Autocar old review E92 M3 V RS4

[161BMW]

I was looking at an old Autocar review of the E92 M3 V RS4 on the Internet.

Previously, Autocar had reviewed the E46 M3 CS V RS4 .... And the M3 CS just pipped the RS4

Then Autocar had reviewed E92 M3 V RS4 .... And the RS4 won hands down ?

One of the criticisms of the E92 M3 in initial reviews besides high seating position was the steering too numb and too thick. Did later E92 M3s have better steering as no one seems to mention this now ?

So what do u people think of which is better E92 M3 V RS4 ?
Also does this mean E46 M3 CS V E92 M3 based on Autocar reviews the M3 CS is 'better' ?

One of the links is below ....

http://www.m3post.com/forums/attachment.php?attach...

Thanks very much :-)

[161BMW]

PS here are some links to the original E92 M3 V RS4 review by Autocar

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7292...

Edited by 161BMW on Saturday 29th December 12:37

[x5x3]

why don't you just try driving both and making your own mind up?

[leeson660]

161BMW said:

I was looking at an old Autocar review of the E92 M3 V RS4 on the Internet.

Previously, Autocar had reviewed the E46 M3 CS V RS4 .... And the M3 CS just pipped the RS4

Then Autocar had reviewed E92 M3 V RS4 .... And the RS4 won hands down ?

One of the criticisms of the E92 M3 in initial reviews besides high seating position was the steering too numb and too thick. Did later E92 M3s have better steering as no one seems to mention this now ?

So what do u people think of which is better E92 M3 V RS4 ?
Also does this mean E46 M3 CS V E92 M3 based on Autocar reviews the M3 CS is 'better' ?

One of the links is below ....

http://www.m3post.com/forums/attachment.php?attach...

Thanks very much :-)

In my opinion from owning a CS and from what I've read / seen of the e92:

CS: more raw, harder, sharper driving exp with much better steering.

e92: quite a bit faster, better equip, softer, leaning more towards a GT car.


So it depends what you want

For me I want the former

Other people who have driven both may disagree.

[cpufreak]

E92 is more of a jekyll and hyde I think.

In that its so comfortable, and refined when cruising, and there is a lot more low down torque, you can quite easily mistake it for being just a very fast, comfortable car.

However, when you're on it - with revs between 7500 and 8400, it is seriously fast, and very sharp - at least as sharp as an E46 in my opinion...

The other thing I notice is when I had my CSL, I would forever be running it up to the limiter - doing that it seems to take a conscious effort in the E92, for now at least, to not upshift early - and you need to do it because its the last 600 rpm is where the magic happens.

[MC99]

cpufreak said:

E92 is more of a jekyll and hyde I think.

In that its so comfortable, and refined when cruising, and there is a lot more low down torque, you can quite easily mistake it for being just a very fast, comfortable car.

However, when you're on it - with revs between 7500 and 8400, it is seriously fast, and very sharp - at least as sharp as an E46 in my opinion...

The other thing I notice is when I had my CSL, I would forever be running it up to the limiter - doing that it seems to take a conscious effort in the E92, for now at least, to not upshift early - and you need to do it because its the last 600 rpm is where the magic happens.

I'd agree, the magic of the power plant in the E92, is in a few parts (for me), but certainly has a certain noise that is in the last few hundred RPM..

Having run an E46, I agree that the work done between generations, specifically in NVH in the E92 makes it initially feel more remote. It takes longer to connect with. Both great cars, able to cope with everyday life comfortably, the E90 M3 probably the most practical and Qish car of the bunch..