RS-4 can only manage a 102MPH trap?
#51
Originally Posted by ultraseven
why is someone with an E55 getting so worked up about an RS4?
Unless folks are ignoring the factual posts that are being made here, it's pretty obvious that the trap time is off. Of course, if 1/4 mile times are what float your boat, there are Camaros in the classifieds every day.
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 AMG
Originally posted by 2QUIK4U: It's about versatility, and that's where the Audi wins hands down. There are very few 4 door sedans that will perform as well as the RS4 on the track,
![](http://www.amgpower.com/community/images/smiles/023.gif)
Last edited by melmanc55; 07-03-2006 at 10:49 AM.
#54
Originally Posted by melmanc55
So much talk of track times with these cars and I will never understand the benefit. 90% of buyers won't ever see a track. It's was a mute point when I went looking for a car. I will never push my car hard (in a turn) enough on public roads to notice it has a problem with handling. Even if it was the best handling car on the planet it becomes a non issue once you hit a non prepared sufface like your average highway or public road. The C55 IMO remains the best choice. ![](http://www.amgpower.com/community/images/smiles/023.gif)
![](http://www.amgpower.com/community/images/smiles/023.gif)
So if handling doesn't matter to you, you'd be happy with a C240 also, unless the extra HP matters to you.
#55
By your logic, I don't know why you would even spend the money in a C55 when a C230 will do your type of driving just fine.
![poke](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/stickpoke.gif)
Originally Posted by melmanc55
So much talk of track times with these cars and I will never understand the benefit. 90% of buyers won't ever see a track. It's was a mute point when I went looking for a car. I will never push my car hard (in a turn) enough on public roads to notice it has a problem with handling. Even if it was the best handling car on the planet it becomes a non issue once you hit a non prepared sufface like your average highway or public road. The C55 IMO remains the best choice. ![](http://www.amgpower.com/community/images/smiles/023.gif)
![](http://www.amgpower.com/community/images/smiles/023.gif)
#57
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C43, SLK32, CLK63 Black Series
Originally Posted by melmanc55
So much talk of track times with these cars and I will never understand the benefit. 90% of buyers won't ever see a track. It's was a mute point when I went looking for a car. I will never push my car hard (in a turn) enough on public roads to notice it has a problem with handling. Even if it was the best handling car on the planet it becomes a non issue once you hit a non prepared sufface like your average highway or public road. The C55 IMO remains the best choice. ![](http://www.amgpower.com/community/images/smiles/023.gif)
![](http://www.amgpower.com/community/images/smiles/023.gif)
#58
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Cali (Ontario)
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
10 Posts
Originally Posted by 2QUIK4U
Who gives a **** about trap speed and quarter mile? If you want an incredible quarter mile time, go buy a mustang GT and put a supercharger on it and nitrous, etc. etc. A time around the track is much more relevant to me and is much more indicative of the overall capabilities and performance of a vehicle than the quarter mile. In Europe, none of the major automobile magazines (e.g. Auto Motor & Sport, Sport Auto and Autobild, etc.) even measure or publish quarter mile times.
It's about versatility, and that's where the Audi wins hands down. There are very few 4 door sedans that will perform as well as the RS4 on the track, be comfortable to use for everyday driving, be perfectly capable to drive in winter/wet conditions and have the quality and aesthetics that Audi offers. $74,000 is not an excessive amount to pay for what the RS4 offers.
It's about versatility, and that's where the Audi wins hands down. There are very few 4 door sedans that will perform as well as the RS4 on the track, be comfortable to use for everyday driving, be perfectly capable to drive in winter/wet conditions and have the quality and aesthetics that Audi offers. $74,000 is not an excessive amount to pay for what the RS4 offers.
you are correct.. they don't measure the 1/4, they measure 0-62km , 0-100km o-200km and 1000 meter and they Also the measure top speed.
for 74K.. I'll buy a used RS6 and mod. If you remember.... SCCA 2 years ago.. AUDI RS6's where clearly superior to other cars on the track courses. I just don't understand why for 74k... you don't get the DSG??? There is no way a person can shift as fast as a dual clutch system.
Why buy a high compression V8, with limited mod potential?
For 74K.. you are buying a all wheel drive... 3900lbs and no torque.
#59
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Cali (Ontario)
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
10 Posts
Originally Posted by SteveL
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.
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.
you only made the E55's point even stronger...
there are very few cars that can beat the E55 in everyday driving. Most roads are NOT curved. In urban city life, all you see is 5 lanes at each side and long stretches of road... and you are lucky if you have the chance to drive with no traffic.
