AMS Magazine: Another Comparison, Another Victory - M3 ZCP vs. RS5, C63, B3

[Uli_HH]

Originally Posted by piloto

I seriously doubt that the Audi engineers and marketing personnel are stupid. They know exactly what they have built, and you can be sure they will sell every one of these that they make, at a nice premium.

Audi's not going for record lap times here. They're going for speed, luxury, sophisticated and dramatic style, detailed engineering (e.g. their classic fluid damped "oh-shit" handles) and technology (quattro, sport rear diff). And by now means is it a slow car.

My point is they never set out to try and beat the M3 at its own game. Instead, they've made an alternate type of vehicle at around the same price point, that's going to attract its fair share of enthusiastic buyers.

And to the poster that said BMW fans are the problem, that's so 2008. According to none other than Top Gear, Audi is the new BMW in that respect.

NO ... Audi´s only intention to build the RS5 in the way they did, was to beat the M3 in all condition ... also and especially on the track ... they want bulid the best overall car in this class ... to be fast on normal roads an S5 is enaugh ... the only need to build an RS5 is to be also fast (the fastest!) on the track ... what a fail for Audi aka Quattro-GmbH!

Uli_HH

[ImStig]

That Top Gear segment made me laugh everytime. What they did with the Roundel, though, was sick. (literally)

Originally Posted by piloto

I seriously doubt that the Audi engineers and marketing personnel are stupid. They know exactly what they have built, and you can be sure they will sell every one of these that they make, at a nice premium.

Audi's not going for record lap times here. They're going for speed, luxury, sophisticated and dramatic style, detailed engineering (e.g. their classic fluid damped "oh-shit" handles) and technology (quattro, sport rear diff). And by now means is it a slow car.

My point is they never set out to try and beat the M3 at its own game. Instead, they've made an alternate type of vehicle at around the same price point, that's going to attract its fair share of enthusiastic buyers.

And to the poster that said BMW fans are the problem, that's so 2008. According to none other than Top Gear, Audi is the new BMW in that respect.

[footie]

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

Footie,

Your complaint about the M3 was the S65 and it's lack of torque yet what the RS5 has is a more High-strung version of the RS4's/R8's V8. This said V8 has a very similar power delivery to the S65 and only 200cc more displacement....... kinda hard for it to be a torque monster as an NA 4.2 V8 with an 8500 Redline.

Face it Audi gave too little too late..... and I am not an Audi Hater at all..... In fact I like Audi's. The RS5 is an awesome car but it just can't trump the M3..... A car which is 4 model years old might I add.

I like the fact that you love and are passionate about Audi's but you make me laugh when you come in here and talk them up...... I think secretly you wish you had your M3 back.

First off, everyone paints me as the big bad wolf............why? Is it because I promote the benefits of AWD, is it because I give everyone a reality check that most of you aren't that special behind the wheel and can't exploit the potential of the M3 in the same way you could in something like the RS5 or is it because I state facts like AWD is superior in slippy conditions which include rain as well as snow. I'm not a BMW hater, never have been and never will be, but I'm not a blind sheep either, the M3 is the best performance car in this sector if you spend most of your time on the track and have the skill to drive and appreciate it's perfectly balanced chassis, but the reality is the majority don't and aren't that skill so basing a purchase on what it potentially can do is relevant, it's what you can do which counts.

Next if you even bother to read my thoughts on the RS5 (clearly you are jumping on this bandwagon) you would know that I have criticized the choice of engine in the RS5, I make prefer FI for road cars because we seldom drive in the last 10th of the engine's rev range so why have an engine that is geared for 10/10th motoring when you only really use this 1/10th of the time.

Also the M3 isn't four years old, but what it is and has proved to be throughout the years is one of the most accomplished products in BMW's portfolio, no other of their products have been this successful against the competition. You only have to look at it's sales compared to the competition, what this proves is BMW would have a lot to lose if the M3 didn't get the rave reviews it gets from the magazines.

Do I want my M3 back? No, I wanted to try the product to see what all the hype was about but after owning one I realise that it's not for me, I seldom drive like a man possessed to appreciate the engine and chassis, I never take to the track now and I didn't think (still don't) the DCT transmission was that great compared to the competition. I'm not saying that it's a bad car (far from it) only that it didn't suit me, I will at some point try an AMG for a year to see how it compares but until that time I am happy with my choices.

