Discussion in 'Internal Combustion' started by Soup, Jun 30, 2012.
AZ: Audi S4 vs BMW 335i
Yet another win for the great S4.
But that's gotta be the slowest 0-200 time achieved in any test.
That's probably one of the fastest 0-200 kph time for the S4 - no surprises, it is AutoZeitung...
AutoZeitung: 18,3 s
Sport Auto: 18,5 s
AutoBild Sportscars: 18,7 s
AutoBild: 19,3 s
Another standard 335i against a full blown S4???
If anything, a standard Bimmer being so close to a special Audi really says enough
My bad. Mixed up the times with the RS5 :/
What confuses me is why there's never a consistency on what the S model really competes against. One second its the E63/M5 for the S6, and its the 335i for the S4. I do realize 335 is more of a "true" competitor, but it just seems like magazines can choose which models the S models are up against.
the S6 was tested against the M/AMG only for the reason that there is no current RS6.
The S competes with the M performance BMW. M135i vs upcoming S3 for example.
Here a simple explanation:
First it was
BMW vs. Audi
BMW M vs. Audi S
But Audi S was not enough good for BMW M so they decided to create Audi RS
BMW M vs. Audi RS
This did that
Audi S vs. BMW
So BMW decided to do this to compete
Audi S vs. BMW M Performance
But again, according to Deckhook, BMW M Performance is to good for Audi S, the S3 has no chance against the M135i. So back as before
Audi S vs. BMW
To make it simple Audi is so bad that they can't compete against BMW and this is how it looks like:
BMW M > Audi RS > BMW M Performance > Audi S > BMW > Audi
Not to forget this:
BMW M CSL > BMW M GTS > BMW M CRT > BMW M
18.3s seems to be on the money, quickest yes but definitely not too quick as to raise eyebrows. As for Klier's comment, you really need to widen your sight from purely Germany because there are other markets were price between these two isn't that great, though I do concede it should be M/Sport and not Sport being used but if the 335i had been remotely close to the S4 in this test then it should have won due to the huge price advantage, afterall is this not the reason why the 6GC isn't winning it's comparison test. Is it remotely possible that the 335i isn't anywhere near as good as the S4?
Levi is seem you left AMG out of the mix.
Do we really need the M135i vs S3 mentioned in every single thread?
Correct. I ignored the rest of your post, since it was nonsense.
When the M335i is gonna be introduced?
Slow down brother. You have to get a F30 with performance parts first before the launch of M335i
LOL. I was kidding. It was not really serious.
I don't agree that M, M-Performance/BMW is necessarily better than RS/S/Audi, just different, it's like saying the GT3 is better than the GT-R. Each have their pros and cons, fans and haters.
Actually yes. The RS5 was aimed to be better than the M3, yes the M3 and not the IS-F or C AMG. It was not a different approach, it had to be the enxt benchmark. But it failed. Glad the RS5 has other pros, like styling (in/out), AWD, quality otherwise it would really be a huge fail.
I wasn't meaning one model only but each brand as a whole, you say the RS5 failed to best the M3 but is that comment not about driving pleasure rather than actual performance stats. It's swings and roundabouts from model to model.
Notice that Audi however good it may be still consumes 20% more fuel than BMW , it also weighs far more than the younger competitior. Audi has to work harder to reduce fuel consumption compared to BMW.
^Thats the price you pay when driving all four wheels instead of just two.
That's the only a part of it. We gotta wait for the first reviews, but 335i xDrive is still about 100kg lighter and consumes less than the S4.
^You do understand the difference between turbo and supercharger, of course it will use a bit more fuel since its mechanically driven, plus it's producing more hp and torque. Though this advantage will only be on loan to the F30 until 2014 when the B9 comes out, leaner, lighter and more fuel efficient.