Unless you live in the mountains... and you see many s-turns, hair pin turns on your way to work... the E55 will spank anything that is out there under 100mph..
With so much power advantage, the handicap of the E55 will not be noticed by everyday driving and freeway driving. Unless you put them both at Laguna Seca at the same time..then you would only see the virtues of the RS4. Then we come back to the point.. is it really worth having a 74K track car?
Personally... I rather have an Evo ix and mod. If we want to drive a track car, the we don't need all the extra comforts of the RS4 and we don't need its additional weight.
By the way.. i'm looking at one with 15k miles and fully load and extended warranty for 57k... (plenty of room for better suspension mods and more power) for that price.
#60
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C43, SLK32, CLK63 Black Series
Originally Posted by TopGun32
you only made the E55's point even stronger...
There is no question about the E55's performance, truely awesome. My point was that if $74K should result in a faster car, a $94K car should not only be faster, it should also handle at least as well as the $74K car.
Also, I have been looking at the price. Sure, it is $74K but if you look at the C55 for instance, which equipped comes to about $64K. However, doesn't the RS4 have more to offer, turning headlights, 19" wheels, center and rear diffs, more power, awd, better brakes - I'm not necessarily talking performance but technology even though performance is pretty good too. Then there is arguable stuff like better interior, better quality materials, real carbon fiber, etc. Shouldn't it cost more than the C55? $10K more? If you modded a C55 with some of the differences between the cars, it wouldn't take long to spend $10K. Like I said before, we'll see what MB prices the C63 at - hopefully they build it, but I bet it will be considerably more than $64K. And if they build a better car than the Audi, then it should probably cost more.
It is pretty clear that BMW, Audi, and MB are upping the prices on the performance models pretty quickly. The M6 for instance is $102K MSRP. The SLK55 was a considerably price hike over the SLK32. The new M5 is considerably more than the previous model and the previous model looks better. The current E55 is considerably more than the previous model. I'm sure the V8 M3 and C63 will follow suit. The RS4 just came out first. It does suck that they are raising prices so fast - makes the argument for waiting a couple of years and depreciation all the more compelling. KBB Private party on a 2003 E55 with 51K miles in excellent condition is $55K.
Last edited by SteveL; 07-04-2006 at 10:23 AM.
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 AMG
Originally posted by dmzz: By your logic, I don't know why you would even spend the money in a C55 when a C230 will do your type of driving just fine.
![drive](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/driving.gif)
#63
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
Originally Posted by SteveL
My guess is that you have driven an RS4 yet. If you do, I think you will notice a difference in every day handling, over an E55, a previous generation M5, an S4, a C55, and most other 4 door sedans. I've driven each of the cars I mentioned and there is a difference in my opinion in every day driving.
There is no question about the E55's performance, truely awesome. My point was that if $74K should result in a faster car, a $94K car should not only be faster, it should also handle at least as well as the $74K car.
Also, I have been looking at the price. Sure, it is $74K but if you look at the C55 for instance, which equipped comes to about $64K. However, doesn't the RS4 have more to offer, turning headlights, 19" wheels, center and rear diffs, more power, awd, better brakes - I'm not necessarily talking performance but technology even though performance is pretty good too. Then there is arguable stuff like better interior, better quality materials, real carbon fiber, etc. Shouldn't it cost more than the C55? $10K more? If you modded a C55 with some of the differences between the cars, it wouldn't take long to spend $10K. Like I said before, we'll see what MB prices the C63 at - hopefully they build it, but I bet it will be considerably more than $64K. And if they build a better car than the Audi, then it should probably cost more.
It is pretty clear that BMW, Audi, and MB are upping the prices on the performance models pretty quickly. The M6 for instance is $102K MSRP. The SLK55 was a considerably price hike over the SLK32. The new M5 is considerably more than the previous model and the previous model looks better. The current E55 is considerably more than the previous model. I'm sure the V8 M3 and C63 will follow suit. The RS4 just came out first. It does suck that they are raising prices so fast - makes the argument for waiting a couple of years and depreciation all the more compelling. KBB Private party on a 2003 E55 with 51K miles in excellent condition is $55K.
There is no question about the E55's performance, truely awesome. My point was that if $74K should result in a faster car, a $94K car should not only be faster, it should also handle at least as well as the $74K car.
