Vs Top Gear: BMW E92 M3 ZCP vs Audi RS5

[warot]

The two might compete in the same arena but they go about this similar performance in an entirely different way and because of this they appeal to completely different customers. When someone says the M3 is better .... why, what makes it better to one people makes it less appealing to another, there's really no point of reference to compare these two because their respective drive systems determine how they behave and in this they couldn't be more different.

Buy your M3 or RS5, which either makes you happy but don't mock someone else for having a different preference to your own.

I'm sorry but that makes no sense.
First of all, if you go by the Top Gear test, they set out to the best SPORTS saloon. What else would it be other than lap times and driving pleasure?

Secondly, these 2 cars absolutely compete against each other. Top of the line 3 Series vs top of the line A5, period. It's like saying you can't compare a Rolls Royce vs Bentley because they have different philosophies. So we can't compare an A8 to a 7er either?

The odd thing South is that if lap times are the most important thing it's the RS5 that is generally quicker on the day. On this occasion it wasn't the case but then again this isn't a standard M3 with which the RS5 was design to beat.

Comical to you maybe but then I wouldn't expect anything different.

P.S.
Re-read what I said, when two cars are design to behave differently it's all but impossible to compare with any certainty other than performance measurements and in this the differences are small, it's like saying Turner was a better artist than Constable because he painter boats.

You are making it sound like the ZCP shaves a big chunk of time, which we all know it doesn't. Whether the M3 had the competition package or not, the RS5 would not have won on that test track.

 

[Sunny]

We need to keep this test in perspective, yes the M3 was quicker but it's not always the case and when you actually look at the occasions when both were compared together on the same day with the same driver the differences are extremely small.

Hockenheim Short -Sportauto
RS5 1:15.30 vs 1:14.20 M3 M-DCT

Sachsenring - Autobild
RS5 1:40.81 vs 1:40.67 M3 M-DCT

Anglesey National - AutoExpress
RS5 1:03.80 vs 1:03.90 M3 M-DCT

Millbrook Alpine Hill Route - Autocar
RS5 1:50.65 vs 1:50.90 M3 M-DCT

Haute Saintonge - automoto fr.
RS5 1:04.07 vs 1:04.30 M3 M-DCT

I'm not sure which of any of these were the M3 with Competition Pack but it does show that overall these two cars are very close in ability if not the way they go about achieving these results. Buy the car that appeals to you.

You missed Hockenheim times by AMS.
BMW M3 ZCP -1.14,0 min
Audi RS5 -1.15,4 min
M3 was 1.4 secs faster.
http://www.germancarforum.com/internal-combustion/34173-ams-audi-rs5-vs-bmw-m3-dkg-alpina-b3-biturbo-mercedes-benz-c63-amg-ppp.html

Also Zwartkops. M3 - 1.16.7, RS5 - 1.18.290. Again, M3 was a massive 1.6 secs faster.
http://www.germancarforum.com/internal-combustion/36614-2011-performance-shootout.html

 

[chonkoa]

Not what I am saying at all. Compare them if you wish but to say one is better than another based on which driving style you preference isn't true for everyone.

You prefer what you like but not everyone has to agree.

Then that defeats the entire purpose of a comparison test isn't it.
If I am not mistaken, you compare to seek out advantages and disadvantage of A over B; based on a set of metrics that in technical terms eliminates certain variables to fair bit of an extent.
In the end we can OBJECTIVELY say A(B) performs better than B(A) based on the said metrics.

 

[Mr Robert]

Yeah, that's right, if you buy cars with your calculator and yardstick... instead of your heart and seat-of-pants.

 

[footie]

I'm sorry but that makes no sense.
First of all, if you go by the Top Gear test, they set out to the best SPORTS saloon. What else would it be other than lap times and driving pleasure?

Totally missing my point, preferences are subjective, the only thing that isn't is cold hard data. Example: I prefer the driving style of the RS5 because it's awd, you might prefer the driving style of the M3 because it's rwd, which is better and who is right? Answer is neither of us.

