jtc55

http://autospies.com/article/index.a...&categoryId=23

me likes the new RS4!!!

jtc55

anyone that speaks German, please translate.

andy_cyp

Put in short......... KEEP your C55 as the audi is way too expensive, and although the RS4 may have a slight edge on you 55 guys performance wise please dont fear as the AMG Dudes have got it under control as the new C out next year will **** on it.

Peace

ScottW911

Stupid, meaningless info: Anyone else notice the old school "cranks" for the manual rear widows of the RS4 in the back seat legroom piece of the video? Wow, nearly 70,000 euros and you can't even get power windows?

nkc32

I love the new Audi RS4 very much too, the looks (exterior & interior) and performance is simply amazing along with the quattro system but to me the comparison was not fair due to its overprice tag on the RS4. In my opinion, the C55 should only be compared to the S4 in which the C55 will out perform it in every aspect except during the rain. But I have to agree that Audi did a pretty good job on the new RS4 with such aggressive bumpers and flared fenders and redesigned wheels, the interior is also very nice too with all the CF interior and sporty steering wheel and bucket seats. Seems like there's not much extra you can add to it, maybe a set of coil-overs or some bad a$$ wheels. Keep up the good job Audi.................................maybe I'll buy another from you one day

zoink

The price difference in euro is "only" 6K... so not a lot of difference... so in terms of price, I think it's comparable.

Crank window... I don't think the one that will come to the US should be all power windows... or is power window optional?

But I agree, it's not a completely fair comparison... not in terms of pricetag, but in terms of technology. C55 is using 7+ years technology (it's the same base engine as the first E55)... while RS4 is using a brand new engine.

I think it would be fair to compare it w/ C63 when it comes out... they should have similar pricetag, similar age of technology... It'll be interesting to see how a big displacement would spare against smaller F/I engine. Include V8 M3 also please...

racer z

Anyone have any idea what the RS4 runs in the 1/4 mile? I saw they got a 4.4 sec 0-60 run but I need the 1/4 miles time, especially mph, to gauge it's performace.

IdriveFast

wait a minute.....are you guys telling me a 2007 420hp car is faster than the 2005 367 hp car????

so 420hp is FASTER than 367hp?? OMG!!!

Jakpro1

Little rough on German, but was able to pick up one line.


"The RS4's front grill makes you think of one thing only....The Tossed Salad Man"

Translation may have been off a tick I think....

edit....okayyyy, okayyy, just watched the video all the way through. Only comment is ....yet again, the world proudly matches up their finest and latest technology with a C55 model/technology that has been around for what 4 years now. Anyone wanna compare today's fastest personal PC from one 4 years ago. Same thing....just unfair. Let's match up the C63 with new composite brakes and CLS handling technology with Mr RS4.....buh bye now.

Nice rims on the Audi BTW....and I am an open Audi hater.

ProjectC55

Mmmmm Old Stck S4's TT and new V8's make nice MB snacks!

zoink

LOL... would you say the same thing when a test between C63, E92 V8 M3 & RS4 comes out... 480-500hp AMG vs. 425hp M vs. 420hp RS?

Errr... I think 7+ years now... C55 is using the same M113 engine that E55 has been using since 1999 (or even 1998 in some part of the world).

I would guess, let's wait and see C63 vs. E92 M3 vs. RS4... I'm quite sure RS4 is the last one except in handling department.

Not try to become an audi hater... but RS4 needs to be driven close to redline to get the full power... and w/ TT, I think the low-end boost may not be good enough.... C63 & E92 M3 would be in N/A form... so no turbo lag and the hp & torque figures are bigger than RS4...

As for C63 vs. M3, I think would be about the same between C55 vs. current M3.... 480-500hp vs. 425hp <--> 367hp vs. 333hp

IMO, AMG is one step ahead of the game as compared to M and RS.

PC Valkyrie

As much as I love my C55, I do disagree with some of the posts on this thread.

First of all, the RS4 is the current KING in the segment it competes with in terms of performance. It's naturally aspirated aspirated 4.2L V8 with FSI has been very highly rated by almost all magazine reviews. High reving like BMW M engines, but with low end grunt too. The RS4 has active suspension and a rear-biased quattro AWD system, meaning it has immense grip and can HANDLE VERY WELL. It blows the M3/C55 away in terms of straightline speed and on a track in terms of lap times. This should not be in dispute.

In terms of "old" vs "new" technology, it doesn't really matter in my opinion. The end result (like acceleration times, lap times around a track, skidpad/slalom measurements, fuel consumption, and driving "feel") is what's most important, in my opinion. Look at the E46 M3. It was introduced in 2000, and has been the benchmark in its category for so many years. Award winning engine, rock solid and engaging chassis have made it the ultimate driving machine for a long time (objectively and subjectively). The newer Audi S4 and Mercedes C32 were meant to be competitors, but their performance was NOT up to par with the M3. The current C55 has come the closest, but it still is not an M3 beater as a performance car. Until the RS4 came out, the M3 was king. Subjectively, some would argue the M3 STILL is king in terms of driving pleasure (even though the is RS4 is faster in everyway).

Yes, the new 6.2L V8 from AMG may indeed make its way into the next C-AMG car. This engine has all the latest bells and whistles and is packed with the latest technology. The upcoming M3 with a V8 derived form the current M5's V10 will likely pack a major punch as well. It's progress and the RS4 is the new performance benchmark to beat in this category.