Also, I have been looking at the price. Sure, it is $74K but if you look at the C55 for instance, which equipped comes to about $64K. However, doesn't the RS4 have more to offer, turning headlights, 19" wheels, center and rear diffs, more power, awd, better brakes - I'm not necessarily talking performance but technology even though performance is pretty good too. Then there is arguable stuff like better interior, better quality materials, real carbon fiber, etc. Shouldn't it cost more than the C55? $10K more? If you modded a C55 with some of the differences between the cars, it wouldn't take long to spend $10K. Like I said before, we'll see what MB prices the C63 at - hopefully they build it, but I bet it will be considerably more than $64K. And if they build a better car than the Audi, then it should probably cost more.
It is pretty clear that BMW, Audi, and MB are upping the prices on the performance models pretty quickly. The M6 for instance is $102K MSRP. The SLK55 was a considerably price hike over the SLK32. The new M5 is considerably more than the previous model and the previous model looks better. The current E55 is considerably more than the previous model. I'm sure the V8 M3 and C63 will follow suit. The RS4 just came out first. It does suck that they are raising prices so fast - makes the argument for waiting a couple of years and depreciation all the more compelling. KBB Private party on a 2003 E55 with 51K miles in excellent condition is $55K.
I think people are just saying that for $74k there are a lot of other cars out there for consideration especially when they can be a class higher such as the E55 or RS6 or other sports car used or not. For me I personally think $74k plus tax and other stuff is too much for an A4 especially when they don't even give us the same steering wheel and seats as in the Euro car. However given the trend that's probably one will spend on for the next M3 and C-class AMG. This like you said makes the used market look very attractive especially when it comes to the E55s.
#64
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C43, SLK32, CLK63 Black Series
Originally Posted by FrankW
I think people are just saying that for $74k there are a lot of other cars out there for consideration especially when they can be a class higher such as the E55 or RS6 or other sports car used or not. For me I personally think $74k plus tax and other stuff is too much for an A4 especially when they don't even give us the same steering wheel and seats as in the Euro car. However given the trend that's probably one will spend on for the next M3 and C-class AMG. This like you said makes the used market look very attractive especially when it comes to the E55s.
#65
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
Originally Posted by SteveL
Well I'm willing to bet that a C63 and new M3 will be in the same price range with options and gas guzzler. I guess we can all agree that $70+K is too much too pay for a small sedan but that is not going to change the fact that is what they are/will be priced at. The fact that the RS4 shares very little with an A4 isn't going to change your mind suppose.
I still think this is some weird philosophy by VAG to create the S4, S6, and then RS6 and RS4. I still think they should just make a S4 that is every single bit on par with the M3 and C55 with out costing a lot more because if they did that the S4 would definitely be my pick between the three.
offtopic, I like the new S6 the best with that Gallardo root V10 even tho it has less power than the M5 or E63. lol
Last edited by FrankW; 07-04-2006 at 07:09 PM.
#66
Originally Posted by FrankW
modding is irrelevant. anyone can spend a lot of money in one car to make fast. I'm sure you'll want to mod your RS4 one day.
I think people are just saying that for $74k there are a lot of other cars out there for consideration especially when they can be a class higher such as the E55 or RS6 or other sports car used or not. For me I personally think $74k plus tax and other stuff is too much for an A4 especially when they don't even give us the same steering wheel and seats as in the Euro car. However given the trend that's probably one will spend on for the next M3 and C-class AMG. This like you said makes the used market look very attractive especially when it comes to the E55s.
I think people are just saying that for $74k there are a lot of other cars out there for consideration especially when they can be a class higher such as the E55 or RS6 or other sports car used or not. For me I personally think $74k plus tax and other stuff is too much for an A4 especially when they don't even give us the same steering wheel and seats as in the Euro car. However given the trend that's probably one will spend on for the next M3 and C-class AMG. This like you said makes the used market look very attractive especially when it comes to the E55s.
#67
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
Originally Posted by FrankW
Can anyone dig up the time M3 CSL and RS4 ran the Ring??
Audi S4 Avant (B6): 8.29 minutes
Audi RS4 (B7): 8.09 minutes
BMW M3 (E46): 8.22 minutes
BMW M3 CSL (E46): 7.50 minutes
BMW M5 (E60): 8.13 minutes
MB C32 AMG (W203): 8.37 minutes
MB C55 AMG (W203): 8.22 minutes
Unfortunately, they've never tested the E55 or CLS55 to get an idea how these straight line monsters would do on the ring. (I wonder whether it's because MB is afraid of embarrassment compared to its chief M5 rival, which was the fastest 4 door sedan on the Nurburgring, until the RS4 came out.)