[Matski]

Respect to the Alpina for coming a very close second to the M3...

Originally Posted by footie

First off, everyone paints me as the big bad wolf............why? Is it because I promote the benefits of AWD, is it because I give everyone a reality check that most of you aren't that special behind the wheel and can't exploit the potential of the M3 in the same way you could in something like the RS5 or is it because I state facts like AWD is superior in slippy conditions which include rain as well as snow. I'm not a BMW hater, never have been and never will be, but I'm not a blind sheep either, the M3 is the best performance car in this sector if you spend most of your time on the track and have the skill to drive and appreciate it's perfectly balanced chassis, but the reality is the majority don't and aren't that skill so basing a purchase on what it potentially can do is relevant, it's what you can do which counts.

I think the skill required to drive either car at maximum attack would be pretty high, you make it sound like you have to be an F1 driver to get the best out of the M, but anybody could drive the RS5 at full tilt thanks to the AWD? Errm, while I agree that AWD is handy for the week or two of snow we get each year (at least where I live anyway), AWD can't defy the laws of physics and with 450+hp on tap It's still pretty easy to get is very wrong in the RS5...

..hhmm, maybe Audi's next slogan should be "Audi, for the less skillful driver"

Also, how do you ever get the skill or appreciation for it's "perfectley balanced chassis" without actually trying it?

At the end of the day if the M3 is too extreme for you... there's always the Alpina

[footie]

Originally Posted by Matski

I think the skill required to drive either car at maximum attack would be pretty high, you make it sound like you have to be an F1 driver to get the best out of the M, but anybody could drive the RS5 at full tilt thanks to the AWD? Errm, while I agree that AWD is handy for the week or two of snow we get each year (at least where I live anyway), AWD can't defy the laws of physics and with 450+hp on tap It's still pretty easy to get is very wrong in the RS5...

Sorry to disagree with you on this one but the RS5 is easier to approach the limit than an M3 and this is solely down to the way the chassis is setup and it's AWD system. You are right in assume you need a bit of skill to push even the Audi but the level of skill is less. Again you are right in stating that AWD don't defy the laws of physics but driven sensibly without approaching the likes of a 90 degree corner at 100mph they will do pretty much what you ask of them without putting you at risk. The main difference is that the nose will run wide and even lifting the throttle (a natural reaction) won't cause anything other than the nose to tuck in, and even if you do floor the throttle on exit the most that will happen is a slight drift or the tail to arc out slowly, much much slower than in the M3, in fact my 10 year old could easily catch it.

I must admit that climate conditions will determine the main benefits of AWD but it's very naive to believe that AWD isn't easier to control because it is. Out of all three drivetrains RWD puts the most demanding on the driver.

Originally Posted by Matski

..hhmm, maybe Audi's next slogan should be "Audi, for the less skillful driver"

Maybe they should take an average Joe and time him in both. Then the slogan could read 'average skill equal above average results'.

Originally Posted by Matski

Also, how do you ever get the skill or appreciation for it's "perfectley balanced chassis" without actually trying it?

That was my point, without taking the M3 to the track you won't get the chance to appreciate that perfectly balanced chassis, so since the numbers that either take theirs to a track, want to or even have the opportunity to do so are slim I reckon using this as a reason for your purchase is silly.

[alito]

Originally Posted by footie

First off, everyone paints me as the big bad wolf............why? Is it because I promote the benefits of AWD, is it because I give everyone a reality check that most of you aren't that special behind the wheel and can't exploit the potential of the M3 in the same way you could in something like the RS5 or is it because I state facts like AWD is superior in slippy conditions which include rain as well as snow. I'm not a BMW hater, never have been and never will be, but I'm not a blind sheep either, the M3 is the best performance car in this sector if you spend most of your time on the track and have the skill to drive and appreciate it's perfectly balanced chassis, but the reality is the majority don't and aren't that skill so basing a purchase on what it potentially can do is relevant, it's what you can do which counts.

Next if you even bother to read my thoughts on the RS5 (clearly you are jumping on this bandwagon) you would know that I have criticized the choice of engine in the RS5, I make prefer FI for road cars because we seldom drive in the last 10th of the engine's rev range so why have an engine that is geared for 10/10th motoring when you only really use this 1/10th of the time.

