RE: Audi RS4 (B7): Spotted

[tim-jxv5n]

These are very similar in size to the new rs3 saloon. I'm liking the look of those aswell

[big_rob_sydney]

ericmcn said:

I like this alot, the Lexus ISF however is probably something I would get over this for overall reliability but the Quattro on the Audi would be great too

I think this is a great point. The many comments about its quality / faults are crazy considering how much these were new. And given they're not actually that quick, you would be way better off in the ISF. Admittedly that's coming from a Lexus fan, but I just can't get over the expenses to run these. I've been running the LS for near on 5 years now, and all it's cost me is servicing and consumables. Not one thing has broken, and it just feels as solid today as it did the day I bought it. These Audi's, I don't know, they just sound like trouble.

[E65Ross]

big_rob_sydney said:

ericmcn said:

I like this alot, the Lexus ISF however is probably something I would get over this for overall reliability but the Quattro on the Audi would be great too

I think this is a great point. The many comments about its quality / faults are crazy considering how much these were new. And given they're not actually that quick, you would be way better off in the ISF. Admittedly that's coming from a Lexus fan, but I just can't get over the expenses to run these. I've been running the LS for near on 5 years now, and all it's cost me is servicing and consumables. Not one thing has broken, and it just feels as solid today as it did the day I bought it. These Audi's, I don't know, they just sound like trouble.

Not that quick? Depends what you're used to but they're around 11secs to 100mph, now that's pretty quick by most standards.

Problematic..... Yes, although I've only experience from just 1 person. I don't think the cost necessarily means being without problems. The further you push the boundaries of technology, the cost goes up, and reliability can often go down.

[swisstoni]

Escort3500 said:

swisstoni said:

I sniffed around these a while ago. I really like the small size and fairly restrained mean looks.
And if course the V8.
Was eventually scared off by reports of engine out for jobs you really shouldn’t have to.

Engine out for what? Not heard that before. You’re not thinking about the contemporary RS6 are you?

Edited by Escort3500 on Sunday 14th October 21:57

Was a few years ago now but something engine maintenance related definitely put me off. Timing chain possibly.

[Dr_Rick]

E65Ross said:

big_rob_sydney said:

ericmcn said:

I like this alot, the Lexus ISF however is probably something I would get over this for overall reliability but the Quattro on the Audi would be great too

I think this is a great point. The many comments about its quality / faults are crazy considering how much these were new. And given they're not actually that quick, you would be way better off in the ISF. Admittedly that's coming from a Lexus fan, but I just can't get over the expenses to run these. I've been running the LS for near on 5 years now, and all it's cost me is servicing and consumables. Not one thing has broken, and it just feels as solid today as it did the day I bought it. These Audi's, I don't know, they just sound like trouble.

Not that quick? Depends what you're used to but they're around 11secs to 100mph, now that's pretty quick by most standards.

Problematic..... Yes, although I've only experience from just 1 person. I don't think the cost necessarily means being without problems. The further you push the boundaries of technology, the cost goes up, and reliability can often go down.

I looked at the RS4, relative to a C63 and an M3, but in the end local cars were a little scabby / thirsty and asthmatic (in that order relative to those cars). A mate had an ISF that he was looking to offload in favour of an A45 so I took him up on the offer.

The ISF was ultimate stealth, mine was black / black but had a custom valved exhaust for proper rumbles. Reliability wise it was spot on. Man dealer prices for servicing were actually fine despite it being 5.0l V8. I was quoted £1000 for 2x front discs and 4x front pads to be replaced. However, ECP got me a set of Brembo kit for £278 and in true Lexus / Toyota fashion I swapped them on my driveway in less time with less trauma than doing the same on an Audi.

Fuel economy was fine too, which was a surprise. Pity my wife didn't like it for some reason.

[Escort3500]

NicoG said:

Had one of these for a couple of months - it was a lovely place to be and the noise and torque was very addictive, but the car left me feeling a bit cold.
Dynamically, the RS4 was way inferior to an E90/92 M3, which is about as close as competitor as is possible to have; it was a very long way from well balanced - always wanted to understeer, even at a 'normal' lick....

Horses for course, obviously. I looked at various alternatives but plumped for an RS4. It’s not perfect by any means, but appealed to me more than an M3 for example (which I also like enormously and was a serious contender). The RWD M3 might be more engaging on a B road but as an all-rounder in all conditions I prefer the RS4.

As for the comments about reliability, provided they’re maintained properly and certain aspects are addressed (eg DRC/oil cooler pipes) then they’re no worse than many comparable (relatively) high performance cars. Agree, they can be expensive to fix if they go wrong, as any car in this category can be, but there are a few good specialists out there that are cheaper and better than main dealers (eg MRC, Unit 20).

