how can the e92 m3 be this much quicker??

[ArthurPE]

that is incorrect...you are comparing DIN unladen (which includes a driver/luggage) with curb...apples to oranges

actually weighed cars
M3 <3600
RS4 close to 4000

so despite being 400 lbs heaver and having higher losses, it's as fast

Ring
RS4 7:56
M3 8:05

I get

Ring

rs4 8:09
m3 8:05

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times

anyway both fast cars granted, and i dont want a bun fight, just wondering how 2 cars with very similar specs on paper can be quite different in a straight line

wrong, you are being selective...not 7:56, but 7:58
still faster than a car that weighs 400 lbs less, and has much lower losses on sport tires
7:58 --- 156.66 km/h - Audi RS4 4.2 V8 FSI, 420 PS/ 1650 kg, Frank Stippler, (10/05) www.8200rpm.com/forum/read.php?f=10&i=16841&t=16841\

you are a very defensive person, understandable given some random comes on here posting videos etc etc. However it is not my intention to spout boring figures about this and that. I was just wondering how 1 car with the same power to weight ratio can be much slower than the other. I have my answer the uk magazines are wrong with their published weight figures by the looks of it...[/quote]

you are very presumptuous and an amusing, insincere instigator, lol, , you don't know me, I like messing with trolls...I have an M3 and an RS4

I wonder the same: a 400 lb heavier car with twice the driveline losses is faster...it's a conundrum

what were the weights for the 0-100 times you posted?

[dlextreme1977]

lol how is it faster.. im really confused now

have a butchers at this for 'the answer' at the bottom

http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/ ... 37911.html

[P_G]

If you have a look on most circuits the two cars are within a couple of seconds if not less of each other, sometimes the RS4 ahead, sometimes the M3. I'm not going to loose sleep over it and if you are bothered about why in a video the M3 is quicker, go buy one.

[dlextreme1977]

that is incorrect...you are comparing DIN unladen (which includes a driver/luggage) with curb...apples to oranges

actually weighed cars
M3 <3600
RS4 close to 4000

so despite being 400 lbs heaver and having higher losses, it's as fast

Ring
RS4 7:56
M3 8:05

I get

Ring

rs4 8:09
m3 8:05

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times

anyway both fast cars granted, and i dont want a bun fight, just wondering how 2 cars with very similar specs on paper can be quite different in a straight line

wrong, you are being selective...not 7:56, but 7:58
still faster than a car that weighs 400 lbs less, and has much lower losses on sport tires
7:58 --- 156.66 km/h - Audi RS4 4.2 V8 FSI, 420 PS/ 1650 kg, Frank Stippler, (10/05) www.8200rpm.com/forum/read.php?f=10&i=16841&t=16841\

you are a very defensive person, understandable given some random comes on here posting videos etc etc. However it is not my intention to spout boring figures about this and that. I was just wondering how 1 car with the same power to weight ratio can be much slower than the other. I have my answer the uk magazines are wrong with their published weight figures by the looks of it...[/quote]

you are very presumptuous and an amusing, insincere instigator, lol, , you don't know me, I like messing with trolls...I have an M3 and an RS4

I wonder the same: a 400 lb heavier car with twice the driveline losses is faster...it's a conundrum

what were the weights for the 0-100 times you posted?[/quote]

is it irony that you call me presumtuous when i am the one asking a polite question and you presume i am a troll and turn this into a rs4 vs m3 debate

[P_G]

Particularly when you ignore other peoples comments and go straight into continuing to antagonise...troll like traits

[dlextreme1977]

