Interesting Vid - CSL vs RS4

[DoctorD]

nickyandsi said:

Oh yeah and in the words of clarkson himself,when driving the Audi RS4,he claimed to
be sitting about 3feet from the best engine ever made. He did mention the M3 but still said he would rather have the RS4.

You 'appear' to be confused between an M3 and a CSL.

I'm sure the RS4 would perform very well as Chris Harris recently found when he fitted his with Corsas at the 'ring, but you're still comparing it with a CSL which lapped the 'Ring at 7:50 and has recorded 1.4g laterally.

A few years ago when I used to track mine regularly we were managing 1:19s around Donington, which would qualify on the back row of a BTCC grid...

A good CSL will do a little over 10 seconds to 100mph and around 16 to 120mph, which is not supercar quick but still pretty respectable for what it is. I have seen RS4s tested at between mid-15s to 120 right up to late 16s, so they should be comparable in most respects - apart from on track where an RS4 would be heavily penalised by its weight after a few laps.

p.s. interesting reaction over on RS246.com

www.rs246.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=59629&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Edited by DoctorD on Sunday 4th March 13:20

[articm]

DoctorD said:

nickyandsi said:

Oh yeah and in the words of clarkson himself,when driving the Audi RS4,he claimed to
be sitting about 3feet from the best engine ever made. He did mention the M3 but still said he would rather have the RS4.

You 'appear' to be confused between an M3 and a CSL.

Edited by DoctorD on Sunday 4th March 13:20

even more confused i think to be quoting clarkson

[nickyandsi]

Back to the original point the CSL would not pull away from RS4 like that.
The RS4 0-62 is 4.8sec

So the video is debateable in my opinion

As with everyone on here, i too have an opinion,and i would rather have the RS4 for its power,handling,elegance,pure class and looks

[m3evo2]

Audi's stated power outputs have been off the mark to the point of making it up on the RS4. Many have not reached anywhere near the claimed standard BHP.

[DoctorD]

m3evo2 said:

Audi's stated power outputs have been off the mark to the point of making it up on the RS4. Many have not reached anywhere near the claimed standard BHP.

That's a shame to hear. I seem to remember them having problems (i.e. delaying the launch of the RS4) due to gearbox or clutch issues (??). Do you suspect they detuned the engine for launch? Is there any evidence that later cars are developing more realistic power figures?

[m3evo2]

DoctorD said:

m3evo2 said:

Audi's stated power outputs have been off the mark to the point of making it up on the RS4. Many have not reached anywhere near the claimed standard BHP.

That's a shame to hear. I seem to remember them having problems (i.e. delaying the launch of the RS4) due to gearbox or clutch issues (??). Do you suspect they detuned the engine for launch? Is there any evidence that later cars are developing more realistic power figures?

It's a possibility I guess. Some owners have taken their cars back because they have been dissapointed, some only managing 350-360bhp. The RS4 forums have been quite hot on this subject plus a friend of mine who works in sales for Audi has confirmed. Most people though would be happy and none the wiser.

[DoctorD]

I came across an RS4 on two seperate occasions in my old 4.8is X5 and was 'surprised' how hard they had to work to pull away. Perhaps a shortage of horses explains it. I also came across one last week in my Z4M Coupe and closed on him at the top-end, so my experience of RS4s is that they are clearly M3-quick or above, but not in a different league. Judging by what we already know about the forthcoming E92 M3, BMW are going to be feeling pretty confident.

I hear that RS4 production will be stopping in April this year to make way for RS6 production. That's one of the things that put me off buying an RS4, they emerge late in the model-lifecycle hence feel a little dated straight away. I guess Audi has its reasons for this, but it certainly puts me off.

[m3evo2]

DoctorD said:

I came across an RS4 on two seperate occasions in my old 4.8is X5 and was 'surprised' how hard they had to work to pull away. Perhaps a shortage of horses explains it. I also came across one last week in my Z4M Coupe and closed on him at the top-end, so my experience of RS4s is that they are clearly M3-quick or above, but not in a different league. Judging by what we already know about the forthcoming E92 M3, BMW are going to be feeling pretty confident.

I hear that RS4 production will be stopping in April this year to make way for RS6 production. That's one of the things that put me off buying an RS4, they emerge late in the model-lifecycle hence feel a little dated straight away. I guess Audi has its reasons for this, but it certainly puts me off.

And so they should be for for all the quoted specifications and cost. I still think a fairer comparison would be the E39 M5 and look how old they are now.

Edited by m3evo2 on Sunday 4th March 15:00

[m12_nathan]

nickyandsi said:

Back to the original point the CSL would not pull away from RS4 like that.
The RS4 0-62 is 4.8sec

So the video is debateable in my opinion

As with everyone on here, i too have an opinion,and i would rather have the RS4 for its power,handling,elegance,pure class and looks

The video doesn't start at 0, the 4wd of the Audi is just a heavy, power sapping waste once the car is moving and the ground is dry, great for standing starts and in the wet though.

Interesting how some RS4's are getting dyno'd at 365bhp, about the same as a CSL but 350kg heavier...

