Vs Poll: Audi RS5 vs BMW M3 Coupe

[Zafiro]

why would manufactures bother claiming numbers then??

if you're going to follow the logic of "everything can happen" then anybody can out perform a veyron on foot then (everything can happen right..)

you can't prove no then other than just talk in the other hand number does prove the it really happened and most importantly some time in the real word

Carmakers likes to talk and there are people like you who like to read about numbers on a piece of paper. Ask yourself, why do people buy M3 and not a C63/RS5? if numbers on a piece of paper was the only thing that matters then no one would consider a M3.

A Veyron is superior, its a huge difference between a car with 1000 hp and car with 400hp. 50 hp between cars arent much difference, one mistake and the race is over. With a Veyron you can pretty much do many mistakes you want but the car will catch your opponent again.
Im not trying to prove anything Im just saying a number on paper doenst always match the reality. That's all Im saying. Now when you know this you dont need to argue about it anymore. You only need to accept my opinion.


Anyway , Im not going to discuss this anymore becuase in reality I dont care who is the quickest. My decisions are based on other things. If you like numbers on a paper then Im okey with it
See you hilalpro and have a nice weekend

 

[hilalpro]

Carmakers likes to talk and there are people like you who like to read about numbers on a piece of paper. Ask yourself, why do people buy M3 and not a C63/RS5? if numbers on a piece of paper was the only thing that matters then no one would consider a M3.

A Veyron is superior, its a huge difference between a car with 1000 hp and car with 400hp. 50 hp between cars arent much difference, one mistake and the race is over. With a Veyron you can pretty much do many mistakes you want but the car will catch your opponent again.
Im not trying to prove anything Im just saying a number on paper doenst always match the reality. That's all Im saying. Now when you know this you dont need to argue about it anymore. You only need to accept my opinion.


Anyway , Im not going to discuss this anymore becuase in reality I dont care who is the quickest. My decisions are based on other things. If you like numbers on a paper then Im okey with it
See you hilalpro and have a nice weekend

"if numbers on a piece of paper was the only thing that matters then no one would consider a M3."
maybe they just don't think twice.. this logic would go on the people that buy the pointless high hp petrol suvs too..

"Im just saying a number on paper doenst always match the reality."
"between cars arent much difference, one mistake and the race is over."
in 90% of cases it does and why would i leave 90% and go for 10% you gotta be smart so the higher the chance the more the car will be faster in reality!
maybe you can use a real life races channel like dragtimes.info or m5board on youtube.. and see what i mean..

"I dont care who is the quickest."
then why bothering your self.. my point is about the fastest car not about the all around better car!

"See you hilalpro and have a nice weekend "
you too.

 

[south]

rs5 1720 kg + 68 kg (that bmw adds over DIN) = 1788 kg
m3 dkg 1675kg

1788kg - 1675 kg = 113 kg

the audi would still have a better power to weight

*Hair-splitting mode on*

RS5: 1,725 kg + 68 kg (driver) + 7 kg (luggage, also added for EU weight) = 1800 kg
M3 DKG: 1,675 kg

1,800kg - 1,725kg = 125 kg

Power to weight:

DIN
RS5: 1,725kg / 450PS = 3.83 kg/PS
M3 DKG: 1,600kg / 420PS = 3.81 kg/PS

EU
RS5: 1,800kg / 450PS = 4.00 kg/PS
M3 DKG: 1,675kg / 420PS = 3.99 kg/PS

If anything, the M3 has a better power-to-weight ratio.

*Hair-splitting mode off*




Best regards,
south

 

[klier]

Atom splitting mode actually.

 

[Mockenrue]

But to answer your question; It's rather simple, Audi is not sporty like BMW, and not comfortable like MB. They lack any kind of genuine history and share engines and technology with the most basic VW models BMW and Mercedes....not so much Those brands are real. VW is real too, but it doesn't stir any emotion for me. But Audi is not even real, they are invented by VW from bankrupt old dinosaur companies nobody cared about being gone

This really, genuinely made me laugh out loud.

 

[klier]

Well, great. Making people laugh is good

 

[hilalpro]

*Hair-splitting mode on*

RS5: 1,725 kg + 68 kg (driver) + 7 kg (luggage, also added for EU weight) = 1800 kg
M3 DKG: 1,675 kg

1,800kg - 1,725kg = 125 kg

Power to weight:

DIN
RS5: 1,725kg / 450PS = 3.83 kg/PS
M3 DKG: 1,600kg / 420PS = 3.81 kg/PS

EU
RS5: 1,800kg / 450PS = 4.00 kg/PS
M3 DKG: 1,675kg / 420PS = 3.99 kg/PS

If anything, the M3 has a better power-to-weight ratio.

*Hair-splitting mode off*




Best regards,
south

*thmare alaynin on*
audi usual claim EU not DIN..
RS5: 1,725kg / 450PS = 3.83 kg/PS
M3 DKG: 1,675kg / 420PS = 3.99 kg/PS

the RS 5 has a better power-to-weight ratio.
just wait till audi put specs on website..

 

[klier]

Audi ALWAYS posts DIN figures, because it makes them look better. You're wrong there. And South is right with the correct numbers.

You see, the RS brand hasn't really progressed all that much.... They're equal to a regular M3 now. Equal in power that is, because the M3 will be the more nimble, more fun and more track oriented car obviously...

