A4/S4/RS4 [Official] 2013 Audi RS4 B8

[Sunny]

See, what I mean? People only scratch the surface and judge things by what they see rather than what they ought to understand. I give up. There's no point in trying to enlighten people on this forum anymore. I'm off to bed. G'night.

No shit!

 

[Gianclaudio]

See, what I mean? People only scratch the surface and judge things by what they see rather than what they ought to understand. I give up. There's no point in trying to enlighten people on this forum anymore. I'm off to bed. G'night.

Sorry Martin , my bad, I'm such an ignorant asshö1e. I'll never comment again if A is nicer than B, specially if I don't take count of function and engineering.

I'll go now to the Huayra thread and bitchslap whoever says the front looks like a catfish, they can't critict, they must understand is about function and active aereodynamics.

We all herectics, we can't judge aesthetics and must be quiet.

Regards.

PS: I love the Huayra, function or not.

 

[mini_cooper4]

Guys going a bit to harsh, don't you ?
As english is not my native language too I can understand that Gian's mistake wasn't technical but caused of the lack of language knowledge.
I don't see a reason for digging so much and making it a problem which it really isn't

 

[Betty Swollocks]

I have always wondered why is this? Do RS cars not go out when it is foggy?

Front fog lights are completely irrelevant anyway, hence not being mandated by law. And people don't even know how to use them, and just switch them on whilst also leaving the normal dipped lights on, and therefore all they see is glare reflecting off the mist. Front fog lights, when used correctly (i.e. side lights only on combined with fog lights) can help a bit, but fog is rarely bad enough for them to make much difference. And rarely is fog bad enough that normal rear lights are not sufficient to be seen. Switching rear fog lights on should only be undertaken when visibility is extremely bad, in which case I wouldn't advise even driving, and NOT when it's slightly misty or raining, which seems to happen at the slightest hint of rain in Belgium thus all you see is a bright red glare. This is one of my biggest annoyances about other drivers. Inappropriate use of rear fog lights. A few months ago I almost crashed into the back of someone who had come to a stop because they had stuck their rear fog lights on when it wasn't necessary, and it therefore made their brake lights almost indistinguishable.

EDIT: Martin, you know most of us read your posts with the highest of interest. So you better stay up a little longer and post some more. It's only 9.30 for crying out loud

Actually, when you made that post it was 2230 in South Africa, which is more than late enough. Martin needs his beauty sleep.

P.S. It's 0710 on Thursday morning here in Tokyo. Been up four hours already. Jet lag is a pain.

 

[klier]

Actually, when you made that post it was 2230 in South Africa, which is more than late enough. Martin needs his beauty sleep.

P.S. It's 0710 on Thursday morning here in Tokyo. Been up four hours already. Jet lag is a pain.

Could have sworn we were in the same time zone...oh well

And WOW at your travels around the world.....I swear...you could have gotten that R8 for free if Airmiles were accepted

 

[Betty Swollocks]

Could have sworn we were in the same time zone...oh well

The Netherlands is UTC+1, and South Africa is UTC+2. However, South Africa doesn't observe daylight saving time (although they used to), therefore between the last weekend in March and the last weekend in October, when the Netherlands observes summer daylight saving time and moves it's clocks forward one hour, they are indeed both the same time. They are not the same "time zone" though.

And WOW at your travels around the world.....I swear...you could have gotten that R8 for free if Airmiles were accepted

Indeed. I keep meaning to post my thoughts on the cars I drive along the way.

I was in Hawaii three days ago, where I drove a 5 cylinder VW Jetta (170PS) for the first time. Very impressed by the engine actually. Very impressed.

And I was in Los Angeles a week ago where I had a MB GL450. God that thing is huge. But, I was literally the first person to drive it according to Hertz and it only had 8 miles on the clock! Took a few pictures and will post them in the MB forum at some point.

Back to Europe Friday morning though, where I'm arriving into Frankfurt and picking up a hire car and then driving to the North of England for two days. Will be something like a 5 Series or E Class I guess. Then back to Holland on Monday where I'll have to make do with the R8.

Anyway, sorry for the off-topic posts.

Regards the RS 4. Looks OK but already looks a bit old fashioned. Why Audi wait so long to release the RS versions I do not know.

 

[Tumbo]

Regards the RS 4. Looks OK but already looks a bit old fashioned. Why Audi wait so long to release the RS versions I do not know.

Don't agree here. They did the same with the B7. The RS4 came with the facelift of the A4 back then aswell.
The RS4 may lack the agressiviness of the B7, and the engine could do more magic, but one thing it does not look like, is old fashioned. IMO of course.

 

[Betty Swollocks]

Don't agree here. They did the same with the B7. The RS4 came with the facelift of the A4 back then aswell.

