RE: Audi RS5 Breaks Cover

[FWDRacer]

Dagnut said:

FWDRacer said:

Flog me if you want but I'd be more excited if this was an estate (sorry avant )...

More in keeping with the Q-car image of Audi's from days yonder etc...

A coupe estate?

Do you breath through your mouth?

An Estate donut. 5 doors - dog pressed against the rear window under acceleration etc.

[Beirut Taxi]

Dagnut said:

I bet the GTR is still a lot quicker

In the real world on a public road?

I disagree.

[croydon]

Well the GTR vs RS5 debate will rage on I am sure, id suugest the RS5 is certainly more refined and elegant, The GTRs performance better even with similar figures, the RS5s interior definately the winner.

I am on the list for the RS5 having previously owned both the GTR33 and R34 and most recently an RS4. My actually worry is that both won't satisfy but for different reasons, ones too aggressive and attracts a different fan club and the other not aggressive enough!

Ian

[footsoldier]

broker1 said:

magnus911 said:

Looks gorgeous but it needs a flat bottom steering wheel. Every other S/RS Audi has one at the moment, why the regression here?

You can spec it...

Flat-bottom steering wheels are a hindrance in a car which has more lock-to-lock turns than a single-seater.

[k-ink]

"Things have moved on quite a bit in those 30 years"


Indeed. They are now bland, over complicated and unreliable. Well done Audi.

[Beefmeister]

article said:

The visual tweaks are relatively restrained, with trademark twin oval tailpipes, a large rear diffuser and a retractable tail spoiler being the most obvious indicators of the RS5.

You forgot the fantabulous box arches!!

[Wayne King]

Beefmeister said:

You forgot the fantabulous box arches!!

Looks fantastic from there, squared arches are just to cool!

Going back to the RS5 vs GTR debate, can i please have the looks of the RS5, the tuneable GTR engine with 600bhp, GTR running gear and suspension and the RS5 interior wrapped up in black paintwork with carbon fibre trimmings and gloss black wheels. Thanks Santa.

[Mr Whippy]

Awww, I was expecting a biturbo and 500bhp.

Hey ho.

Dave

[dr_rallye]

Mermaid said:

Sub 8 minute lap at the 'Ring?

Can't help thinking this would look better on smaller rims and some decent rubber. This large rims thing is getting silly IMHO. Smaller lighter alloys and some tyres where they aid the suspension by conforming to the road surface and give additional grip surely can't be a bad thing - an extreme example, but look at the Lotus Exige. Tyres like R888s have stiffer sidewalls than normal so the technology is out there to make some great tyres.

[Lil' Joe]

iluvmercs said:

Lil' Joe said:

Darren, care to explain more on the torque issue's in the V8 RS4? I'd be most interested.

Hi Lil' Joe,

At certain times, I've just found the engine left wanting for torque, unless of course you rev the nuts off it. (OK, I know some people out there will be cursing at me, thinking that's the whole point of the engine.)
For example, a 50mph, 3rd gear rolling start with a friend in 350Z didn't result the pulling away I was expecting. However, changing down gears resulted in expect anhiliation
Maybe it's me being a tad lazy and picky, but it's quite nice, on accasion, not to have work the gears so much.
But being caught in the wrong can leave one with egg on his or her face
The peak torque seems to come in rather high in the rev range.

Also compared the C63 AMG it is massivly deficient on torque (by almost 140 lb/ft). I've driven a CLS63, and that was noticably quicker in the mid-range.

OK, the primary point just means you have put more effort in for the desired results.
But my second point became very obvious when behind a C63 on the track. It simply thundered away!

I would have assumed, given a new RS model with newer, more powerful V8, they would have increased the torque, too

Darren

Interesting, cheers Darren. I wouldn't have expected that from the V8. I have to say though, I prefer forced induction for the road, NA on the track, as the torque and turbo rush makes fast road work exciting without breaking the speed limit all the time, and is also easier when your not "on it".

Joe

[Frimley111R]

What does it weigh? A ton and a half?

[Koln-RS]

spydersingh said:

Is it just me or do these new Audi's fail to excite anymore?

Correct.

Audi are now the Marks & Spencer of car manufacturers - huge range, very competent, easy to live with, but somehow rather contrived, bland and predictable.

[Dagnut]

FWDRacer said:

Dagnut said:

FWDRacer said:

Flog me if you want but I'd be more excited if this was an estate (sorry avant )...

More in keeping with the Q-car image of Audi's from days yonder etc...

A coupe estate?

Do you breath through your mouth?

An Estate donut. 5 doors - dog pressed against the rear window under acceleration etc.

So a RS4 or RS6 Avant?....donut

Edited by Dagnut on Wednesday 24th February 10:41

[wab172uk]

Me likey, me wanty, me can't affordy..

[Dagnut]

Beirut Taxi said:

Dagnut said:

I bet the GTR is still a lot quicker

In the real world on a public road?

I disagree.

No but how can you get to the limits on the public road? an STI or EVO would be just as quick "real" world

[Mermaid]

Frimley111R said:

What does it weigh? A ton and a half?

1725kgs

[Beefmeister]

A bit lighter than the GTR then.

1725kg vs 1780kg

444bhp vs 476bhp

257bhp/tonne vs 267bhp/tonne

I don't think there'll be much in it performance wise.

I'd also wager that the GTR is the car that Audi are positioning this car against, not the M3.

I for one can't wait to drive one.

[crisisjez]

Hate to say it as I`m a fan of the shape, but its sadly lacking in the horsepower stakes.(And not at all futureproof) Have Audi learned nothing from their poor initial choice of engine in the R8.
This isn`t a `family car` so it needn`t be sensible, it should have had a proper torquey motor up front. That cars going to be a chore to drive at 70% (Which is where most of us drive)
Shame, should have been Audis take on the M6.

[Dagnut]

Beefmeister said:

A bit lighter than the GTR then.

1725kg vs 1780kg

444bhp vs 476bhp

257bhp/tonne vs 267bhp/tonne

I don't think there'll be much in it performance wise.

I'd also wager that the GTR is the car that Audi are positioning this car against, not the M3.

I for one can't wait to drive one.

I know on paper it looks close but we've seen before with the GTR it monsters cars of similar PTW, its nearly a second quicker to 60 and I'd wager would be 2 seconds ahead by 100mph..the way the gearbox in the GTR manages the torque and the way it puts the power on the tarmac would see it well clear..did you see the Autocar test against the R8? It beat it to 60, to 100, and lapped nearly 2 seconds quicker..I can't see Audi pulling that back in a heavy car with only an extra 30bhp.

[Kazlet]

So thats 200kg heavier than an M3 and nearly half a ton heavier than an E46 CSL! Jeez thats heavy.