[craig2003]

Escort3500 said:

As for the comments about reliability, provided they’re maintained properly and certain aspects are addressed (eg DRC/oil cooler pipes) then they’re no worse than many comparable (relatively) high performance cars.

I beg to differ, mine was fully maintained by Audi main dealers and did no more than 7k in between oil changes so almost double the recommended servicing required.
Forgot to add to my previous post that the throttle pedal, throttle ECU and loom also failed along with the rear wiper motor.
All in all I forked out circa £27k in 5 years to keep it on the road.
It had the engine changed at 42,000 miles, I bought it with around 45,000 on so thought it would have been bullet proof but the new engine lasted the same length of time as the first did.

Edited to add pic
20160526_182259

Edited by craig2003 on Monday 15th October 11:30

[crashley]

Fantastic cars. I had one for over 5 years and 50k miles. Sure they're expensive to run as any 400bhp 10year old car is. When on the right road, these are phenomenal. I had an Avsnt too, so offers a degree of practicalality that BMW could never with the M3.

Replaced mine with a C7 RS6 but will likely add another B7 RS4 again as they're almost go-kart like by comparison, and i do miss a daily manual gearbox.

[Christmassss]

Here is a stupid question. The S4 and the RS4 has the same 4.2 V8, so is it a case of different internals that unleashes the extra power? If so, if you happened to have an S4, how easy would it be to modify the S4 engine to similar power levels to the RS4?

[hooblah]

Christmassss said:

Here is a stupid question. The S4 and the RS4 has the same 4.2 V8, so is it a case of different internals that unleashes the extra power? If so, if you happened to have an S4, how easy would it be to modify the S4 engine to similar power levels to the RS4?

Here's your answer:

http://bfy.tw/5rB

[gofasterrosssco]

hooblah said:

Christmassss said:

Here is a stupid question. The S4 and the RS4 has the same 4.2 V8, so is it a case of different internals that unleashes the extra power? If so, if you happened to have an S4, how easy would it be to modify the S4 engine to similar power levels to the RS4?

Here's your answer:

http://bfy.tw/5rB

For a non-sarcastic answer, the engines are fundamentally the same, the RS4 engine (and the R8 engine that preceded it) being the high performance variant. The are different in so many areas that it really wouldn't be worth trying to modify a 'normal' S4 engine.

See page 7:

http://www.volkspage.net/technik/ssp/ssp/SSP_377.p...

[Christmassss]

hooblah said:

Here's your answer:

http://bfy.tw/5rB

Says the guy who comes onto Pistonheads to start a thread - Chicken is out of date. Can I still eat it? - Rather than googling it.

[Christmassss]

gofasterrosssco said:

For a non-sarcastic answer, the engines are fundamentally the same, the RS4 engine (and the R8 engine that preceded it) being the high performance variant. The are different in so many areas that it really wouldn't be worth trying to modify a 'normal' S4 engine.

See page 7:

http://www.volkspage.net/technik/ssp/ssp/SSP_377.p...

I see. Lots of differences. Thanks!

[Some Gump]

Christmassss said:

Here is a stupid question. The S4 and the RS4 has the same 4.2 V8, so is it a case of different internals that unleashes the extra power? If so, if you happened to have an S4, how easy would it be to modify the S4 engine to similar power levels to the RS4?

Quite a few differences, but I read the article so long ago don't shoot me if some of these details are a bit awry.. It was a really well done .pdf presumably ripped from one o the proper car mags.

RS4 engine - same as R8 engine, 8k RPM redline. More steel internally and trick pistons that are lighter than the normal Audi 4.2 to give the higher redline. Flappy airbox to give tuned intake length. Has artificial throttle limit (to limit torque) in gears 1,2,3 that is not present on the R8 (to protect the transmission). R8 is also dry sumped, allegedly more for packaging requirements (in mid engine install, the prop shaft has to go through the location the wet sump would have been).

S4 engine - Same as the one in the Q7 et all. 7k RPM redline.

From memory of the graphs, the S4 engine outperforms the RS4 down low through a limited band, before being quite mullered high up - in other words they only differ when you're really pushing on.

From a day playing with someone in an S4, on the road in a line there's not fantastic amounts in it - but we were on country roads where "point and squirt" doesn't really apply. Where there is a huge, huge rift in RS4 vs S4 is the second it gets twisty. The S4 is an A4 with a big engine - stll has all the understeer and struggles with body roll. RS4 was massively in front on corner exits, as well as having no issues whatsoever by the time the S4's brakes had cried "please, stop!!".