Secondly, these 2 cars absolutely compete against each other. Top of the line 3 Series vs top of the line A5, period. It's like saying you can't compare a Rolls Royce vs Bentley because they have different philosophies. So we can't compare an A8 to a 7er either?

I haven't a problem comparing them, I have a problem with the suggestion that one or the other is better. These cars are so different in driving style as to appeal to entirely different people and it shows with the differences in opinion on this very thread.

You are making it sound like the ZCP shaves a big chunk of time, which we all know it doesn't. Whether the M3 had the competition package or not, the RS5 would not have won on that test track.

Unfortunately I don't know whether the two M3s have been compared side by side as yet but when they do I reckon there will be a difference in performance, otherwise BMW has pulled off the best marketing trick in the business in getting loyal customers to part with the thick end of 7% of the car's overall value for a performance enhancement that has no benefit what so ever. Frankly I don't buy it, there is a benefit and

You missed Hockenheim times by AMS.
BMW M3 ZCP -1.14,0 min
Audi RS5 -1.15,4 min
M3 was 1.4 secs faster.
http://www.germancarforum.com/inter...ina-b3-biturbo-mercedes-benz-c63-amg-ppp.html

Also Zwartkops. M3 - 1.16.7, RS5 - 1.18.290. Again, M3 was a massive 1.6 secs faster.
http://www.germancarforum.com/internal-combustion/36614-2011-performance-shootout.html

Thanks for this additional info, added to the other single day tests it evens things up, possible even in favour for the M3 but the point remains that these two cars are closely matched in overall performance and in the UK where I am from their respective prices are also evenly matched too.

Then that defeats the entire purpose of a comparison test isn't it.
If I am not mistaken, you compare to seek out advantages and disadvantage of A over B; based on a set of metrics that in technical terms eliminates certain variables to fair bit of an extent.
In the end we can OBJECTIVELY say A(B) performs better than B(A) based on the said metrics.

Total right, measurable differences are the sole comparison that can be made between cars because everything else is subjective, be that driving style, handling, comfort, interior & exterior design, all of these are preferences that not everyone will agree on.

 

[DeDe]

According to AutoBild Sportscars the M3 DKG with Competition Package is only 0.2 seconds faster around the Sachsenring than a stock M3 DKG... (1.40,7 vs. 1.40,9 min)

 

[coolraoul]

How people can still take Top Gear seriously amazes me.

I love that show just like I love a good film.
Doesn't mean all that goes on a cinema screen is true life...

Top Gear is a comedy show.
Which happens to deal with cars.
Nothing to take seriously here, be it pictures of forced understeering on an RS5 or a track time...

 

[Human]

How people can still take Top Gear seriously amazes me.

I love that show just like I love a good film.
Doesn't mean all that goes on a cinema screen is true life...

Top Gear is a comedy show.
Which happens to deal with cars.
Nothing to take seriously here, be it pictures of forced understeering on an RS5 or a track time...

ALL true!
And everyone should know this by now. Indeed a Great show! Great entertainment! And even greater comedy!

 

[footie]

You realise that Top Gear tested an M3 before and it clocked a 1:25.3? So much for the RS5 beating a standard M3, even considering the track conditions. Speaking of which, didn't you base previous discussions on your point of the RS5 being the faster car whenever the conditions aren't perfect? Clearly didn't hold true here.

I can't deny that on this occasion the M3 bested the RS5 in less than ideal conditions, but neither can you deny that on other occasions the M3 isn't always the quicker of the two.

Also, don't give me the fanboy rubbish. I'm not the one predicting any car coming from brand A beating any car coming from brand B, just to then explain why the test was set up, unfair, the other car was a ringer, or the cars shouldn't be compared at all.