Also the M3 isn't four years old, but what it is and has proved to be throughout the years is one of the most accomplished products in BMW's portfolio, no other of their products have been this successful against the competition. You only have to look at it's sales compared to the competition, what this proves is BMW would have a lot to lose if the M3 didn't get the rave reviews it gets from the magazines.

Do I want my M3 back? No, I wanted to try the product to see what all the hype was about but after owning one I realise that it's not for me, I seldom drive like a man possessed to appreciate the engine and chassis, I never take to the track now and I didn't think (still don't) the DCT transmission was that great compared to the competition. I'm not saying that it's a bad car (far from it) only that it didn't suit me, I will at some point try an AMG for a year to see how it compares but until that time I am happy with my choices.

Footie... as someone who also had an M3 and now is in an Audi, I agree with you 100%. I really do not think that anyone here will ever get your point. I too was very impressed with my M3 and would probably still have it if it was not for over 1 year of DCT problem and BMW's go fuck your self response.
I ado agree with you that the BMW M3 is definitely a better performer although really not by that much. I also believe that minds were made up by the magazines before they even drove the cars. If people were to really analyze the article without having such a "loyal" M3 mindset, they would see how unfair they all are to the Audi and the Cadillac.
As someone who had an M3 and now has an S5 convertible (6-supercharged) I can tell you that I do agree with you that if I was to take the M3 to a track (coupe and sedan) it would be the S5 easily and even the RS5. I have driven all 3. I can also tell you that I agree with the fact that the S5 and definitely the RS5 are both more consistent and easier to drive every day and require less driver effort to achieve performance and I am thoroughly enjoying the performance it has (lower torque band, AWD, MUCH better DCT) far more than the M3. I did have a 93 so mine was slower due to the fact that it was a convertible, but I am comparing my Audi S5 Convertible to the M3 convertible and, thus far, every performance number that I have attained (track, 0-60, 1/4 mile, etc) has been better with the S5. Coupes... not sure.
What people do not seem to get, nor will they ever (not everyone of course), is that we do not tout Audis because we have them or work for them. We HAVE Audis because we were so impressed by them. I can tell you that, even as a current and previous Audi owner (A4 avant) that I had a different idea of the S5 until I drove it, fell in love and traded my M3 and that does not even compare to the orgasmic experience when I drove the RS5 in Portugal last month.
I would honestly give up foot as most people will not understand and will attack you as they have.

I just went to the S5 forum and what a different mindset.

To prove my point just wait and see the Fu#& you comments I will probably get from this post...

[brava09]

IMO, it is more important to drive a car that is the best car in its class (I feel better...), rather than driving a car that comes always 2nd or 3rd in any comparo.


Footie, I suppose that the reason why everyone sees you as the bad wolf around here is that you trumpeted the all-mightiness of the RS5 way before they launched it....you had suggested that you hold insider information that the RS5 would be marginally faster than M3....now, not only that is not faster at all, but also it is more than marginally slower than M3....as far as I am concerned, you lost some credibility around here...sorry to say, but you look more and more like an Audi fanboi.

[Matski]

Originally Posted by footie

I must admit that climate conditions will determine the main benefits of AWD but it's very naive to believe that AWD isn't easier to control because it is. Out of all three drivetrains RWD puts the most demanding on the driver.

Similarly, is it not then the most rewarding for the driver? I would say it is, and if I where paying M3 money for a 'drivers' car I would expect it to be rewarding. If I wanted something less demanding I would probably save a load of money and go with a 335d instead. Is an M3 that demanding in day to day use? or is it just when you're pushing it? - and surely this is where you want the "experience" of the M3 to be?

[footie]

Originally Posted by Matski

Similarly, is it not then the most rewarding for the driver? I would say it is, and if I where paying M3 money for a 'drivers' car I would expect it to be rewarding. If I wanted something less demanding I would probably save a load of money and go with a 335d instead. Is an M3 that demanding in day to day use? or is it just when you're pushing it? - and surely this is where you want the "experience" of the M3 to be?

You re quite right, more demanding does mean more rewarding, but we return to my earlier point that without the skill to test the chassis you are arguably driving something that is superior yet you'll never know it.

You state that if I couldn't or didn't want to be challenged you would forgo the performance of the M3 and buy a 335d, I say why do that when you car still have all the performance of the M3 and not only that but can excess it even easier making you quicker as well.