I've run an RS4 for 4-5 years, and would wholeheartedly recommend them to anyone that likes cars. Some say "they are not that fast" and I do wonder what the hell they've been driving - sub 5s to 62 and 11s to 100 is still "very fast" to most people!

[ericmcn]

E65Ross said:

Not that quick? Depends what you're used to but they're around 11secs to 100mph, now that's pretty quick by most standards.

Problematic..... Yes, although I've only experience from just 1 person. I don't think the cost necessarily means being without problems. The further you push the boundaries of technology, the cost goes up, and reliability can often go down.

For the outlay you could do better, I think that's the whole point. A 2 litre Subaru twinscroll is about 4 seconds worse off to 100 mph over the Audi and that is 'only' a 2 litre turbo and would be far less likely to break your wallet and cost much less too.

[JuniorD]

JaredVannett said:

RS4 and M3 back to back:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUk9-gW8gIQ

Only conclusions I can draw from that are that the Audi has a nicer interior and the driver is a dick.

[E65Ross]

ericmcn said:

E65Ross said:

Not that quick? Depends what you're used to but they're around 11secs to 100mph, now that's pretty quick by most standards.

Problematic..... Yes, although I've only experience from just 1 person. I don't think the cost necessarily means being without problems. The further you push the boundaries of technology, the cost goes up, and reliability can often go down.

For the outlay you could do better, I think that's the whole point. A 2 litre Subaru twinscroll is about 4 seconds worse off to 100 mph over the Audi and that is 'only' a 2 litre turbo and would be far less likely to break your wallet and cost much less too.

Yes, but getting a Subaru is missing the point of the RS4.

[hertfordshire1]

Ran one of these for a year back in 2006.

Picked it up with 2k miles @3 months old and sold it a year later with 44k miles (it was my daily driver)...

Mine was Grey, black optics pack and had the buckets etc.

First of all, never felt that quick - certainly not over 400 BHP quick and that always was a let down.
Then there were the issues with the seat leather wearing out on the bolsters after 6 months (Audi telling me that I wasn't meant to be wearing jeans when I drove it)...
They eventually agreed to pay for the replacement leather on the seat if I paid for the labour (remembering this car was still under 1 year old)....
Then the dealer damaged the car when removing the seat and the party was well and truly over..
The oil changes from memory were expensive too - like £400 odd quid...
I've never owned an Audi since.

Good points - they were rare back then so lots of thumbs up, Bose audio was good and the Nav was good for its time too..

I also put the plate RS04 DAD on it, much to my kids delight - I wonder what car that plate is on now (as I sold it with the plate)...

Still if picking one up cheap now, then the experience might be better - never felt like a £50k car to me.

Ta

Steve

[Christmassss]

Some Gump said:

Quite a few differences, but I read the article so long ago don't shoot me if some of these details are a bit awry.. It was a really well done .pdf presumably ripped from one o the proper car mags.

RS4 engine - same as R8 engine, 8k RPM redline. More steel internally and trick pistons that are lighter than the normal Audi 4.2 to give the higher redline. Flappy airbox to give tuned intake length. Has artificial throttle limit (to limit torque) in gears 1,2,3 that is not present on the R8 (to protect the transmission). R8 is also dry sumped, allegedly more for packaging requirements (in mid engine install, the prop shaft has to go through the location the wet sump would have been).

S4 engine - Same as the one in the Q7 et all. 7k RPM redline.

From memory of the graphs, the S4 engine outperforms the RS4 down low through a limited band, before being quite mullered high up - in other words they only differ when you're really pushing on.

From a day playing with someone in an S4, on the road in a line there's not fantastic amounts in it - but we were on country roads where "point and squirt" doesn't really apply. Where there is a huge, huge rift in RS4 vs S4 is the second it gets twisty. The S4 is an A4 with a big engine - stll has all the understeer and struggles with body roll. RS4 was massively in front on corner exits, as well as having no issues whatsoever by the time the S4's brakes had cried "please, stop!!".

I've run an RS4 for 4-5 years, and would wholeheartedly recommend them to anyone that likes cars. Some say "they are not that fast" and I do wonder what the hell they've been driving - sub 5s to 62 and 11s to 100 is still "very fast" to most people!

Thanks for the in depth answer

[Pintofbest]

hertfordshire1 said:

I also put the plate RS04 DAD on it, much to my kids delight - I wonder what car that plate is on now (as I sold it with the plate)...

Steve

It's still on the RS4 if AskMID is anything to go by.