Best regards,
south

As for what I said prior to the RS5 being released, that opinion was based of what information I had at the time, clearly there is guess work when somethings are unknown, even you know that. Had I known that the RS5 would end up 150kg heavier than the M3 I wouldn't have been so sure about everything but that how this game works, some of it is fact and some is filling in the holes and making a guess based on experience.

P.S.
How can anyone state a car is better than another based on which one they prefer to drive when all else is near enough identical, it's subjective and how you can't see the point I am making about this is incredible.

 

[klier]

Didn't you predict the RS5 to 'trump' the M3 in every possible way months before the RS5 was out? And now that the results aren't what you've hoped before, there's all of a sudden 'no point to compare' them? Pardon Footie, but that's comical.


Best regards,
south

Not comical, but sad beyond words.

Also, the AWD RS5 is a full second slower on a wet (pretty moist) Top Gear track....(!!!)

LOL, the RS5 really is a POS!!!!

 

[Human]

I think the RS5 gets to take a bit too much of a beating here. The cars are different, thats it! The M3 is far better at being an M3, how can that come as a surprise to anyone?

No surprise there Doc!

 

[Audi69]

The M3 Competition Pack beat the RS5 on Top Gear. BBC iPlayer - Top Gear: Series 16: Episode 5

 

[chonkoa]

The M3 Competition Pack beat the RS5 on Top Gear. BBC iPlayer - Top Gear: Series 16: Episode 5

Is the same video as the ones posted in page 1 of this Thread?

 

[Sunny]

I think the RS5 gets to take a bit too much of a beating here. The cars are different, thats it! The M3 is far better at being an M3, how can that come as a surprise to anyone?

Good question, maybe ask the person who build it up here as the M3 beater before it was even released. Of course when that blew up on his face, everyone started mocking him and the car - a pretty normal reaction.

As for RS5 itself, I said it somewhere else, it is a good car, even a great one, but a classic like M3 or 911 or even previous RS4? No. For that, it needs to set new standards for the class. RS5 doesn't. It just offers similar performance to M3 in a more sterile package. It is a nice alternative to M3, and thank god there is one, but it will be exactly that - an alternative. M3 is the entrée of this class - at least for now.

 

[footie]

Good question, maybe ask the person who build it up here as the M3 beater before it was even released. Of course when that blew up on his face, everyone started mocking him and the car - a pretty normal reaction.

Yes I built it up but from the info I had and based on past experience this should have been the case, previously the weight shadowed the S version but unexpectedly this time it didn't and that turned the RS5 from something that would consistently beat the M3 to one that occasionally beat it. Mock me if you must, I'm man enough to take it.

As for RS5 itself, I said it somewhere else, it is a good car, even a great one, but a classic like M3 or 911 or even previous RS4? No. For that, it needs to set new standards for the class. RS5 doesn't. It just offers similar performance to M3 in a more sterile package. It is a nice alternative to M3, and thank god there is one, but it will be exactly that - an alternative. M3 is the entrée of this class - at least for now.

The odd thing is that every RS5 owner I know who previously owned the RS4 don't feel it a failure next to the RS4, in fact all of them see it superior in every way. The only negatives that come up are it's weight, obvious really and the steering when equipped with the adaptive steering system. Who do you reckon have the more creditable, accurate and genuine opinion, the people who have owned both or someone who has spent the best part of 48hrs at most with both?

BTW these are the people who really question what JC was doing with the RS5 in that video, not only me because it doesn't understeer like that unless you leave it in either comfort or auto mode and leave the ESP on, with all systems off and in dynamic it holds it's line as doggedly as the M3 and will step the tail out on exit as was the case when the Stig drove it. Oh and a very important thing to remember about Topgear, what JC says goes for in that show he is God.

 

[Sunny]

The odd thing is that every RS5 owner I know who previously owned the RS4 don't feel it a failure next to the RS4, in fact all of them see it superior in every way. The only negatives that come up are it's weight, obvious really and the steering when equipped with the adaptive steering system. Who do you reckon have the more creditable, accurate and genuine opinion, the people who have owned both or someone who has spent the best part of 48hrs at most with both?

