RS4 & E90 M3

[cally_ive]

What would you guys choose? the RS4 or the E90 M3

[John]

m3

[carnuts3]

Originally Posted by cally_ive

What would you guys choose? the RS4 or the E90 M3

Too early to determine. Need to look at price and test drive both before deciding.

[M3]

No need to wait... BMW M is BMW M and Audi R is Audi R

[Smoltz]

Easy. M3. I've owned 2 E46 M3s and a B6 S4. The M3 is just a hell of a lot more fun to drive than the S4 and I'm sure that pattern will repeat itself. Also, the new M3 will cost substantially less than the RS4.

-Adam

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by cally_ive

What would you guys choose? the RS4 or the E90 M3

The RS4 is too expensive and too heavy with poor weight balance, and I don't need 4 doors. Yes, it performs well, but it's engineering over good basic design. Audi does have a better aesthetic direction right now than BMW (nasal opening excepted) and wonderful interiors. I may check out the RS5 if it's oout before the M3.

[visor]

Try asking the same question on the A4/S4/RS4 forum and see what answer you get.

[Smoltz]

Originally Posted by visor

Try asking the same question on the A4/S4/RS4 forum and see what answer you get.

Most B6 S4 owners live in their own reality. In their world the S4 is faster in a straight line and on a road course than the M3 and the 1 Top Gear review that shows the S4 being faster is the only one that counts.

-Adam

[visor]

Originally Posted by Smoltz

Most B6 S4 owners live in their own reality. In their world the S4 is faster in a straight line and on a road course than the M3 and the 1 Top Gear review that shows the S4 being faster is the only one that counts.

-Adam

Oops, sorry, that was a rhetorical question.
Should have put a at the end.

What I meant was that we being on an M3 forum would give a biased answer to his question, just as those on the S4 forum...

[SpencerM3]

As a current '06 S4 owner who is counting the days till the E90/92 M3 shows up, i'd still probably say RS4 based on AWD and all that it has to offer. However The M3 is an M3 and there is just a certain mystique about the car.

[JK42]

The RS4 was rushed out fast by Audi when they first heard/realized that the new M3 would have a V8. It's a very non-special car compared to the upcoming new M3. Even the quattro transmission on it reduces the actual output of the engine going to the wheels big time, over 17% power loss in transmission, and this for a supposedly "special" model. That's nothing new in regular Audis or VW concern 4WD's, but for the RS4, it's a shame. They're desperately trying to cash in as much as they can now before the new M3 hits the streets, because there is no direct competition from BMW, with the M5/M6 being too big, heavy and expensive and non-comparable.

Mark my words: In the next 10 years or so, Audi will probably build an all RWD car. They've moved the percentage of power to the rear wheels more and more, trying to cope with BMW on the market and trying to make cars that are as fun to drive, but they just can't - unless they do an RWD only car. Remember that Quattro used to be advertised as the perfect 4WD with 50:50 power distribution... Now it's way more RWD oriented already, and keeps getting that way. But their worst problem is their low standard of engine engineering (both turbodiesels and gasoline.) Even the RS4 V8 is basically, well, garbage, when compared to the new M3 power-unit. In it's revs, transmission, etc.

They also tried to copy the M5/M6 with the S6 unsuccessfully by building their own V10 gasoline engine, and in this case, BMW had the goods out on the market first. And they were better to start with. The current S6 is a pathetic M5-wannabe.

Best regards,

Jussi

[Smoltz]

Originally Posted by visor

Oops, sorry, that was a rhetorical question.
Should have put a at the end.

What I meant was that we being on an M3 forum would give a biased answer to his question, just as those on the S4 forum...

I've owned both cars and yes there is some bias on a forum for a particular car, but IMHO more M3 owners are willing to admit to the S4s advantages than there are S4 owners who are willing to admit to the M3s advantages.

-Adam

[Smoltz]

Originally Posted by westwest888

I've seen no less than three RS4's on the road now, both as a pedestrian and while I was driving. The sound is UNDENIABLE - you're clearly looking at an RS4. It sounds like a spaceship. But I can't help but think the exterior looks like a $30,000 A4 2.0T with new bumper covers and some glue-on trim items like lip spoilers and door trim. $77k MSRP is a lot to swallow and there's not a lot of choice (1 option package, all or nothing). Audi's strategy is to offer one choice completed loaded from the parts bin.

I think the ///M3 will appeal to the enthusiast who wants choices. Choose transmission, body style (coupe, sedan, vert), choose extra luxury or weight savings, etc. Ultimately this will make it a better car and a better brand.

I don't know where you got your facts on a $77k MSRP with no options, but it isn't true. Go to Audi's website, you'll see that you can get the car without the premium package/rear side airbags. The first batch of RS4s all came equipped the same, if you wanted to order one at this point without the premium pacakge you would be able to, this was their plan from the get go and is documented in their inital press release to dealers that was floating aroudn on the internet in a pdf.


