New M3 v RS4

Post by **SR71** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:15 am

I'd love to know how often even the RWD aficionados drift on the road?

If you intentionally drift your £50K car on the way to the supermarket like some Stefan Bellof/Walter Rohl legend, then my apologies to you, but in this country, the winner of an AWD versus RWD debate is a no-brainer, surely?

If you like RWD for drifting then say so, but, to suggest it allows the same progress to be made as an AWD car, especially on the average UK road, is stretching ones credibility.

And one other thing...

There is a good reason for affording a car a natural tendency to understeer...like it or not.

Post by **I-want-an-RS** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:30 am

A chance for you all to see for yourselfs

Post by **W8PMC** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:35 am

SR71 wrote:I'd love to know how often even the RWD aficionados drift on the road?

If you intentionally drift your £50K car on the way to the supermarket like some Stefan Bellof/Walter Rohl legend, then my apologies to you, but in this country, the winner of an AWD versus RWD debate is a no-brainer, surely?

If you like RWD for drifting then say so, but, to suggest it allows the same progress to be made as an AWD car, especially on the average UK road, is stretching ones credibility.

And one other thing...

There is a good reason for affording a car a natural tendency to understeer...like it or not.

Could not agree more.

This is the main reason i sold my M5 & have now settled on the RS4.

I'd be a fool to say the RS4 was quicker than the M5, however 90% of the time it was & having what i feel is a bigger safety net suits me & my family given i drive around 25K miles per annum.

The M5 was an awesome machine & no doubt the M3 will be the same, but to exploit it's full performance, you needed perfect road/track conditions & as the forecasts are proving, the UK is not renowned for it's Californian weather

.

The M cars do offer up chassis & general dynamics advantages & i've no issue in admitting that, however the RS4 does offer the ability to drive it close to it's limits 90% of the time, where as the M's offer a touch more but only 10% of the time & the rest of the time the RS4 has a large enough advantage to warrant it's place as the day to day better car & it looks like the press in the main agree.

Post by **Norrs2** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:56 am

djcevo wrote:
RussianM3_dude wrote:
djcevo wrote:To summarise (my thoughts) If I was given the chance to have an M3 for a couple of days then that would be great for arse end out action, to do 15k a year, mostly on <beep> roads, in the wet or damp then the RS4 is the best you can get for 50k!!!!!!!!

I have the new M3 on order but im seriously thinking of cancelling it due to the fact that by the time Im due to get mine, the RS4 will be worth say 40K, and I dont believe the M3 is worth another 13/14k specced up!!!!!!!!
Why then get an RS? A 2.0T Quattro would be just as good and you'll have money left over for something very tasty.
Russianm3 - not being obnoxious but I could afford the RS, and if I felt the M3 was worth it I would pay the extra 13/14 k but I personally dont feel it's worth it.

Very sensible I would say. IMHO the M3 is just so UGLY anyway

Post by **RussianM3_dude** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:32 am

I didn't mean about the M3. I meant, why get the RS in the first place? I find it to be in a performance nether region. Expensive, yet not a sports car, yet not a luxure car either.

Post by **tartan_rob** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:41 am

RussianM3_dude wrote:I didn't mean about the M3. I meant, why get the RS in the first place? I find it to be in a performance nether region. Expensive, yet not a sports car, yet not a luxure car either.

What and the M3 is either a sports car or a true luxury car? Surely a stripped out lotus elise or a caterham is the true sports car? We just have sporty and capable version of upper end family cars. The M3 included. However you tart it up, the M3 is a 3-series. It is therefore based loosely around BMW's smaller family car.

If you want a true sports car I feel you should go somewhere else. If not, you have to suffer the traits of a family car wrapped into a quick and capable version. For me (and the majority on this forum I suspect), the suffering is worth it...like we said before...you disagree, I will agree.

Post by **Mikeyboy** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:45 am

But thats the case with the M3 as well. No four seat car is a sports car and that includes the M3. A GT maybe but not a sports car.

I don't think i really get your point RM3Dude when its the M3 and RS4 your talking about. It would make more sense if you were comparing the RS4 and the AMV8

Also I have to agree with everyone who is saying the AWD aspect is better in the real world than the RWD. I really don't get it when the reviews rave about how the LSD on the M3 will allow you to bring the back around. Oh thats alright then, I can side swipe a car on a bend using my LSD.
The feel of when the car is at its limits is better than being able to get the car beyond its limits and the reviews of the new one (and some of the more sensible ones about the old one) say it just doesn't provide that.

Post by **RS4-Junkie** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:54 am

Even on track you have better performance with AWD. M346CSL AND 997C2S have still problems to follow me in my AVANT with proper semi slick tyres attached. Power is nothing control, realize it.

Post by **W8PMC** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:59 am

& the new M3 is heavier than the RS4 Saloon

Post by **mrdeli** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:02 pm

Actually it's not - the new M3 is around 70kgs lighter - the report is incorrect

Post by **mrdeli** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:05 pm

Actually it's not - the new M3 is around 70kgs lighter - the report is incorrect

Post by **W8PMC** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:37 pm

mrdeli wrote:Actually it's not - the new M3 is around 70kgs lighter - the report is incorrect

& your source is more correct because??

In Auto Express & AutoCar the M3 Coupe is 1655KG & the RS4 Saloon is 1650, so the RS4 is 5KG lighter than the M3.

Audi website confirms the RS4 is 1650KG

The M3 is not yet listed on the BMW UK website.

Post by **RussianM3_dude** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:04 pm

SR71 wrote:I'd love to know how often even the RWD aficionados drift on the road?

If you intentionally drift your £50K car on the way to the supermarket like some Stefan Bellof/Walter Rohl legend, then my apologies to you, but in this country, the winner of an AWD versus RWD debate is a no-brainer, surely?

If you like RWD for drifting then say so, but, to suggest it allows the same progress to be made as an AWD car, especially on the average UK road, is stretching ones credibility.

And one other thing...

There is a good reason for affording a car a natural tendency to understeer...like it or not.

I don't drift, it's just that RWD is more nimble even at low speeds, you feel the rear steering the car, it's more alert. Also less power is wasted and there is less weight.

Post by **RussianM3_dude** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:05 pm

W8PMC wrote:
mrdeli wrote:Actually it's not - the new M3 is around 70kgs lighter - the report is incorrect
& your source is more correct because??

In Auto Express & AutoCar the M3 Coupe is 1655KG & the RS4 Saloon is 1650, so the RS4 is 5KG lighter than the M3.

Audi website confirms the RS4 is 1650KG

The M3 is not yet listed on the BMW UK website.

They are mixing up different weighting norms. The M3 weight has the driver plus fluids while the RS4 does not. This has been endlessly debated on other forums.

Post by **RussianM3_dude** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:06 pm

RS4-Junkie wrote:Even on track you have better performance with AWD. M346CSL AND 997C2S have still problems to follow me in my AVANT with proper semi slick tyres attached. Power is nothing control, realize it.

Oh, sure and with slicks, you will beat an Enzo on winter tires. Not exactly a proper comparison. Same power, same tires, same weight an RWD car will be faster.

RS246.com Forum :: The World's #1 Audi R, S and RS Enthusiast Community

New M3 v RS4

Who is online