raptorduck

Well, not surprisingly the RS4 came in a relatively distant third in this month's comparo in C&D. 4.5 to 60? I thought it was a tad faster than that.

I would still not buy the new M3 over the RS4, cheaper and faster and nimbler or not, and I used to be or still am an M snob.

The C63 at 3.9 to 60 made me take notice (and the auto trans). Definate possibility. The firm suspension worries me though.

Bob W.

first, they're all euro spec cars...and C&D is a US magazine, so thanks for the useless info on cars we can't buy. second, the M3 won't even be available here for another 4-6 months, and the C63 another 7-9 months. third, part of the point total is based on "estimated" pricing. fourth, the RS4 loses big on pricing because it has the ceramic brakes ($8000+ option), which isn't even available in the US. fifth, the cover of C&D reads "Hell-Raising Sedans" and pictures the M3, RS4, and C63...hate to break it to you, C&D, but the M3 isn't a sedan any more than the 911 is a sedan.

C&D and Motor Trend were in such a rush to be 'first' to publish this piece, they're willing to compromise their journalistic integrity. Neither publication is worth the paper its printed on.

larryV

Motor Trend did a comparo of euro spec versions off the same 3 cars. It's not a completely worthless comparo though. It does the job of priming the American buyer with some idea of what's to come. Thing is, having the euro spec versions actually gives the RS4 a slight weight advantage in that 1) the ceramic brakes provide some unsprung weight savings (and better braking), and 2) the euro bucket seats are significantly lighter than the 8-way seats with side airbags that US-spec RS4's are equipped with. From my understanding, the US versions of the C63 and M3 will have the same seats as the euro spec cars that were tested on both articles. So strictly going by weight, it seems the RS4 could further take even more of a performance penalty by crossing the pond in an all US-spec comparo. But that will never happen since production for the RS4 will end before the C63 and M3 arrive. Maybe that's why they did the comparo? Euro spec form was the only way to do it since it wouldn't be right to compare new models with a car no longer in the assembly line?

cit1991

Well put.

Bob W.

just less fade with prolonged use, and better pad durability....AFAIK. so for this test, I don't think the brakes give the RS4 any advantage.

as far as weight, the test weight in the C&D article is 3814lbs. the R&T test car weight was about 100lbs more, yet they got it to 60mph and through the quarter 0.2sec quicker, which is significant. so much for any weight advantage in the Euro spec car.

with cars this close in performance, I think the only way to make it relevant to us is to have them in US spec form, running our crappy US spec gas, on our crappy US spec roads. that C63 isn't even a production model, so God knows how much power that motor was actually making.

Jet Jockey/A4 Pilot

You see Bob we can agree on some things :-)

raptorduck

You should write a letter to the editor as other readers should see this. Although I noticed the sedan error and the brakes thing, I did not notice the rest.

raptorduck

I get all the car mags, and R&T always has the fastest 0-60 times for a car, with C&D usually the slowest. I have always suspected it was the method used. Perhaps R&T uses a method that would not be used by your average driver and C&D does not.

I recall R&T had my old CLK55 at 4.9 from 0-60 and C&D had it at 5.3, for example. Of course then an on line publication tested one after the adaptive transmission had "adapted" to agressive driving and it was a tricle under 4.8.

bhvrdr

that many magazines have historically allowed the M3 and other cars to slip into due to cubic feet of interior rather then number of doors. But it's not a big point IMO. The fact that the RS4 was eurospec is important as we know in the US it weighs well over 100lbs more and is a bit slower but the difference is probably not enough to have make a huge difference in scores. Add to that the other cars were eurospec so sure it wasnt US cars but it was apples to apples eurospec models and I dont expect any of those cars to have their character completely tranformed in US trim. Overall, I though it was an interesting read taken for what it is. It gave solid peformance data (from VBOX instruments) on three very interesting cars. Will there be a heck of a lot more seen over the next year on US models of these newer performance vehicles? Sure there will. I just saw this as a neat first taste. It was better than reading about minivans anyways.

bhvrdr

C and D uses a VBOX and then does an average of with wind and against wind runs