audi would not even be releasing the car if it could perform a 414 HP 4 year old platform. It makes no sense if someone believes somehow magically it will be inferior in anyway to E9X M3. Just not going to happen unless BMW aggressively updates the engine etc. The main question is how big the gap will become, which could have easily been narrowed with the competition package and added horsepower in the S65, yet BMW decided to go the easier and cheaper way out. With the F30 becoming a boring and bland turbocharged low-revving car, I think RS5 will still soldier on with a glorious, sonorous race-bred engine giving hope to racing heritage in road caars. __________________ ""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

02-22-2010, 11:51 PM	#32
H Bomb Lieutenant Colonel 65 Rep 1,676 Posts Drives: 08 M3 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: FL to NY iTrader: (4)	that is just it who cares how much power it has, and in fact if it had similar or equal to the M3 now i would have more respect for Audi then BMW just bc they still are making a NA engine vs taking the popular route and going boring turbo blah blah. since when did BMW M do whatever everybody else did?? if they did that we would of had turbos and SC's long time ago in the other M's. it is truly sad to see that concept go out the window. and sad bc it will be the last BMW i buy bc of that. however i am a true manual fan and it looks like this car will only be video game paddles so i will be looking for a clean used R8 then instead __________________ Street- 08 E92 M3- Sparkling Graphite/ Fox Red/6sp Track- 10 CRF 250-PR2 Race Motor/Ohlins TTX Susp Hauler- 06 Ford Skyjacker F250 4WD
	Appreciate 0

02-23-2010, 01:29 AM	#33
BMW269 Brigadier General 435 Rep 3,888 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Germany iTrader: (0)	What if the RS5 came with the 4.0l V8 TFSI, 480 Hp and 620 Nm? TheRS5 has no chance against the next M3 F30. But even now there is going to be this Alpina B3 S Biturbo with 400 Hp and 540 Nm. The Alpina B3 Biturbo is already so faster than S5 and very close to M3. What about the other?
	Appreciate 0

02-23-2010, 02:31 AM	#40
footie Major General 1120 Rep 8,017 Posts Drives: i5M60 Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: No where fast iTrader: (0) Garage List 2024 BMW i5M60 [0.00] 2022 BMW i4M50 [0.00] 2020 BMW M5 Competi ... [0.00] 2008 E92 M3 [0.00]	^^^^^^ Good one OK, you doubt me, that's fine.
	Appreciate 0

02-23-2010, 02:48 AM	#41
BMW269 Brigadier General 435 Rep 3,888 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Germany iTrader: (0)	Less than 7:59 min is not that fast. I stil would have expected more. Do you know the Ring Times of M3 Competition or M3 GTS? Well, would you like the next M3 F30 if it had 3.0l I6 FI with 450 Hp and 550 Nm, and with the new xDrive system of X6 M or even better?
	Appreciate 0

02-23-2010, 10:54 AM	#44
frenchM3dreamer Captain 8 Rep 784 Posts Drives: 08 Mitsu Eclipse Spyder GTP Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Edmonton, AB iTrader: (0)	it's funny to see you guys getting so excited about a car that almost nobody has driven (except Footie maybe ) and just speculating on handling, numbers, lap times... i think Audi and BMW target 2 slightly different markets, especially when it comes to the M brand... I'm sure the RS5 will be a bad ass car, regardless of whether it outperforms the M3 or not (which, like it was said before, it should since Audi had 4 years to get it right...) but then, some of you/us are die-hard Audi / AWD fanboys and will get the RS5... some are Bimmer boys and will get the M3... and some have $ 70K or more to spare without any particular preference, will test-drive both and take the one they prefer... what's wrong with that??? there's more to a car than just the numbers, dont you think? Also, i'm curious to know how Footie has so much info on it... not saying that in a bad way, just saying it must be nice and frustrating at the same time to have info that others dont have (at least from what i read) but not being able to share it... Cheers guys!
	Appreciate 0