BMW M4 vs Audi RS5 Compared on Nurburgring GP track by Autozeitung (Update)

[sharkfighter]

Originally Posted by Holset

Weight
If you take M4 no option weight 1497kg then add 40kg DCT + 75kg driver,luggage=1612kg
Just a thought.

My point is that the car could been weighted with driver and probably has a fair bit of options.

Anyone else surprised it weighed only 11kg less then an e92 M3 they tested at 1626kg?
F82 3,560lbs vs. e92 3,584lbs in their testing.

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82780

[turbo8765]

Originally Posted by TN_3

Yeah, so according to this, the E92 is faster...kinda takes some air out of the balloon. Of course, we don't know how the drivers for these times stack up.

Even if the e92 M3 had a pro and the M4 a slow journalist, its still a bit unimpressive.

[jc05e46m3]

Originally Posted by pfl

I'm pretty sure the M4 is Inline 6, not a V engine and that RS5 is a naturally aspirated V8, not turbo.

You're right. Always makes me cringe even though everyone gets the point. lol

[gregblackM3]

Those lap times are obviously bogus. If not, than the new M4 is slower than the E92 M3.

[Mako]

disappointing 0-100 km/h times! only 0.1 faster than the RS5, with similar power and less weight? And the RS5 times are pretty accurate as Car and Driver tested it 0-60 mp/h in 4.4. Really thought with DCT the M3 would easily break 4.0 seconds this time (maybe 3.8). Car and Driver even tested the E92 M3 at 4.0 in one of their articles (with rollout of course, although 5-60 was 4.4).

[cs4444]

The M4's 2.6 seconds quicker lap, and 3.3 km/h advantage in the slalom over the RS5 are both significant and impressive.

[///M3Owner]

I don't think it beats the GTR.. Or the turbo S.. I know the new 2015 GtR does it in 1:18 unless that's just the nismo

[sharkfighter]

big step up in acceleration vs. the last e92 M3 they tested

0-100km/h: 4.8s
0-160km/h:10.3s
0-200km/h:15.2s
Weight: 1626kg
Track Time: 1.40,1min

[ozinaldo]

Originally Posted by ChesterM4

Interesting, the 0-100km/h is not that great but the lap time is off the chart. Lap time can't be that good ? ?

1:38.9 of the F82 against 1:39.4 of the 1M. I would call it THE LEAST that it should manage, given its more power to weight+PSS tires+with DCT and CCB too! 0.5 sec. difference of the same magazine on the same track means just with PSS tires fitted 1M could arguably equal that M4 lap time. I would expect higher 1:37s or lower 1:38s honestly.

[ozinaldo]

Originally Posted by Ulmi

It is NOT the complete Nürburgring GP Track
It is the "Autozeitung Test Track Config"
http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/autoze...est_track.html

BMW 1M Coupe 1:39.40
BMW M3 2007 1:40,7

And it says that the BMW Ceremic Brakes are not as good as the Audis Ceramics

This!

[ozinaldo]

Originally Posted by blisstik

E92 M3 1:38.70
1M 1:39.40
RS5 2012 1:40.40

I don't think that E92 lap time was done by the same magazine (Auto Zeitung). I might be remembering wrong but their own number for the E92 M3 was over 1:40. Track condition (weather) and driver factor could explain such a large difference between these E92 times. M4 time is a good time by Auto Zeitung standards, not a mind blowing time though.

[SOM3]

Originally Posted by ozinaldo

1:38.9 of the F82 against 1:39.4 of the 1M. I would call it THE LEAST that it should manage, given its more power to weight+PSS tires+with DCT and CCB too! 0.5 sec. difference of the same magazine on the same track means just with PSS tires fitted 1M could arguably equal that M4 lap time. I would expect higher 1:37s or lower 1:38s honestly.

1M will not beat in M4 in any performance category...give it a rest already.

[ozinaldo]

Originally Posted by SOM3

1M will not beat in M4 in any performance category...give it a rest already.

Who said it would or it should? Having a M3 on order clouds your reading skills as well? All I said that I would expect better lap time from the M4, especially loaded with DCT and CCB. Obviously, for you that is good enough which is fine.

I may buy a M3 too, won't make me have illusions about it, I am not that type

[jackkk]

100-200 8,7 sec.!? Nice!

[Diver]

The provided link to lap times shows the M4 to be slightly slower than a 2007 M3 tested. I think what is being delivered is mainly an improvement in fuel consumption and some other updates, but not a faster car than the old M3.

Welcome to the world where CO2 is a poison gas.

[sharkfighter]

Originally Posted by Diver

The provided link to lap times shows the M4 to be slightly slower than a 2007 M3 tested. I think what is being delivered is mainly an improvement in fuel consumption and some other updates, but not a faster car than the old M3.

Welcome to the world where CO2 is a poison gas.

These are Auto Zeitung's 2007 Test numbers for the e92
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8201
0-100km/h: 4.8s
0-160km/h:10.3s
0-200km/h:15.2s
18 m slalom: 70,4 km/h
100-0 km/h (warm): 34,9 m
60-100km/h 2,3s
80-120km/h 3,0s
Weight: 1626kg
Track Time: 1.40,1min

The F82 is faster in all categories

[NAV8TT]

Well the E90x M3 was a winner too when was compared to the RS5. Good to hear both generations destroyed the Audi.

[NAV8TT]

Originally Posted by ozinaldo

This!

Was the M3 a DCT? Comp package?

[dreamspeed]

The RS5 they are using has already been on the market for several years now and the M4 is just released with the newest tech.

If the M4 can beat the new upcoming RS5 and C63 as well as the Lexus F coupe then that would be impressive.

[m3ct]

wow 0-100 in 8.5....ahh this wait is kililng me!!

[Jockey]

Originally Posted by Diver

Welcome to the world where CO2 is a poison gas.

Well, it is actually. That's why your bodies expels it

[Liberation]

Originally Posted by BMWFB02

Well the E90x M3 was a winner too when was compared to the RS5. Good to hear both generations destroyed the Audi.

Although, I'm a fan of all these cars, there was a link from fastest laps posted in another RS5 thread in the E92 forum and the RS5 had better times around 12 of 15 laps (or something close to that).

I love the E92 M3 and if I didn't have an E46 I would probably have purchased one but the RS5 has held its weight and then some against it at multiple tracks.