[ZM4000]

Originally Posted by Kiemyster

point for point, tit for tat, BMW > Audi. Its quite pleasurable to see all these Audi adverts on tv saying how their cars have the best residuals amongst german cars, or how many of them are still on the road today. Kiss my ass, audi couldnt build a car to save their life. I dont know any car tech that says they would dip their dick in an audi, its either BMW or MB. Apparrently the guys at world car fans talk massive amounts of shit about bmw's... someone tell me what thats all about.

anywho, it makes me very happy that the M3 ZCP has won every single point comparison so far. BMW FTW now wenever the audi fanboy's talk their trash, i need not even entertain their conversations anymore. We have won once again my friends

AMEN

[alito]

So in order for the M3 to be a great car the Audi has to be crap and all its drivers alike. You are right... BMW driver's egos are not attached at all to their cars...

[jdgamble]

Originally Posted by alito

every performance number that I have attained (track, 0-60, 1/4 mile, etc) has been better with the S5

Dude... I've driven an S4 and agree that it's much easier to mindlessly get around corners... and I would never say F to anyone on this board... but if this is true, you must be a HORRIBLE driver! I mean, REALLY horrible.

[quality_sound]

Originally Posted by cloakster

Considering the weight of the car, the performance of it is not bad, but why would Audi build such a heavy car. Its meant to be a high performance car at a reasonable price, but its completely missed that purpose. Its overweight and overpriced.

I don't think Audi was trying to build an "M3 killer" or any other such nonsense. I think Audi was trying build a great GT. I don't know how fast you've had your M but IME the M3 needs more weight as it starts to lift at high speeds. I think the reason M-B and Audi make their cars so heavy is because it's easier than designing downforce-producing parts that don't look like they were taken from the JC Whitney catalog.

[EmPower]

Originally Posted by footie

First off, everyone paints me as the big bad wolf............why? Is it because I promote the benefits of AWD, is it because I give everyone a reality check that most of you aren't that special behind the wheel and can't exploit the potential of the M3 in the same way you could in something like the RS5 or is it because I state facts like AWD is superior in slippy conditions which include rain as well as snow. I'm not a BMW hater, never have been and never will be, but I'm not a blind sheep either, the M3 is the best performance car in this sector if you spend most of your time on the track and have the skill to drive and appreciate it's perfectly balanced chassis, but the reality is the majority don't and aren't that skill so basing a purchase on what it potentially can do is relevant, it's what you can do which counts.

Next if you even bother to read my thoughts on the RS5 (clearly you are jumping on this bandwagon) you would know that I have criticized the choice of engine in the RS5, I make prefer FI for road cars because we seldom drive in the last 10th of the engine's rev range so why have an engine that is geared for 10/10th motoring when you only really use this 1/10th of the time.

Also the M3 isn't four years old, but what it is and has proved to be throughout the years is one of the most accomplished products in BMW's portfolio, no other of their products have been this successful against the competition. You only have to look at it's sales compared to the competition, what this proves is BMW would have a lot to lose if the M3 didn't get the rave reviews it gets from the magazines.

Do I want my M3 back? No, I wanted to try the product to see what all the hype was about but after owning one I realise that it's not for me, I seldom drive like a man possessed to appreciate the engine and chassis, I never take to the track now and I didn't think (still don't) the DCT transmission was that great compared to the competition. I'm not saying that it's a bad car (far from it) only that it didn't suit me, I will at some point try an AMG for a year to see how it compares but until that time I am happy with my choices.

After looking at Footie getting bashed I figured I should chime in... BTW - Footie, stop causing trouble :P.

That is the exact reason why I got into the 335, instead of waiting one year for the M3. Its the perfect balance between good handling and decent performance (has gotten me into trouble a lot).

Real world is what matters and for most of us this is it. I drove an M5 (have a review on this board somewhere) and I did not like it simply because of this very reason - lack of real world power. That being said, i am VERY excited about the 550i and the new M5, both of which I am considering as a replacement for the 335i.

For the few of us who can offord to have 'toys' in the garage, I would reckon that the M3 would be at the bottom of that list!

This was quoted in top gear a few years ago - regarding the incessant comparisions between the M3 and the 911 - 'If you want a sports car, start with a sports car, not a sedan that you have to re-engineer to be a sports car'.