If you feel that the RS4 looks like an A4 2.0T than you have to admit that the M3 looks like a 325. With that being said, that's the point of teh RS4/M5/M3. It's not supposed to look like a supercar, it's jsut supposed to perform like one.

-Adam

[Hans Delbruck]

If I wanted an RS4, I would have bought one already... or actually, since Audis depreciate like anvils, I'd be smart and wait a few years and get a used one. Audi's are still numb IMO compared to BMWs. But they have beautiful interiors!

[replicat]

No offense to any Audi enthusiasts, but I think that the company is a joke here in the states. In europe they contend with bmw and mb but out here they continually lose money. The q7 is another loss over here, AND IT WAS DESIGNED FOR US!!!!!!!!!!! I mean that company is so bent over cash here. What do they take us for out here? A bunch a fat yuppies!?! LOL well that may be true to most of the demographic that buys, but not us auto enthusiasts.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to urinate. (On my toilet with an audi logo in the bowl)

PS. M3 FTW, RS4 :

FTW = For the Win

[JK42]

No they don't contend with BMW in Europe either. Their engines are a joke, and their "quattro" transmission system loses between 15% and 25% of the engine's power and torque, instead of BMW's typical transmission loss which is only around 4%, so with BMW you get nearly all the engine power to the ground through your tyres, with Audi, forget about it. They're a premium brand of Volkswagen/Skoda - a joke with any serious performance driver who knows his stuff. Pretty much the european Lexus - copy whatever BMW and MB does and try to convey an image of quality, while all you do is share base-plates, engines and technology with cheap-o cars and "luxury" models such as Seat, Skoda, VW (cheapo), Audi and Lambo ("luxury"). The new Lambo Gallardo is absolutely hideous inside after VAG bought them, it looks like a frigging TT with absolutely crappy low quality interior materials on the cockpit, and this for a car that used to be able to challenge Ferrari in style. Lambo's are dead to any serious performance drivers thanks to the VW group/Audi.

Great idea with the Audi logo in the toilet bowl. I'll go check the nearest BMW shop tomorrow to see if they have any Audis at the second hand / traded cars department that could do without an Audi S or RS-logo and I'll attach that to my toilet for real.

Best regards,

Jussi

[meruyailir]

I think Audi has the most original exterior design pieces. BMW door handle changed from the old lift up style to the pull style ala MB. BMW 3er front has some Audi's "pig snort" grill design concept, where there's a continuity of flow from the grill to the bottom of the bumper. MB S class has BMW butt.

Make no mistake, I'll pick M3 over RS4 anytime.

[JK42]

But their interior design is terrible, engines and technology inferior and even on the "premium" cars. Look at the pictures of the RS4 steering wheel with the horrible column on the bottom, or pics inside of any TT with the absolutely vomit-inducing gear shift and the ugly TT-plate on the front panel.

Best regards,

Jussi

[Smoltz]

Originally Posted by JK42

No they don't contend with BMW in Europe either. Their engines are a joke, and their "quattro" transmission system loses between 15% and 25% of the engine's power and torque, instead of BMW's typical transmission loss which is only around 4%, so with BMW you get nearly all the engine power to the ground through your tyres, with Audi, forget about it.
Best regards,

Jussi

Your numbers are off here. Audi's AWD system (as with most center diff AWD systems) is usually factored between 22-25% drivetrain loss. RWD BMWs (and most other RWD vehicles) are usually factored at 15-18%. I prefer RWD for spirited driving, but that 2-10% increase in loss may be worth it depending on your priorities for the car.

-Adam

[JK42]

Smoltz,

Actually they are not. In real life roto dynotests current BMWs lose between 4-8%. See www.rri.se. 130i loses 4% torque and 8% power, 335i Coupé loses 4% of torque and 6% of power. Hope this helps. (HTH.)

Best regards,

Jussi

[replicat]

Are we factoring in manual vs. auto trannies here? I think that smoltz' and Jussi's answers sound about right with the audis systems losing the power that it loses. I know that AWD/4WD vehicles lose an enormous amount of power and if thats also in an automatic car, thats even more power lost. I would guess that an auto awd audi would lose between 20-30% depending on the drivetrain. And a rwd manual bmw, losing less that 10% (HP)

Just my two cents.

[JK42]

This is just about what the powertrain loses. Every manufacturer gives it's performance figues (hp/Nm/lb-ft) as measured from the engine. The transmission before that power and torque gets to the road always uses up a bit of those numbers. That was what we were talking about.

The difference that a manual greabox vs. torque converter automatic gearbox makes is a completely different issue. There too old-style torque converter automatic gearboxes (slushboxes) (basically any type of automatic tranny, including BMW's Steptronic) are usually a little slower in accelleration vs. manual gearbox with the same car/engine, and are definitely worse in a track setting since downshifts can't be controlled very well and the automatic gearbox is bad at guessing when it's time to downshift, even though they have been getting better and better over the years. They will probably be replaced by dual clutch gearboxes in the future in all BMW's (then the options will be manual or dual clutch, or in M cars, SMG.)

Best regards,

Jussi