which ECU chip did you get? asp pulley's $1k and the plugs are $6-700 I believe...where the other $2k went? just curious. unless the we're just lucky to pay less on West coast.

when comparing cars it's better to leave the mods out of it. I've read someone who strapped a GE jet engine in a VW new Beetle and can literally leave you toasted and crispy when it turns on the afterburner.

 

I think it's pretty obvious you are not an Audi fan.. lol

 

But when you factor in the loss of your warranty, the loss of reliability, and the reduction in the car's market value, those mods are pricier than you think. BTDT.

 

lol.... nothing against Audi, I'm not a fan of spending $74,000 on a sports sedan that during everyday driving could get beat on the highway by some stock SUV's at half the price......

 

the RS4 is not going to get beat by C55/M3 on the freeway man. Only cars that are more expensive like the M5, E55/63, CLK63 will beat that car.

money wise, for $74k it's the price to pay for a 1 or maybe 2 yr limited production car. I would pick a used E55 tho.

 

On the top gear video I think you should consider the tires. the CSL M3 has racing slick tires from the factory. BMW tells the new owneres the tires are not safe to drive with in cold or wet conditions. Given the track was wet for the drag race the tires did nothing to help the CSL M3, my guess is a normal M3 with stock tires would out drag a CSL on a wet track.

 

that show's Fifth Gear...and that M3 is a competition package (zcp) not a CSL.

 

You did not even spend any money on an rs4, so how can you not be a fan of something that you have not even done at all?

You see the disperency in your argument in here?

 

I guess you haven't figured out yet that there is clearly something wrong with the data. The SLK32 in C&D back in 2001 did a 13 @ 110 with a 4.5 sec 0-60. How could the RS4 do a 13 @ 102 with a 4.5 sec 0-60? In the test, if the RS4 did a 0-60 in 4.5, there is no way it would have covered the 1/4 mile in 13 flat with only a 102 trap speed. And 13 in the 1/4 is the slowest time I have seen for an RS4 in a magazine test.

 

I guess you haven't figured out that AWD cars have significantly higher drivetrain losses and almost always have lower trap speeds and less highway pulling power than a compariable car with RWD..... It's 100% possible to run a 13 flat at 102 with a good launch....

same thing with the RS-6, it would run in the 12's at around 108 MPH, and look at an E55, it will run in the 12's at 115+MPH..... after the launch the E55 would kill the RS-6......

maybe they did botch up the test, but 13.0 @ 102 is possible.....

 

what? I said "spending $74,000 on a sports sedan", which I have done.....

 

https://mbworld.org/forums/showpost....1&postcount=20

 

Hate to break the news to you but;

E55 is not a $74K sedan, it is more like $94K sedan, so your argument is still not relevant.

We are not comparing used vs new cars as well.

 

Did you really read my post? How is it possible that 2 cars reach 0-60 in 4.5 seconds but then reach the 1/4 mile in 13 flat when one car is doing 110 mph at the end of 1/4 and the other is doing 102 at the end of the 1/4 mile. The lauch doesn't have anything to do with it it both cars reached 60 at the same time, they should cover close to the same distance. A small variation at the 1/4 is certainly possible but not 8 mph if they both do a 13.

If you saw a magazine review with an E55 trapping 110 mph, would you believe it but because it was in a magazine?

Here are some other mistakes in the article... they say that RS4 has cooled front seats(it doesnt) , that it carries over the DRC from the S4 (S4 desnt have this), and that it has quad exhausts (which it doesn't).

So the article says I have cooled seats... hmmm.... I guess I just haven't found that button yet. I mean it must be true, it is in a magazine.

 

Well the latest R&T has the rs4 tested, and compared against a c4s.

It seems like the rs4 is pretty quick.

http://coochas.com/pics/C4SvsRS4/997...&T-Aug06-3.jpg

They tested the 1/4 mile in 12.8 sec @ 109.7 mph

I would say it is pretty pretty quick. And 0-60 in 4.3 sec and that is way above the c32 c55 or the m3. The new c63 and m3 will be as quick maybe quicker who knows but it is still a few years ahead for now. Current c55 or the m3 is not even close to the rs4 in the 1/4 mile or the 0-60, or 0-100 or 0-120.......

It is a 70K car, but it is a damn fast 70K car for sure.

 

And more bad news for you... that slow RS4 with only a 102 trap speed can beat the E55 with it's 116 trap speed around the Nurburgring. If the RS4 is faster around the Nurburgring with only a 102 trap, the E55 must not handle very well. I think people above have used the word pathetic above so I guess this must mean that the E55 has pathetic handling.

So I guess the conclusion here is that the RS4 owner paid $74K for a slow car and the E55 owner paid $94K for a crappy handling car. Considering that even the highest speed limits in the US are below 100 mph and most roads are curved, I think the RS4 owner is a little better off.

I apologize to any E55 owners reading this. I love that car but sometime when someone starts throwing stones, you should expect to have a few stones thown back.

 

and your point is? I never said anything about E55 handling..... you go roadracing a lot with 4 door sedans?

 

Yes but I am... apparently the E55 handles like crap. And yes, many people go to tracks with their 4 door sedans.

 

ayee.... the LAUNCH is the first 60 FEET, which can be from 1.8 - 2.1 seconds in these cars.... the launch is NOT 0-60 MPH...... which takes over twice as long....

if you look at timeslips from AWD cars and RWD cars, you'll see a decent discripency between their trap speeds..... even if they run the SAME exact ET.... the AWD drive cars tend to not pull as hard at speed due to higher driveline losses....

like I said, run an RS-6 vs E55..... both can run a similar ET, and the E55 will have around a 6MPH advantage at the end of the 1/4 mile.... you really can't see how this works? if you ran them at highway speeds the E55 would beat the RS-6 everytime.... this is what the trap speed tells you...

now, could that one test be a fluke, misprint, bad test, etc? sure... it's not the end of the world.... we'll eventually see what it does elsewhere...

this was the first test I had seen, and I was suprised by the low trap... I do think it should be higher.... especially since the S4 can pull 100MPH with 80 less HP....

BUT if you want to argue of if it's NOT possible to run 13.0 @ 102, let's do it and I'll bring in some real world examples....

 

no, I asked if YOU go roadracing with 4 door sedans.....

 

zumbalak, that's more like it....

 

If you look above, I posted a reference to the same test where the RS4 trapped a 109.7. Did you miss it?

 

I'll let you know. I've only had a 4 door sedan for 2 weeks. However, an all consuming back yard project is taking up all of my weekend so it won't be for a while. The RS4 does handle regular roads with incredible ease.

 

Of course it is possible but a well driven car with awd with a 0-60 of 4.5 and 420 hp will trap higher than 102. The only way it would be 102 is if the driver missed shift or let off.

 

why is someone with an E55 getting so worked up about an RS4?