This is the point I'm making. When they wait until after the facelift the design is already starting to look "old" because the car has already become so ubiquitous.

 

[330CIZHP]

I like how it looks. However, I would say sedan would have made more sense. Great to see they stuck with the V8 and did not end up switching it to a V6T. The coupe already is a heavy car. The sedan would have been marginally heavier, but the estate definitely must be approaching close to M5 weight, I reckon.

 

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

It's always enlightening to read Martin's posts. He's so knowledgeable.

 

[martinbo]

Sorry Martin , my bad, I'm such an ignorant asshö1e. I'll never comment again if A is nicer than B, specially if I don't take count of function and engineering.

No need to be patronising Gianclaudio. I actually enjoy your posts/opinion and feel that you can contribute meaningfully to this forum.

Of course you can say that the RS4's engine bay looks better than the M3's. It does. However, when one uses words like "cover" it implies a piece of plastic with no other function other than to aesthetically improve an engine bay by hiding untidy bit makers don't want you to see. The new F10 M5 is a classic example of this interestingly where a plastic cover has been placed over the hot-side inside turbos. BMW will say that this also acts as a heat sheild but its primary function is to hide the guts of the thing and make the engine bay look pretty.

In the case of the M3 the term "cover" garners unwarranted criticism for the wrong reasons. That's why I point the error out: the term "cover" in plain English is technically incorrect - language differences regardless.

 

[Deckhook]

^ The air box of the M3 does cover the engine so technically he was correct in calling it a cover. Regardless he is 100% correct in saying the RS4 engine bay looks aesthetically pleasing compared to the M3 or most other engine bays.

 

[klier]

^ The air box of the M3 does cover the engine so technically he was correct in calling it a cover. Regardless he is 100% correct in saying the RS4 engine bay looks aesthetically pleasing compared to the M3 or most other engine bays.

No, because the air box is PART OF THE ENGINE, you can actually see the whole engine on the BMW.

See what I did there?

100% right on something completely subjective. Amazing (the RS4 engine bay does look better than the M3's, though )

So back to the RS4......does anyone know the weight already?

 

[Mr Robert]

Weight will be crucial, but as this is Audi, I think I shouldn't be worried.

 

[Tumbo]

I wonder, how did they manage to make the RS4 B7 so good, and not pulling of the same with the RS5?
I'm afraid that the RS4 B8 will have some of RS5's letdowns.
On the other hand, the S4 B8 sedan has got some fantastic reviews!

 

[klier]

Weight will be crucial, but as this is Audi, I think I shouldn't be worried.

I am, because the RS5 turned out to be quite a pig. And I very much doubt an A4 Avant weighs less than an A5 coupe.

 

[martinbo]

^ The air box of the M3 does cover the engine so technically he was correct in calling it a cover.

No BobfootieThomasBendoverTheDriverDeckhook. Technically is it not a cover. What is it with you and your idiotic manner of trying to contradict and refute everything I say? Just because it happens to conceal some of the engine does not make it a cover. A cover is a cover by virtue of its purpose: that's to cover something. This is not the purpose of the plenum. It's like saying a tyre's a cover because it covers the rim. Go open the bonnet (or should that be cover) of your wife's GTI. Look at the big flat piece of plastic: technically that is a cover.

Think man.

 

[Mr Robert]

I am, because the RS5 turned out to be quite a pig. And I very much doubt an A4 Avant weighs less than an A5 coupe.

But then again, expectations will differ between a coupe and a wagon.

Just because it happens to conceal some of the engine does not make it a cover. A cover is a cover by virtue of its purpose: that's to cover something. This is not the purpose of the plenum.

I think that about covers it.

 

[Deckhook]

Technically is it not a cover. What is it with you and your idiotic manner of trying to contradict and refute everything I say?

Calm yourself down Martin, I wasn't trying to contradict you par se, all I was suggesting that the fact it covers the engine it's understandable to call it a cover as he basically said what he seen.

Just because it happens to conceal some of the engine does not make it a cover. A cover is a cover by virtue of its purpose: that's to cover something. This is not the purpose of the plenum. It's like saying a tyre's a cover because it covers the rim. Go open the bonnet (or should that be cover) of your wife's GTI. Look at the big flat piece of plastic: technically that is a cover.

Think man.

A tyre is a tyre but a wheel trim now that's a cover but if you want to be literal then look up a dictionary for the meaning of cover and it says Put something such as a cloth or lid on top of or in front of (something) in order to protect or conceal it so at no point does it state something can't serve another purpose and if you think about it the M3's air box does potect and conceal the engine so calling it a cover is literally what it is does as well as it's intended purpose.

 

[eryk03]

I am, because the RS5 turned out to be quite a pig. And I very much doubt an A4 Avant weighs less than an A5 coupe.

There will be no as fat pig as M6 coupe... For sure.