which one was the better car with better overall performance
was audi more fun to drive than merc?
4wd kills some of the fun because of it's extra weight.

i know audi had Bi-turbo engine which could be tuned into more HP.

which one was faster of these cars when they were original factory cars?
european S4 had 265 hp
european C43 had 306hp

did C43 have better build quality and being more reliable than S4 back in 98-99?

 

The B5 S4 has a HUGE tuning market now and can be made VERY fast. So out of those 2 now, owning a clean example of a B5 is the better way to get a very nice performer.

 

Disagree. As an owner of two B5 S4's they get boring. Even with the stick and +2 wheels/tires and a 93octane tune eco.... I think my C43 is more fun. Ive only +1 wheels tires and straight pipes.
Also you cant take the understeer out (unless you disconnect the front wheels)...on the track the quattros still feel slower in the turns than power oversteering the C43..at least it feels so ;-)

But there are certainly more S4s around.....

 

I'd be really, really hard to convince that a late 90's Audi had build quality anywhere near as good as any mercedes, especially the early hand-made AMG models like a C43.

 

When new, the B5 S4 was quicker than the C43 from 0-60 and through the quarter mile in the Car and Driver comparo that I have. They're different enough that it is really just about what is important to you: V8 or V6, RWD or AWD, auto or stick, replace turbos or replace transmission

 

Whats the weight and torque spec of the audi?

Theres no way it makes up that power gap just because its able to "shift better".

Four wheel drive will be an advantage of the line but who cares.....what you want from the car is linear power and fun factor when cruising. I cant see a 260php audi having thaf

I havent driven that audi but it is true that there is a much bigger tuners market for those cars but stock for stock i can guarantee that the c43 will be a more enjoyable drive. If you are more into racing and all that then go get your self the audi and for the price of getting a 5.4 swap you might be able to bring it to the spec of a stock c43

 

Stage 3 B5 S4s can be tons of fun. That is the problem though, you have to bring them to stage 3. Once at that level and beyond there i no real comparison for a fun sedan of that time. I mean The AWD allows for a lot more throttle in turns and earlier throttle input at the apex etc. But as the above person stated it all depends on what you want + how much moddability you want in a car. Some people love tinkering and making the cars better/faster etc and the options are endless with the b5 s4. Especially now with E85 tunes.

 

I prefer the E36 M3

 

And I prefer my old 1970 911E with webbers, S motor, +3 wheels tires. But alas in a moment of stupidity i sold it..the brake cables all rotted..the wife promising I couldh ave any car i wanted. I chose a new TT 225hp. duh.

E36 M3 costs alot more than a C43!!. I looked around for a 2nd car i could take to the track for 5+ years. I did consider B5 S4s and M3's. even other things I wont admit. But my test drive of the C43 had me sold. I paid only $3K with 18" monoblocks and new rubber. The acceleration from 80 to 120 is just much much better than my stage 2 S4 ( and the 911 of course...Id be pissing my pants in the 911 at 120...)

My daily driver is a B5 A4 stage 1. 5spd stick. Its fine and takes me skiing..and the kids dont drive stick ;-)

 

the european M3's 98 - 99, version e36 had 320hp stock.
the c43 couldn't come near this car?

the audi s4 had 265 HP and 400NM stock

reading car magazines, tests of the 3 cars, the c43 seems like have finished last in all tests?

 

That would be the consensus from the articles that I have from that time. The C43 was criticized as being more like an American muscle car than a German sports sedan. Obviously, we each have our own preferences. I would enjoy owning all three, but the Audi is probably 3rd in my personal evaluation. The C43 and M3 are close to tied up for me and would really depend on my mood. I really really enjoyed my trip down the East Coast in an E36 M3. My dad has an E46 M3 and that is a lot more peaky. The US spec E36 has more push down low. But they are surprisingly similar to drive in terms of how they feel control wise.

 

yes, every single review I've ever read put the C43 in last place, and that's where it belonged when it came to most performance metrics. However, AMG has only recently been trying to actually compete with the BMW M cars or Audi R/S cars. For many years, AMG was its own unique thing so it wasn't exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. Make a proper 2 door version of the C43 with a proper manual transmission and then compare it to an M3.

When someone says "BMW M3" you immediately imagine a coupe with a manual gearbox and a screaming 6 cylinder winding around turns. Because that's what it is. Up until the last few years, when someone says "AMG" you picture a big sedan with a growling V8 that hits like a sledgehammer but is numb in the turns.

however, the C43 got some really unfair press in other areas. it was banged on for its price and presumed bad reliability. It was expensive because of the chief factor the other 2 did not have: it was hand made. And, history has shown the "quality" issues to be 100% completely false. Have you ever seen a C43 or any early AMG with a completely destroyed interior? Have you ever seen a late 90's BMW or Audi that didn't have a crap, faded, paint-peeling interior? I love those old Audi's and BMW's but in the last couple years I actually looked into finding one as my "fun, other german" car but any M3 for less than $10k is a completely ragged out piece of **** that needs a motor rebuild and completely new interior. All the expensive ones are literally show-cars that have never seen wide open throttle. Meanwhile you can find totally clean C43's for less than 5k if you look. Even high mile examples are in remarkably good condition.

They were entirely different beasts. The Audi was an AWD twin turbo, the M3 was a stick shift coupe, and the C43 was a RWD automatic v8 sedan. They're technically in the same segment, but I don't think any of them were competing for each other's customers. M owners know what they're getting, and so do AMG owners. I like the M's, but I'm too frugal to justify needing the entire top end of my engine needing a rebuild/replacement every 150k miles, and new seats, switches, shifters, carpet, and dash panels every 200k.

 

All I have to say is that people are not aware how much their adaptive tranny is bottlenecking their c43.

Try properly resetting the transmission then go do some runs. Its a night and day



Dont dismiss this fact