M4 (MT) vs RS5 (DSG) comparison review by Auto Bild

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by coloradoe92m3

Given e92 M3 is niticablu quicker than rs5, Id hope for more significant win for m4. Why is nobody putting up an e92 vs f80 M3 test in a big mag???

While the E9X M3 is a tad quicker than the RS5 in a straight line (except right off the line), the Audi tends to be quicker than the E9X around a road course. Check out FastestLaps.com here (Audi quicker on 12 out of 16 tracks), or the follow-the-leader run here (sorry for the commercial up front in this video).

No doubt the M4 will beat up on the Audi. Then the new RS5 comes out...

Love the competition.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

While the E9X M3 is a tad quicker than the RS5 in a straight line (except right off the line), the Audi tends to be quicker than the E9X around a road course. Check out FastestLaps.com here (Audi quicker on 12 out of 16 tracks), or the follow-the-leader run here (sorry for the commercial up front in this video).

No doubt the M4 will beat up on the Audi. Then the new RS5 comes out...

Love the competition.

I am not saying that the M3 is faster than the RS5, but I found that this "follow the leader" video kinda stupid and meaningless to compare the two cars when it first came out.

The second car will always have a tougher time. Different cars are faster on different sections of a track/road. In the sections where the following car could be faster, it cannot leverage its advantage because it butts its nose against the car in front. I've lived this on more than one occasion playing with buddies at the track.

In the video the M3 is always behind the RS5. To have been fair, they should have traded spots.

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Not so sure. In 2007, on the Autozeitung config Nurburgring GP course, an E90 M3 Sedan (MT) had a faster time than either the RS5 or M4 at 1:38.7 Obviously was different day, but time is close enough to be interesting in a head-to-head. Agree with above comment that a mag should do outgoing 2013 model vs incoming 2015 model, think it would be really interesting on tracks where the 60+ bhp @ crank and 70+ bhp at the wheel advantage (as seen from underrating on dynos) comes less into play.

link, please? Also, the e92 was produced overseas in 2007, but the e90 was not produced until a year later as a 2008 model IIRC.

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/bmw/200...w-ar10641.html

I can only find this, which shows the m4 at 1:38.9 secs at the ring GP, though the layout is unknown.

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=994161

Where the rs5 is at 1:41.5 and the E92 was at 1:44.86

http://fastestlaps.com/laptimes/48d620ad7c893.html

I realize that you are desperate to show that the e92 is not slower than the m4, but unfortunately it is. Every single track they both have been tested on shows this. It is, and always will be just like the e92 is faster than the e46, and the e46 is faster than the e36 etc.....

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I am not saying that the M3 is faster than the RS5, but I found that this "follow the leader" video kinda stupid and meaningless to compare the two cars when it first came out.

The second car will always have a tougher time. Different cars are faster on different sections of a track/road. In the sections where the following car could be faster, it cannot leverage its advantage because it butts its nose against the car in front. I've lived this on more than one occasion playing with buddies at the track.

In the video the M3 is always behind the RS5. To have been fair, they should have traded spots.

Wow. You should know better.

The second car always has an easier time than the first car. Always. Back in my track days, I always tried to find a "race buddy" with similar lap times. We'd quickly sort out who had the quicker lap time, then play follow the leader. With similar lap times, there's almost always a section where the slower guy is actually quicker, but that soon sorts itself out as the quicker car gets some more distance with each lap. The advantage for the slower guy is that he gets to go to school on the faster guy - as they point out in the video.

The bimmer is following because it's slower than the Audi (as both drivers attest). As far as the actual filming goes, they did a ton of filming, and spliced various pieces together so the viewer wouldn't be bored. Meaning as the lap progressed the M3 would fall further and further behind, and who wants to watch an Audi pass by the camera, and then sometime later, the bimmer.

There was one section (the uphill) where the M3 appeared to have an advantage, but everywhere else the Audi was quicker. They close the video by reiterating that the Audi is quicker. You think they're lying?

As a by the by, don't you think the guy following would've pulled up next to (or close) to the Audi on the uphill if he could have?

Sheesh. I can't believe I'm having to explain this to you. You being a guy on this site with actual firing neurons (that's a compliment) - as opposed to some other participants.

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Wow. You should know better.

The second car always has an easier time than the first car. Always. Back in my track days, I always tried to find a "race buddy" with similar lap times. We'd quickly sort out who had the quicker lap time, then play follow the leader. With similar lap times, there's almost always a section where the slower guy is actually quicker, but that soon sorts itself out as the quicker car gets some more distance with each lap. The advantage for the slower guy is that he gets to go to school on the faster guy - as they point out in the video.