#68
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
Originally Posted by uownme
You are comparing a new cars price to used car prices. Im sure used rs4s are considerably less. Its a hell of a car, better than the c55 so quit trying to justify it by saying its overpriced.
![crazy](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/crazy.gif)
![crazy](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/crazy.gif)
#70
Originally Posted by SteveL
Well I'm willing to bet that a C63 and new M3 will be in the same price range with options and gas guzzler. I guess we can all agree that $70+K is too much too pay for a small sedan but that is not going to change the fact that is what they are/will be priced at. The fact that the RS4 shares very little with an A4 isn't going to change your mind suppose.
#71
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
Originally Posted by uownme
I think used cars are great buys. No doubt about that but you keep saying e55/rs6 which would be used priecs for $74k.
Plus I didn't say the RS4 is overpriced. I said it is a great car, limited edition and there are people willing to pay for the premium for limited edition cars. I said for the money the RS4 would not be my choice, I didn't say it was overpriced did I?
![Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif)
Last edited by FrankW; 07-04-2006 at 11:16 PM.
#72
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C43, SLK32, CLK63 Black Series
Originally Posted by 06E55
None the less, congrats on the rs4. I am interested on your thoughts of the car. My wife has an e46 m3 that is very nice and it handles great and revs like nothing I have been in. I must admit my cts v felt like it could keep up with the m3 in the twists no problem but seemed to lack in straigtline performance. My e55 is just stupid when going straight but if we hit the turns the wifes m3 is gone. Enjoy the car and keep me posted on your thoughts. I think it is a cool car that has some great things going for it.
I do love the E55. When I drove one it was quite a rush. I can only imagine what a modified one is like. I have a pretty heavily modified SLK32 with abour 420 hp/tq and it weighs 3200 lbs. However, it is pretty tame unless you step on the throttle but then it really takes off. I had someone in the other day and took off and they said it felt like take off in an airplane.
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#73
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C43, SLK32, CLK63 Black Series
Originally Posted by FrankW
IMO It is a limited edition car that's going to be short lived, so people do pay a premium for it. It's just not for me tho.
Btw, the seats are different in the US and European version because US cars require the passenger airbag sensor which is not available on the European seats. I do agree about the steering wheel. I don't know why they made it different.
Last edited by SteveL; 07-05-2006 at 02:31 PM.
#74
Super Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: California
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML350 '06
Here's a thought...
Can we agree that the engineers at Audi, BMW and MB are ALL capable of making a car that has great handling? Or any car manufacturer for that matter...even the engineers at Kia? That being said, I think these debates are pointless. Right up there with trying to debate whether one modified car is faster than another? It never ends.
My point is b/c technology is available to all of these car companies who have a lot of money, they make decisions based on priorities that feed their bottom line. What does the consumer want? The E55 is a prime example b/c horsepower costs a lot. Trust me...the gang at AMG is certainly capable of making a track car (i.e., CLK-DTM) but they know that MB's consumers want a smoother ride when purchasing an E55 b/c, yes, 90% (if not more) of people who buy this car will never take it to a track or discern if it has "great handling" or not. So these cars, Audi, BMW, AMG, as well as others, pretty much have different priorities is all.
That's my two cents.
Nick
Can we agree that the engineers at Audi, BMW and MB are ALL capable of making a car that has great handling? Or any car manufacturer for that matter...even the engineers at Kia? That being said, I think these debates are pointless. Right up there with trying to debate whether one modified car is faster than another? It never ends.
My point is b/c technology is available to all of these car companies who have a lot of money, they make decisions based on priorities that feed their bottom line. What does the consumer want? The E55 is a prime example b/c horsepower costs a lot. Trust me...the gang at AMG is certainly capable of making a track car (i.e., CLK-DTM) but they know that MB's consumers want a smoother ride when purchasing an E55 b/c, yes, 90% (if not more) of people who buy this car will never take it to a track or discern if it has "great handling" or not. So these cars, Audi, BMW, AMG, as well as others, pretty much have different priorities is all.
That's my two cents.
Nick
#75
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Cali (Ontario)
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
10 Posts
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...pageNumber=1#2
At the track the RS 4 proves its mettle, launching from zero to 60 in just 4.7 brain-cell-punishing seconds. The quarter-mile disappears in 13.2 seconds at 106.8 mph.
102 MPH seem a bit low... this is more like it.
At the track the RS 4 proves its mettle, launching from zero to 60 in just 4.7 brain-cell-punishing seconds. The quarter-mile disappears in 13.2 seconds at 106.8 mph.
102 MPH seem a bit low... this is more like it.