Particularly when you ignore other peoples comments and go straight into continuing to antagonise...troll like traits

thanks

[ArthurPE]

lol how is it faster.. im really confused now

have a butchers at this for 'the answer' at the bottom

http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/ ... 37911.html

7:58 < 8:05, at least in this inertial reference frame

[ArthurPE]

that is incorrect...you are comparing DIN unladen (which includes a driver/luggage) with curb...apples to oranges

actually weighed cars
M3 <3600
RS4 close to 4000

so despite being 400 lbs heaver and having higher losses, it's as fast

Ring
RS4 7:56
M3 8:05

I get

Ring

rs4 8:09
m3 8:05

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times

anyway both fast cars granted, and i dont want a bun fight, just wondering how 2 cars with very similar specs on paper can be quite different in a straight line

wrong, you are being selective...not 7:56, but 7:58
still faster than a car that weighs 400 lbs less, and has much lower losses on sport tires
7:58 --- 156.66 km/h - Audi RS4 4.2 V8 FSI, 420 PS/ 1650 kg, Frank Stippler, (10/05) www.8200rpm.com/forum/read.php?f=10&i=16841&t=16841\

you are a very defensive person, understandable given some random comes on here posting videos etc etc. However it is not my intention to spout boring figures about this and that. I was just wondering how 1 car with the same power to weight ratio can be much slower than the other. I have my answer the uk magazines are wrong with their published weight figures by the looks of it...[/quote]

you are very presumptuous and an amusing, insincere instigator, lol, , you don't know me, I like messing with trolls...I have an M3 and an RS4

I wonder the same: a 400 lb heavier car with twice the driveline losses is faster...it's a conundrum

what were the weights for the 0-100 times you posted?[/quote]

is it irony that you call me presumtuous when i am the one asking a polite question and you presume i am a troll and turn this into a rs4 vs m3 debate[/quote]

with hidden agenda....ie, troll, disingenuous to boot

[dlextreme1977]

lol how is it faster.. im really confused now

have a butchers at this for 'the answer' at the bottom

http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/ ... 37911.html

7:58 < 8:05, at least in this inertial reference frame

yeah odd one that, who is frank stippler anyway and how is his time different from sportautos?

[P_G]

If it were a rhetorical question you should have said.

Let's face it, your introduction to the forum was confrontational as you almost confessed to and your evidence is a video on a BMW favoured board. It'll be as biased if not moreseo than we are here to RS4's and so many people have come on here to try and do the same. The reality is that the RS4 was a great car whilst in production and BMW then had a further three years to develop a car that is at best a second or so quicker at speeds you are never likely to reach legally on UK public roads.

So what is your point? And if not a point to prove, what is your query? Because either way I don't believe many RS4 owners are worried and like said if you are, by an M3.

[ArthurPE]

I dont know the answer. Doesn not coincide with this though

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_ ... 66cb00.pdf

rs4 13.1 - 108mph
m3 12.8- 113mph

0-100mph rs4 11.3 vs m3 9.8

R&T 911 comparo
RS4 12.8 sec 1/4 mile
wt 3920 (4110 loaded)

as fast, yet 400 lbs heavier, and with double the driveline losses
what makes the M3 so slow?

for reference R&T different test:
M3 13 flat 3585 (3765)

0.2 faster, yet 345 lbs heavier
the RS4 had no sunroof or nav

[dlextreme1977]

that is incorrect...you are comparing DIN unladen (which includes a driver/luggage) with curb...apples to oranges

actually weighed cars
M3 <3600
RS4 close to 4000

so despite being 400 lbs heaver and having higher losses, it's as fast

Ring
RS4 7:56
M3 8:05

I get

Ring

rs4 8:09
m3 8:05

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times

anyway both fast cars granted, and i dont want a bun fight, just wondering how 2 cars with very similar specs on paper can be quite different in a straight line

wrong, you are being selective...not 7:56, but 7:58
still faster than a car that weighs 400 lbs less, and has much lower losses on sport tires
7:58 --- 156.66 km/h - Audi RS4 4.2 V8 FSI, 420 PS/ 1650 kg, Frank Stippler, (10/05) www.8200rpm.com/forum/read.php?f=10&i=16841&t=16841\

you are a very defensive person, understandable given some random comes on here posting videos etc etc. However it is not my intention to spout boring figures about this and that. I was just wondering how 1 car with the same power to weight ratio can be much slower than the other. I have my answer the uk magazines are wrong with their published weight figures by the looks of it...[/quote]

you are very presumptuous and an amusing, insincere instigator, lol, , you don't know me, I like messing with trolls...I have an M3 and an RS4

