Is the RS4 (B7) truly the best “all roundâ€

4.2 V8 32v Naturally Aspirated - 414 bhp
Post Reply
Les
3rd Gear
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:06 am
Location: The Shire (of Aberdeen)

Is the RS4 (B7) truly the best “all roundâ€

Post by Les » Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:21 pm

Wanted to create a thread to openly and honestly discuss this as I am struggling to see what can compare with it. Not only this but some on here are struggling for an option to move to and this may draw out some good alternatives.
The RS4 seems to rank highly in most situations, if not top!
So where do we start then:

Performance:
Now most on here will know the usual stats:
0 – 62 in 4.8s
0 – 100 in 10.7s
These numbers are matched by a few cars out there or, in the case of the C63, bettered but there is not a whole lot in it, on a dry day! Bring on some rain or even a damp surface and things immediately turn in favour of the RS4…..big time!
Autocar do tests on a dry circuit and on a wet circuit (two different tracks by the way).
Here are some examples of lap times from them:
Car Dry lap Wet lap
RS4 (B7) 1.16.9 (track greasy) 1.06.4
M5 1.16.15 1.08.35
Lambo LP640 1.14.7 1.16.5
Porsche GT3 1.12.5 1.19.1

Some other times are missing from this I know, most importantly the M3 and the C63. On the C63 it lapped 1s faster on the dry track but 5s slower on the wet track (I don’t have the exact times, to tenths, though).
The M5 is very impressive in both conditions and this demonstrates it’s top-notch chassis set up and near perfect weight distribution on it’s axles. Thing is the RS4 is only three quarters of a second off it in the dry (with 100hp less) but 2s faster in the wet.
Top Gear tested the M3, RS4 and C63 in Spain and whilst the M3 was the fastest round the track they used (the RS4 and the C63 were matched) they could not separate any of the cars for sheer brilliance.
Verdict: For super car performance in any weather the RS4 has to take the honours.

Practicality:
Looking at space there are a few cars that are pretty good but most likely the C63 takes it, having a bit more space (M5 is a class size up). That said the RS4 and M3 both have sufficient space for family use or 4 adults and luggage. Lexus IS-F is probably pretty useful also.
Verdict: C63

Looks:
RS4 – “Phatâ€

User avatar
aidanjaye
5th Gear
Posts: 1133
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Post by aidanjaye » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:00 pm

Not the same driving experience but I did look at the Masser Quartroporte - until the massively expensive (even compared to RS4s) running costs were highlighted.....1200 quid for insurance!!!! Ahhhh

Les
3rd Gear
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:06 am
Location: The Shire (of Aberdeen)

Post by Les » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:10 pm

Hadn't ever thought of the Masser, don't know a lot about them, quite rare really.
Interesting though that we can mention such a car against the RS4 8)

User avatar
aidanjaye
5th Gear
Posts: 1133
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:43 pm
Location: Scotland

Post by aidanjaye » Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:32 pm

Don't think will be as quick as a RS4 - especially in wet.

P_G
Cruising
Posts: 8249
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 1:25 pm
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne

Post by P_G » Thu Jun 11, 2009 10:23 pm

On the lap times it is also interesting to note that althought the V8 R8 is quicker in the dry by a couple of seconds, it is slower in the wet than the RS4. IIRC that was EVO's timings but has been reciprocated on other tracks.

BTW, if customer service was something that led to someone chosing a replacement then Mercedes would be out. I went at lunchtime today to see how much rear leg room there was in a C63 AMG, there were no cars on the AMG stand, there were only three cars in the showroom and after 15 minutes looking around the showroom and approved cars site no one approached me to ask if I wanted to help and they weren't serving other customers, four of the sales team were having a chat and a laugh amongst themselves . I thought Audi sales were feckin useless, this lot have to be seen to be believed for their incompetence.

Les
3rd Gear
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:06 am
Location: The Shire (of Aberdeen)

Post by Les » Fri Jun 12, 2009 9:02 am

RS4 is definitely quicker than a Masser, in the dry or wet, I think? Apparently they do sound very good though 8)

Bye the way I mis-quoted the RS4's 0 - 100 time, Autocar timed it at 10.5s not 10.7s.

On the Merc dealers I remember going to one a couple of years back to have a look at a couple of cars. After about 5 minutes a very snooty receptionist came over and asked if she could help me in a manner more suited to disciplining your dog :!:

I spent a lot of time thinking about what car I would move to after my Porsche and i have to say the RS4 B7 is one cracking machine.
The fact it can compete with much more "exotic" vehicles and in many cases out performing them says it all :D

Marvelous cars (not perfect :cry: ) but damn close :D

micromoose
Neutral
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 7:53 am

Post by micromoose » Fri Jun 12, 2009 1:17 pm

I'm sitting here lurking, sorry learning all I can about RS4's until I buy one next year. I've had both 2 & 4 wheel drive cars and while RWD gives the most rewards I'd take 4WD every time in the UK for a daily driver. The security it gives you (especially Nov-March) enables you to make much better cross country pace without ruining your steering wheel with sweat! At the end of the Top Gear Spain episode I think they all said that in the real world they'd prefer to be driving the RS on a dark wet UK evening.

Post Reply

Return to “RS4 (B7 Typ 8E) 2006–2008”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 81 guests