The bimmer is following because it's slower than the Audi (as both drivers attest). As far as the actual filming goes, they did a ton of filming, and spliced various pieces together so the viewer wouldn't be bored. Meaning as the lap progressed the M3 would fall further and further behind, and who wants to watch an Audi pass by the camera, and then sometime later, the bimmer.

There was one section (the uphill) where the M3 appeared to have an advantage, but everywhere else the Audi was quicker. They close the video by reiterating that the Audi is quicker. You think they're lying?

As a by the by, don't you think the guy following would've pulled up next to (or close) to the Audi on the uphill if he could have?

Sheesh. I can't believe I'm having to explain this to you. You being a guy on this site with actual firing neurons (that's a compliment) - as opposed to some other participants.

Thanks for sharing your immense wisdom with the great unwashed, Augie. Maybe you should go back and reread Can aut's post, and maybe you'll understand what he actually meant.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by Never Convicted

Thanks for sharing your immense wisdom with the great unwashed, Augie. Maybe you should go back and reread Can aut's post, and maybe you'll understand what he actually meant.

CanAutM3 is a clear thinker and writer, and I understood every word. I just disagree 100% in this particular scenario - and the authors of that piece agree with me, as they state.

Why don't you show just how squeaky clean you are by explaining how the M3 was at a disadvantage.

[FogCityM3]

?????????????????????????????????????????

Since you seem to know my views so well, you will also know that I typically don't dignify such comments with a response, but several seem curious (and was brought up in another thread).

Can't find the original scans (they used to be on the web, I remembered readin them), but it documented in numerous threads (and is in fastest laps)

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...95&postcount=2

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=267531

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

link, please?
I realize that you are desperate to show that the e92 is not slower than the m4, but unfortunately it is. Every single track they both have been tested on shows this. It is, and always will be just like the e92 is faster than the e46, and the e46 is faster than the e36 etc.....

[FogCityM3]

Agreed, of course different day / different driver. The point was making is that on tighter tracks think the differences may not be as large as one would think, would still like to see a head-to-head matchup. In power tracks like the n-ring, yes that is where that extra 60-70 bhp should help and help a lot!

Originally Posted by SOM3

Ok so if E90 M3 is faster on one track than the M4 you still have to look at the overall package and there is no question M4 wins.

BTW I find it very hard to believe that E90 M3 had a faster time on N-ring GP track, there must some kind of mistake. That track is very hard on heavy cars with weak brakes to boot.

[SOM3]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Agreed, of course different day / different driver. The point was making is that on tighter tracks think the differences may not be as large as one would think, would still like to see a head-to-head matchup. In power tracks like the n-ring, yes that is where that extra 60-70 bhp should help and help a lot!

Me too.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Wow. You should know better.

The second car always has an easier time than the first car. Always. Back in my track days, I always tried to find a "race buddy" with similar lap times. We'd quickly sort out who had the quicker lap time, then play follow the leader. With similar lap times, there's almost always a section where the slower guy is actually quicker, but that soon sorts itself out as the quicker car gets some more distance with each lap. The advantage for the slower guy is that he gets to go to school on the faster guy - as they point out in the video.

The bimmer is following because it's slower than the Audi (as both drivers attest). As far as the actual filming goes, they did a ton of filming, and spliced various pieces together so the viewer wouldn't be bored. Meaning as the lap progressed the M3 would fall further and further behind, and who wants to watch an Audi pass by the camera, and then sometime later, the bimmer.

There was one section (the uphill) where the M3 appeared to have an advantage, but everywhere else the Audi was quicker. They close the video by reiterating that the Audi is quicker. You think they're lying?

As a by the by, don't you think the guy following would've pulled up next to (or close) to the Audi on the uphill if he could have?

Sheesh. I can't believe I'm having to explain this to you. You being a guy on this site with actual firing neurons (that's a compliment) - as opposed to some other participants.

We will probably have to agree to disagree on this one. I believe that the car that is following is at a disadvantage. Think of all the great race ends, where a second place car is able to catch the leading car thus clearly showing greater speed but then be unable to pass. While I understand defensive maneuvers are likely at play too here, IMO, it is more difficult to maintain speed while closely following another car because you need to adapt to the car in front and compromise your own driving. At least this has been my own experience.

While I fully agree that a slower driver can benefit a lot by following a faster driver, but the point here is to compare the cars, not drivers.

At the end of the video (probably because of editing, as you stated), we don't see that the RS5 gained much ground on the M3 (if at all). In my book, if the following car is able to keep up, it usually means that it is faster. So the video does not prove anything.