I wonder the same: a 400 lb heavier car with twice the driveline losses is faster...it's a conundrum

what were the weights for the 0-100 times you posted?[/quote]

is it irony that you call me presumtuous when i am the one asking a polite question and you presume i am a troll and turn this into a rs4 vs m3 debate[/quote]

with hidden agenda....ie, troll, disingenuous to boot[/quote]

disingenuous? little unfair... i think i have been pretty straight

[ArthurPE]

that is incorrect...you are comparing DIN unladen (which includes a driver/luggage) with curb...apples to oranges

actually weighed cars
M3 <3600
RS4 close to 4000

so despite being 400 lbs heaver and having higher losses, it's as fast

Ring
RS4 7:56
M3 8:05

I get

Ring

rs4 8:09
m3 8:05

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrburgring_lap_times

anyway both fast cars granted, and i dont want a bun fight, just wondering how 2 cars with very similar specs on paper can be quite different in a straight line

wrong, you are being selective...not 7:56, but 7:58
still faster than a car that weighs 400 lbs less, and has much lower losses on sport tires
7:58 --- 156.66 km/h - Audi RS4 4.2 V8 FSI, 420 PS/ 1650 kg, Frank Stippler, (10/05) www.8200rpm.com/forum/read.php?f=10&i=16841&t=16841\

you are a very defensive person, understandable given some random comes on here posting videos etc etc. However it is not my intention to spout boring figures about this and that. I was just wondering how 1 car with the same power to weight ratio can be much slower than the other. I have my answer the uk magazines are wrong with their published weight figures by the looks of it...[/quote]

you are very presumptuous and an amusing, insincere instigator, lol, , you don't know me, I like messing with trolls...I have an M3 and an RS4

I wonder the same: a 400 lb heavier car with twice the driveline losses is faster...it's a conundrum

what were the weights for the 0-100 times you posted?[/quote]

is it irony that you call me presumtuous when i am the one asking a polite question and you presume i am a troll and turn this into a rs4 vs m3 debate[/quote]

with hidden agenda....ie, troll, disingenuous to boot[/quote]

disingenuous? little unfair... i think i have been pretty straight[/quote]

no one ever sees the error of their ways, you're excused

[dlextreme1977]

If it were a rhetorical question you should have said.

Let's face it, your introduction to the forum was confrontational as you almost confessed to and your evidence is a video on a BMW favoured board. It'll be as biased if not moreseo than we are here to RS4's and so many people have come on here to try and do the same. The reality is that the RS4 was a great car whilst in prioduction and BMW then had a further three years to develop a car that is at best a second or so quicker at speeds you are never likely to reach legally on UK public roads.

So what is your point? And if not a point to prove, what is your query? Because either way I don't believe many RS4 owners are worried and like said if you are, by an M3.

Apologies, I thought i was clear from the outset. My query was how are 2 cars with the same power and weight (quoted from uk magazines not your american friend on here) much different in a straight line race? He then turned it into rs4s are the best thread when i never even knocked them in the first place..

[ArthurPE]

If it were a rhetorical question you should have said.

Let's face it, your introduction to the forum was confrontational as you almost confessed to and your evidence is a video on a BMW favoured board. It'll be as biased if not moreseo than we are here to RS4's and so many people have come on here to try and do the same. The reality is that the RS4 was a great car whilst in prioduction and BMW then had a further three years to develop a car that is at best a second or so quicker at speeds you are never likely to reach legally on UK public roads.

So what is your point? And if not a point to prove, what is your query? Because either way I don't believe many RS4 owners are worried and like said if you are, by an M3.

Apologies, I thought i was clear from the outset. My query was how are 2 cars with the same power and weight (quoted from uk magazines not your american friend on here) much different in a straight line race? He then turned it into rs4s are the best thread when i never even knocked them in the first place..

they aren't much different...the RS4 is only a little faster, call it even
but it is 400 lbs heavier...pretty amazing, and BMW has lost the plot