 

[south]

*thmare alaynin on*
audi usual claim EU not DIN..
RS5: 1,725kg / 450PS = 3.83 kg/PS
M3 DKG: 1,675kg / 420PS = 3.99 kg/PS

the RS 5 has a better power-to-weight ratio.
just wait till audi put specs on website..

They call it EU weight, but leave out said 75kg which makes it DIN. Have a look at the S5 to see how they state their weight. "Ohne Fahrer (75kg)" means "without driver (75 kg)". This is not only a wrong understanding of that 75kg (it's driver plus luggage), but also a misrepresentation of the EU weight standard.



Also notice the weight of the S5. It's impossible that the RS5 is only 10kg heavier than the S5.

I hope this clarifies these things a bit. The RS5 doesn't have a better P/W ratio.


Best regards,
south

 

[LaArtist]

How about the C63??

3.78kg/PS

But still not as fast as the rest..

So what does this discussion give us??.. the RS5 can still be faster if it has a worse ratio..

 

[klier]

They call it EU weight, but leave out said 75kg which makes it DIN. Have a look at the S5 to see how they state their weight. "Ohne Fahrer (75kg)" means "without driver (75 kg)". This is not only a wrong understanding of that 75kg (it's driver plus luggage), but also a misrepresentation of the EU weight standard.

But doesn't the EU weight need a 90% filled fuel talk as well? That would mean another 60 kg minimum....

 

[south]

How about the C63??

3.78kg/PS

But still not as fast as the rest..

So what does this discussion give us??.. the RS5 can still be faster if it has a worse ratio..

That's a good point IMO. P/W ratio is only one key to a good time around a race track, but there are others.

But doesn't the EU weight need a 90% filled fuel talk as well? That would mean another 60 kg minimum....

So does DIN. That's why the difference between EU and DIN standard always is 75kg, regardless the tank size.


Best regards,
south

 

[hilalpro]

Audi ALWAYS posts DIN figures, because it makes them look better. You're wrong there. And South is right with the correct numbers.

You see, the RS brand hasn't really progressed all that much.... They're equal to a regular M3 now. Equal in power that is, because the M3 will be the more nimble, more fun and more track oriented car obviously...

no im not but you and South are wrong he mentioned the rs5 has 1720kg at first i saw yesterday the s5 configurator but you can't say the rs5 weight 1800 kg because audi claimed 1725 kg with no clearance if Eu or DIN.. so like i said wait for the site specs.

 

[hilalpro]

How about the C63??

3.78kg/PS

But still not as fast as the rest..

So what does this discussion give us??.. the RS5 can still be faster if it has a worse ratio..

strait line = c63 amg drive the rest out of sight (0-200 km/h 14.0 vs 15.2) that means more than 10 cars between them!

the c63 ppp has p/w of 3.63kg/ps
and also will leave them behind ~2 second at 200km/h

 

[Mr Robert]

Generally rwd cars are more fun to drive so i assume bmw is already ahead for that.

In my book, RWD is an advantage. It is bot the most efficient layout but I think it is the most fun and I don't mind arriving at B 2 seconds later wgen travelling from my stay at A, as long as the drive puts a smile on my lips...

 

[hilalpro]

In my book, RWD is an advantage. It is bot the most efficient layout but I think it is the most fun and I don't mind arriving at B 2 seconds later wgen travelling from my stay at A, as long as the drive puts a smile on my lips...

In my book a lighter rwd car is an advantage but 2 seconds that will make you uncomfortable in a race and also can save your life in a late normal road overtaking..

 

[south]

no im not but you and South are wrong he mentioned the rs5 has 1720kg at first i saw yesterday the s5 configurator but you can't say the rs5 weight 1800 kg because audi claimed 1725 kg with no clearance if Eu or DIN.. so like i said wait for the site specs.

Do you have anything to prove your bold claim or are you just disagreeing?


Best regards,
south

 

[hilalpro]

Do you have anything to prove your bold claim or are you just disagreeing?


Best regards,
south

http://www.germancarforum.com/a5-s5-rs5/32380-official-audi-rs5-4.html#post445446

any way wait for them if they gonna put 1725 kg on the site the way they did with s5 then m3 has the better p/w ratio.. but hey you can't compare an rwd car p/w r to an awd car p/w r that's an another pointless thing to do.

 

[south]

http://www.germancarforum.com/a5-s5-rs5/32380-official-audi-rs5-4.html#post445446

any way wait for them if they gonna put 1725 kg on the site the way they did with s5 then m3 has the better p/w ratio.. but hey you can't compare an rwd car p/w r to an awd car p/w r that's an another pointless thing to do.

That's not what I meant. I know that I used 1,720 kg first by mistake in that post, but we all agree on the 1,725kg, right?
I asked if you have any proof for the claim that these 1,725kg stated for the RS5 are EU weight including driver and luggage. Do you?

Oh, and it was you who started with the p/w ratio being better for the RS5. Why did you do that if it's that pointless?


Best regards,
south

 

[hilalpro]

That's not what I meant. I know that I used 1,720 kg first by mistake in that post, but we all agree on the 1,725kg, right?
I asked if you have any proof for the claim that these 1,725kg stated for the RS5 are EU weight including driver and luggage. Do you?

Oh, and it was you who started with the p/w ratio being better for the RS5. Why did you do that if it's that pointless?


Best regards,
south

when did i mentioned that the p/w ratio being better for the RS5??

i only talked about the rs5 has the better power to weight based on your bold 1720kg.. but bieng better for or not its your claim!

so again pointless like i motioned...