I am not claiming that the M3 is faster than the RS5 (other evidence seems to point to the opposite). My point is that this video itself is useless. The only "evidence" that the RS5 is quicker, is the subjective impression of the drivers.

Thanks for the compliments, I can also say the same about you. Cheers .

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

We will probably have to agree to disagree on this one. I believe that the car that is following is at a disadvantage. Think of all the great race ends, where a second place car is able to catch the leading car thus clearly showing greater speed but then be unable to pass. While I understand defensive maneuvers are likely at play too here, IMO, it is more difficult to maintain speed while closely following another car because you need to adapt to the car in front and compromise your own driving. At least this has been my own experience.

While I fully agree that a slower driver can benefit a lot by following a faster driver, but the point here is to compare the cars, not drivers.

At the end of the video (probably because of editing, as you stated), we don't see that the RS5 gained much ground of the M3. In my book, if the following car is able to keep up, it usually means that it is faster. So the video does not prove anything.

I am not claiming that the M3 is faster than the RS5 (other evidence seems to point that the RS5 is actually slightly faster). My point is that this video itself is useless. The only "evidence" that the RS5 is quicker, is the subjective impression of the drivers.

Thanks for the compliments, I can also say the same about you. Cheers .

If you were doing this test, you'd ascertain which car was quicker, and put that car in front. Then you'd make sure the viewer wouldn't be bored by keeping the cars close together at all times, via editing. I'd do the same.

The result? Subjective, I guess, but if you and I were in these cars, we'd know who was quicker.

This would be a fun conversation for an hour or so over beers on the back porch.

[stressdoc]

Carl Edwards is a former student of mine. Once in a while we would talk race strategy. In NASCAR drafting is huge, and has pros & cons. There are situations in which you want to be the lead car, and situations in which you can 'slingshot' from drafting; sometimes complex coalitions develop to exploit these effects.

Obviously much less salient for road courses, although micro-effects on the surface (clearing dust, adding rubber, temperature) might have some consequences.

[Lups]

Originally Posted by stressdoc

Carl Edwards is a former student of mine. Once in a while we would talk race strategy. In NASCAR drafting is huge, and has pros & cons. There are situations in which you want to be the lead car, and situations in which you can 'slingshot' from drafting; sometimes complex coalitions develop to exploit these effects.

Obviously much less salient for road courses, although micro-effects on the surface (clearing dust, adding rubber, temperature) might have some consequences.

wow, you are not just a fancy nick Doc.

[stressdoc]

"fancy nick" ? Google translate got befuddled with that one. Sami?

[Lups]

Originally Posted by stressdoc

"fancy nick" ? Google translate got befuddled with that one. Sami?

haha, it means you are too cool for forums, despite how I read your nick every time. Not telling btw.

[stressdoc]

What can I say, I can't match Shakespeare's innuendo. But you have the gift!

My daily quota has been exceeded.

But must add: Carl Edwards is a truly good person. And he kicked ass at Sonoma yesterday!

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

If you were doing this test, you'd ascertain which car was quicker, and put that car in front. Then you'd make sure the viewer wouldn't be bored by keeping the cars close together at all times, via editing.

If I were doing the test, I would do a fast lap with each car individually and then show the laps in overlay as was done here. But that is just me .

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

This would be a fun conversation for an hour or so over beers on the back porch.

I am sure we'd have lots of fun

[TheBingoBalls]

Given the weight of the current RS5, if it's only approx. 2 seconds slower than the M4, given Audi's recent cars, I'm going to say if the next-gen RS5 is able to drop some serious weight (and rumours indicate that they will), I believe it will have absolutely no problem keeping up or even being faster than the M3/M4.

0.02.

[Newguy123]

Take the M4 any day of the week over the rs5. Terry already has 540 wheel HP and 540 Wtq with just his piggy and a few gallons of E85.... That Audi won't even stand a chance with just $600 into the bimmer... My .002

[Rupes]

Originally Posted by SOM3

Exactly neither E92 or RS5 can come close to the new beast.

Did ya happen to notice the car that was just one car below the new M4 on this track?

1:34,41 min BMW M4 Manual
1:35,04 min - BMW M3 Coupe (E92) DCT

I'd say that's pretty close.

[RW Carbon]

M4 Please

[Andrew115]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Observation:

The M4 scored higher than the RS5 in the "Sound" category

huh.. didn't expect this. Maybe they are talking about volume of sound? I saw that it was a few db louder. More noise doesn't always mean better? Weird.