Eurocharged Rick

i like the new RS4...very tastefully done, but once the new C-AMG comes out along with the new M3, it will just be over-priced for what you get...

Bobby Dazzler

In the UK we have a magazine called Autocar, that completes independent road tests. Can't lay my hands on the RS4 full test, for 1/4 mile information but have some headline figures for it, along with the equivalent for two key competitors:

RS4: 0-60mph 4.5s, 0-100mph 10.5s, 30-70mph 4.1s, 50-70mph (in top gear) 5.9s, 60-0mph 2.8s

C32: 0-60mph 4.6s, 0-100mph 10.8s, 30-70mph 3.9s, 50-70mph (in top gear) 2.4s, 60-0mph 2.4s

M3: 0-60mph 4.8s, 0-100mph 11.5s, 30-70mph 4.1s, 50-70mph (in top gear) 7.7s, 60-0mph 2.6s

C55 not tested by Autocar unfortunately.

Surprises me how little there is in it between the RS4 and C32 to 100mph, given it's power and traction advantages.

By the way, if you haven't read it already, you can read the full story on the C32 versus M3 here: http://c32life.com/C32reviews/autocar/

1985mb

This is not unheard of. Porsche and other manufacturers have a history of producing stripped-down "street legal but track ready" cars with some features intentionally taken out to save on the weight.

Sometimes it is the radio or the AC. Getting rid of power windows is another way to save weight.

Different manufacturers do it in different ways and have different names for these "trim" levels (or lack thereof).

"Club Sport" "RS" "MR" "CSL" etc...

ScottW911

I understand exactly what you are saying. My neighbor brought home his Porsche GT3 a while back and I was in awe of the weight savings implemented in this street/race car. Of course, that might be the ultimate example of the stripped-down/weight-saving car. But the C55 is a luxury car that happens to be seriously fast. Is it a worthwhile comparison to make with a thinly disguised race car (ie; RS4 or M3)?

I have tremendous respect for the M3 and the RS4. Both would be terrible for me and my business as I need to transport clients on a regular basis. When I drive alone, I have as much fun as any human could, in my C32. I just believe MBZ is proving it can play in the same arena with vehicles designed for the track with its own very comfortable and drivable luxury performance car. That will always make it an unbeatable combination for me. Just my $.02...........

Fifth Ring

As much as I LOVE those test results, most test showed the C32 going 0-60 in about 5.0 or 5.1. This amazing, but 0.4 is a HUGE variance when you are down in that range.

RW C55

In Canada the price of the new RS4 will be starting at 94200, and the current C55 is at 73600.. thats more than 20000 in differnce

PC Valkyrie

That 0-60mph time for the C32 is REALLY fast. I don't think an average C32 can pull that off. Most tests have the C32 doing 0-60mph closer to 5 seconds.

Also remember that a true performance car is judged not only by its straightline accleration, but also its handling abilities. That's why many manufacturers aim for a fast lap time around the Nurburgring track. It's what many people consider a "benchmark" test for the overall performance of a sports car.

These times have all been posted before in other threads, but here they from fastest to slowest for the cars of interest (all taken from Sport Auto magazine, which conducts these tests around the Nurburgring track using the same test driver):

B7 RS4 8.09 minutes
E46 M3 8.22 minutes
W203 C55 8.22 minutes
B6 S4 Avant 8.29 minutes
W203 C32 8.37 minutes

And yes, I do realize that the RS4 is significantly more expensive than the current M3/C55/S4, but it's also quite a step up in terms of performance. What will be interesting is the performance numbers and price of the upcoming V8 M3 and next C-AMG car.

PC Valkyrie

And here is a part of the comparison test done by Auto Motor und Sport magazine (which made that video posted above). The left hand column is the RS4 and the right hand column is the C55.

You can see that the RS4 trounces the C55 in straightline acceleration.

zdkdeeier493

Thats fast for the M3 too! 4.8??? YEAH RIGHT. Maybe an M3 CSL. I don't think even a pro driver could pull that off in an M3.

clkcadet

isnt the C55 more suited to go against the S4 rather then the RS4??, i think thats a disadvantage, put it up against an e55

aecasasus

Pretty cool!!!!

1985mb

Problem is, when you get into such niche territory there are very few comparisons left. I don't think we (or the media) have much choice but to compare the C32/55 to the M3 and S/RS4.

Another way to think about it, perhaps: Since we compare the "regular" C-class with the 3-series and A4 (although the C is generally more expensive), you might as well compare their performance versions.

Each manufacturer also seems to have a slightly different philosophy regarding how they execute their vision for the "performance" versions of their C, 3 and A4. MB seems to have kept the focus a bit more on luxury, BMW on the handling and engaging the driver, Audi perhaps somewhere in the middle. This is all relatively speaking. The AMG C, M3 and S/RS4 are all very much performance cars compared to 99% of the market.

I'm sure MB hopes that aside from the "dedicated" C32/55 crowd, there were also additional buyers who came in looking at the non-AMG C class and ended up buying the AMG version. Those people would probably have been comparing the 3-series and A4, too.

1985mb

PS: ScottW911, different strokes for different folks, but sounds like the C was the right choice for you.