[nickyandsi]

Am i right in saying the CSL is stripped down so does not have a lot in them,taking away all the luxuries.

[DoctorD]

Not all the luxuries, but most of them. In practice it weighs around 140kg less than an M3 and yet has a good 20-30bhp more power. It uses a large quantity of aluminim and carbon fibre in its construction (i.e. the roof is made of carbon fibre, the boot is essentially plastic, the rear window uses thinner glass etc, etc.)

[nickyandsi]

Back to the point though,we should therefore be comparing a fully loades RS4,with a fully loaded M3 (not a CSL).

Edited by nickyandsi on Sunday 4th March 16:55

Edited by nickyandsi on Sunday 4th March 16:55

[DoctorD]

nickyandsi said:

Back to the point though,we should therefore be comparing a fully loades RS4,with a fully loaded M3 (not a CSL).

Perhaps, but the video compared a CSL with an RS4 Avant, so the ensuing discussion was a valid one.

Edited by DoctorD on Sunday 4th March 16:57

[nickyandsi]

But the video does not look genuine. As i said before,its debatable in my opinion and even if the CSL is quicker or not id still rather have the Audi for many reasons.
Just my opinion

[Caddyshack]

I am amazed that it has taken this long to bring in the question of the 0-60 in all of this.

The reason an RS4 (and Scoobies) etc look so quick on paper is that we still use the silly 0-60 time to "judge" how fast a car is...sit in an RS4 and wind it up to 4-5000 rpm and side step the clutch and wahey you have a fast 0-60 time try that in a CSL and watch the tyres melt (yes you can use a luanch control) BUT

Use a rolling start such as the vid and all the 4WD does is slow you down due to weight, its lost its ace card.

And no I dont agree that an RS4 would spank the CSL round bends...if the bends were on a smooth race track.....bumpy B road then Maybe?

[Beemer-5]

Most times on the road a clear, fast run is started above zero mph, so the 4wd 'advantage' is negated and in fact a weight and drag penalty, most of time.

Only at Santa Pod would the RS4 have any advantage in performance, or at a traffic light grand prix perhaps.

[DoctorD]

nickyandsi said:

But the video does not look genuine. As i said before,its debatable in my opinion and even if the CSL is quicker or not id still rather have the Audi for many reasons.
Just my opinion

In the first run, the RS4 driver appears to concede early but in the 2nd run it looks like both drivers are committed until the end. The CSL looks and sounds exactly as they normally do, and you would never hear the RS4 when along side a CSL. It's an interweb video not a peer-reviewed scientific study, so take away what you want from it..

[m3evo2]

DoctorD said:

nickyandsi said:

But the video does not look genuine. As i said before,its debatable in my opinion and even if the CSL is quicker or not id still rather have the Audi for many reasons.
Just my opinion

In the first run, the RS4 driver appears to concede early but in the 2nd run it looks like both drivers are committed until the end. The CSL looks and sounds exactly as they normally do, and you would never hear the RS4 when along side a CSL. It's an interweb video not a peer-reviewed scientific study, so take away what you want from it..

I will and the CSL looks/sounds fab plus spanks the RS4

Edited by m3evo2 on Sunday 4th March 17:36

[nickyandsi]

’04 M3 CSL
Fuel Delivery Injection BHP 343.0 Torque (lbs feet) 272.9 RPM to which the Torque refers 4900 Maximum Speed 155 Acceleration (0-60) 4.9
Length (mm) 4492 Width (mm) 1780 Height (mm) 1365 Unladen weight 1570 Boot Capacity (litres) 411
£58,357

’04 M3
Fuel Delivery Injection BHP 343.0 Torque (lbs feet) 269.2 RPM to which the Torque refers 4900 Maximum Speed 155 Acceleration (0-60) 5.2
Length (mm) 4492 Width (mm) 1780 Height (mm) 1383 Unladen weight 1570 Boot Capacity (litres) 411
£43,352

‘06 RS4
Fuel Delivery Injection BHP 414.0 Torque (lbs feet) 317.2 RPM to which the Torque refers 5500 Maximum Speed 155 Acceleration (0-60) 4.8
Length (mm) 4589 Width (mm) 1816 Height (mm) 1415 Unladen weight 1650 Boot Capacity (litres) 719
£49,777

After all is said and done far more is as always said than done!
The figures above are genuine Manufacturers figures for the cars under discussion, you pay your money and take your choice - personally I would rather pay the £50K and be safe on any day dealing with the un-predectability of British weather than hope for a dry day and hope to get the best out of a BMW

Edited by nickyandsi on Sunday 4th March 17:37

[m3evo2]

nickyandsi said:

Back to the point though,we should therefore be comparing a fully loades RS4,with a fully loaded M3 (not a CSL).

Edited by nickyandsi on Sunday 4th March 16:55

Edited by nickyandsi on Sunday 4th March 16:55

Audi V8 420bhp
M3 Straight 6 343bhp

On paper the Audi should win and would against standard M3 which is not in discussion plus the M3 is old, RS4 is new, well the engine is. Not really a a fair test is it. Like comparing an M3 to an S3