Also, on an unrelated topic, what peeves me most is how so many people appear to know about cars and run their mouths. I have seen a few new comers in the market that have very high top speeds (like the G-power hurricane M5), which allegedly reaches 232mph. The 0-60 for this car is average for this class of car at 4.3 s, which tells me that the car is geared optimally with high ratios, so it feels like a GT through the power bands and does not run out of cogs. But after reading through some of the comments, I saw so many ppl post that they were shocked at how slow it was to 60.

This is exactly what I feel after reading through this thread. People here are just fan boys and have no idea what they are talking about.... and BTW Footie, stop causing trouble!!

[alito]

Originally Posted by jdgamble

Dude... I've driven an S4 and agree that it's much easier to mindlessly get around corners... and I would never say F to anyone on this board... but if this is true, you must be a HORRIBLE driver! I mean, REALLY horrible.

Horrible driver of only the M3.... good theory.

[Poppin Fresh]

Originally Posted by quality_sound

I don't think Audi was trying to build an "M3 killer" or any other such nonsense. I think Audi was trying build a great GT. I don't know how fast you've had your M but IME the M3 needs more weight as it starts to lift at high speeds. I think the reason M-B and Audi make their cars so heavy is because it's easier than designing downforce-producing parts that don't look like they were taken from the JC Whitney catalog.

That was their excuse when they built the S5. Audi GMBH were clearly aiming for the BMW M3's throat when they built the RS5.

[Tallest]

i think people are missing the point here - a tuned 335i whipped both RS5 and C63.

Although, look at the 0-200 jolt by AMG. Fak that's quick. but undrivable, looking at the comp figures.

[MJC///M3]

Originally Posted by quality_sound

I don't think Audi was trying to build an "M3 killer" or any other such nonsense.

Have to respectfully disagree with you on that comment bro.

Just seems the overall sentiment over the past few months....especially reading through many of the RS5 debates was that this car was INDEED meant to dethrone the M3. This coupled with the incessant barrage of Audi commercials directly targeting BMW, is a testament to that fact.

In any event, its fantastic to see the M3 reign supreme. I think the E92 will go down as one of the best M3's ever....especially considering how fantastic the competition is these days..(RS5, C63, etc).

[amgthis]

BMW wins = RS5 is a POS? C63 was aimed at the M3 and so was the IS-F so are those shit cars as well?

[DougLikesBMW]

Originally Posted by amgthis

BMW wins = RS5 is a POS? C63 was aimed at the M3 and so was the IS-F so are those shit cars as well?

IS-F? Yes.

[rob612]

Originally Posted by footie

Maybe you need to check out this.

maybe you should look at the nurburing 24 hour race

[four-rings]

First off, Let me state that I am not a bmw owner obviously you should be able to tell from the user name. However, footie you’re going in the wrong direction trying to prove that the rs5 is a quicker car under one circumstance. You just can’t base one time off of countless other times were magazines have proved otherwise...

Although, if you compare the rs5 and the m3 with normal everyday drivers (not some magazine pro) no matter which year you will find different result. The s4, s5, rs4, and rs5 will all smoke an m3 off the line from 0-100km (0-60mph) why? Because Audi’s quarto (all-wheel drive) system. Now I am not saying that the car will win a quarter mile by any means.. Because once the m3 gets traction and going I know it is near impossible to beat hard for many cars to contend with it. However, I don’t believe Audi (as some of you stated fell behind the ball with this car) they already have one "super car" v10 r8. Which if u look at every bmw model, most cannot even keep up with it.

imo and I know most of you will correct me if I am wrong. Audi isn’t all about building the fastest and the best compact sports car. They all may come out with similar models that rival and go against other models. But each car serves a different purpose and benefits in its own way uniquely. Audi relies very much on the design, practicality and functionality. For example, the s5, wasn’t put out to be the fastest 2 door coupe. But, its sleek design with integrated l.e.d display sets it apart in it own way from a 3 series or a Benz. One of Audi’s biggest factors that that they have been praised for is their interior. Which I have read has been outstanding for the past 15 years compared to bmws etc. For example, comparing a 07 m3 to a 2005 s4 the record sport interior jumps leaps and bounds over the plain m3 “sport” seat. Much like if you compare the rs5/rs4 European recaros to the bmw you will get a similar result. The two companies have their two own ways of getting individuals to drive their cars.

I understand the whole ragging on other cars is big and is big competition. But, you got to be happy with what you have. Knocking on someone else just to better your self just makes you as an individual look like a weak fool. You can rip others for what the drive.

I apologies for and spellings or grammatical errors