Footie, learn to digest what other's post and not just blindly react every time you think you read a slight aimed at your beloved RS5. RS5 came 4 years after B7 RS4, it will of course be superior. No one said otherwise. But B7 RS4 set new standards for its time, which is why people so fondly remember it. RS5 doesn't and people will probably forget it as soon as the next one comes around. Now, is that so difficult to grasp?

As for JC, he is like a caricaturist, he overdoes things to make a point and exhort a laugh. That is his style and he gets paid for that. Like when he sat on a pile of rocks and claimed how it was more comfortable than the SL 65 BS. No one in the right sense, believes that to be literally true. You don't need to keep repeating every two pages about how JC intentionally made your beloved RS5 look bad - most people who follows Top gear know to take whatever he says with a pinch of salt.

 

[330CIZHP]

I would tend to agree a bit with Footie here.

I mean, something looked very very fishy there how the RS5 front end looked like it was on ice with the steering on full-lock. It was not even understeer as understeer does not look like that since the tires still 'bite' the road. It was just no grip whatsoever. The tires never 'bit' at any point. It simply slid towards the apex on all the turns.

Something just does not add up here. My biggest suspicion is the front tires were completely bald. Whether they did that unintentionally or for great television. I don't know, but this is what it looked like was happening to the RS5:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Eddie Griffin totalled an Enzo with bald front tires and it was a publicity stunt to promote the movie than anything else.

Footie, learn to digest what other's post and not just blindly react every time you think you read a slight aimed at your beloved RS5. RS5 came 4 years after B7 RS4, it will of course be superior. No one said otherwise. But B7 RS4 set new standards for its time, which is why people so fondly remember it. RS5 doesn't and people will probably forget it as soon as the next one comes around. Now, is that so difficult to grasp?

As for JC, he is like a caricaturist, he overdoes things to make a point and exhort a laugh. That is his style and he gets paid for that. Like when he sat on a pile of rocks and claimed how it was more comfortable than the SL 65 BS. No one in the right sense, believes that to be literally true. You don't need to keep repeating every two pages about how JC intentionally made your beloved RS5 look bad - most people who follows Top gear know to take whatever he says with a pinch of salt.

 

[martinbo]

If there's one thing a Subaru instructor knows about when it comes to handling dynamics it's the understeer how to and how not tos. You want more understeer? Wind the lock on.

And that's exactly what Clarkson was doing for theatrical purposes. If the front tyres were bald, the nose push would be even more severe.

 

[footie]

If we are to assume that these were the laps that the M3 and RS5 did to achieve their respective lap times then I call them out as fake and false, in every single clip the RS5 covers the ground quicker than the M3CP. Now if these were the laps then why would Topgear suggest they are???

Even on Sportauto's times for their wet lap course the old RS4 is almost 5s quicker than the E92 M3. Is Topgear seriously suggesting that the RS5 has lost a full 6s (in theory) to the RS4 in such a discipline ........... I don't think so.

As for the understeer that RS5 had, anyone who has driven the RS5 will know this isn't normal and has been induced to show the RS5 up poorly, why would JC and Topgear do this, what possible reason would they have?

I'm now under one conclusion either everything on the Topgear power lap board is fake or at the very least some of it is adjusted to how Lord Clarkson believes it should be.

 

[coolraoul]

Footie, Top Gear is a comedy show. It's funny, entertaining, and that's all.

You don't believe Bruce Willis can kill 200 terrorists in one and a half hour do you?
Same with TG.

It's crazy to see people not having understood that.
Every thing Clarkson and co do, is for entertainment purpose. Everything.

It wouldn't be funny to say both are evenly matched and then have a race where both follow the same lines.

So you have an over-oversteering M3 chased by an over-understeering RS5. Entertaining. Voila.

Crazy to loose time commenting on some TG's laptime or taking any of Clarkson's comments seriously... C'mon, man!

See it for fun, have a laugh, that's all!!