A5/S5/RS5 AMS - Audi RS5 TEST

[DeDe]

First test of the new RS5. Final rating: 5/5 stars.

• Engine: V8, 450 hp, 430 Nm
• Gearbox: 7-speed-double-clutch (with Launch Control)
• Brakes: ceramic
• Tyres: Pirelli P Zero

• Weight: 1780 kg
• Vmax.: 250 km/h (limited)

• 0-50 km/h in 1,7 s
• 0-100 km/h in 4,5 s (M3 DKG: 4,6 s)
• 0-160 km/h in 10,1 s
• 0-200 km/h in 16,1 s (M3 DKG: 16,0 s)
• 400 metres: 12,7 s (179 km/h)

• Flexibility (80-120 km/h): 4,4 s/6,1 s/8,1 s/10,6 s (4th/5th/6th/7th gear)
• 18 m slalom: 66,5 km/h
• 110 m evasive test: 139,4 km/h
• Braking distance (100-0 km/h): 33,3 m/33,4 m (cold/warm)

• Basic price: €77.700,-
• Price as tested: €102.271,-

Scans will come tomorrow.

 

[Zafiro]

€102.271,- Gulp lots of cash!

 

[Sunny]

DeDe, not sure where you got those times for M3. Most 0-200 times I have seen for M3 DCT are sub 16 and even low 15s. Even AMS test with a E90 with manual was 16 flat. http://www.germancarforum.com/internal-combustion/23674-ams-bmw-m3-e90-vs-mercedes-c63-amg.html. And AutoBild in 15.2 secs with E92 M3 with DCT. http://www.germancarforum.com/internal-combustion/24138-autobild-m3-manual-vs-m3-dct.html.

Anyway I guess till the cars are tested side by side, I doubt you can tell which is faster.

ps. RS5's long ass ratios are definitely hurting it's in gear acceleration. 80-120, M3 DCT in 6th is almost as fast at RS5 in 5th and almost 2 secs faster than RS5 in same gear (6.3 vs 8.1).

 

[Tarek]

Very expensive car,feels like C63 and M3 money.

 

[footie]

DeDe, not sure where you got those times for M3. Most 0-200 times I have seen for M3 DCT are sub 16 and even low 15s. Even AMS test with a E90 with manual was 16 flat. http://www.germancarforum.com/internal-combustion/23674-ams-bmw-m3-e90-vs-mercedes-c63-amg.html. And AutoBild in 15.2 secs with E92 M3 with DCT. http://www.germancarforum.com/internal-combustion/24138-autobild-m3-manual-vs-m3-dct.html.

Anyway I guess till the cars are tested side by side, I doubt you can tell which is faster.

ps. RS5's long ass ratios are definitely hurting it's in gear acceleration. 80-120, M3 DCT in 6th is almost as fast at RS5 in 5th and almost 2 secs faster than RS5 in same gear (6.3 vs 8.1).

No doubt the gearing is playing it's part in the in-gear times of it's taller gears but this was by design because economy had to good to justify the reason for not going with an FI unit.

As for the actual acceleration figures, I can only assume they chose the 16.6s of the M3 because that was the figures AMS got from it and not the best figures regardless of magazine. Likewise I think you will find that the 16.1s is well below the best you will see for an RS5. In any case they seemed to like the car enough to give it 5 out of 5.

 

[Mr Robert]

The times are as expected and given a few more tests we will find out how representative the 16.1 is. I think we can safely say that 16.6 is not representative for the M3.

On a more interesting note. Look at that price! €102,271!

 

[Sunny]

No doubt the gearing is playing it's part in the in-gear times of it's taller gears but this was by design because economy had to good to justify the reason for not going with an FI unit.

Yea, I realize the tall ratios are a design decision (what else can it be?), but a wrong one in this class of cars. The economy will make for interesting blurb in the marketing literature, but the (relatively) lethargic in gear acceleration is gong to hurt in real life.

I can only assume they chose the 16.6s of the M3 because that was the figures AMS got from it

No, AMS got 16.0 secs from M3 with DCT.

 

[DeDe]

DeDe, not sure where you got those times for M3.

AutoBild Sportscars.

 

[Sunny]

AutoBild Sportscars.

But I thought Autobild got 15.2, at least that is what this thread says. May be they did another test.

 

[DeDe]

But I thought Autobild got 15.2, at least that is what this thread says. May be they did another test.

That was another test. My source's come from a comparison test between the M3 DKG and the Rieger-335i. - Vergleich BMW M3 gegen Rieger 335i - Rieger 335i putzt BMW M3 - Sportscars - autobild.de

 

[Zafiro]

It only shows its impossible to compare acceleration times unless its done in the same conditions. Whatever the result is going to be, M3 and RS5 is going to be close in terms of acceleration.

 

[Merc1]

It is unfortunate that Audis need way more power just to equal the performance of their rivals. The RS5 should outdo the M3 in performance, especially for such a price difference.


M

 

[footie]

Ok, I think we are all in agreement that the two cars need to be tested side by side to get a truer reflection of the performance differences between them. Though I doubt too many people buy either of these cars purely on how quick they reach 60mph or any other acceleration discipline, or should I say it's only one of many reasons for buying one.

 

[DeDe]

Ok, I think we are all in agreement that the two cars need to be tested side by side to get a truer reflection of the performance differences between them.

There will be a comparison between M3 and RS5 in the next issue of Sport Auto. I will post the results and scans.

 

[Mr Robert]

Ok, I think we are all in agreement that the two cars need to be tested side by side to get a truer reflection of the performance differences between them. Though I doubt too many people buy either of these cars purely on how quick they reach 60mph or any other acceleration discipline, or should I say it's only one of many reasons for buying one.

Exactly. 0-100 km/h is probably the least interesting of the common diciplines. I like 50-200 km/h much more as it is more relevant in how the car performs under driving.

That said, driver involvement, feel and such things are far more important.

 

[Sunny]

Exactly. 0-100 km/h is probably the least interesting of the common diciplines. I like 50-200 km/h much more as it is more relevant in how the car performs under driving.

That said, driver involvement, feel and such things are far more important.

Talking about, in gear acceleration, just realized how much the super tall gears are hurting the RS5, in 80kmph-120kmph, it is slower than a 535 in 5th, 6th and 7th gear and hardly any faster even in 4th (4.5/5.7/7.4/9.8 for 535 vs 4,4 s/6.1/8,1 s/10,6 for RS5). I bet even S4 has better in gear acceleration. All this compromise, just to claim some fuel efficiency figure in a brochure than no one will ever get in real life.

 

[chonkoa]

The times are as expected and given a few more tests we will find out how representative the 16.1 is. I think we can safely say that 16.6 is not representative for the M3.

On a more interesting note. Look at that price! €102,271!

They probably tested a fully loaded RS5.

 

[Iamnotme]

On a more interesting note. Look at that price! €102,271!

LOL! That's less than the RS5's base price in my country!

 

[Mr Robert]

Yeah, probably almost fully loaded. There are a few really pricy options for the RS5, some of which will be opted for by a lot of buyers.

LOL! That's less than the RS5's base price in my country!

To add some relevance to the figure one could check what other models are available at that price, because it is rather steep compared to good a spec C63 or M3.

 

[footie]

I'm pretty confident that you will see a few exciting times from the RS5. The spec will play it's part in those figures but I don't think they are that bad considering it's already similar to that of an M3 DCT.