any of you guys come up next to a M3
11-01-1999, 01:02 PM
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here is a real life comparison that someone with both cars did!!
A friend in PA just got an S4 three weeks ago. I have a 98 stock 4 door M3 and he called me to compare cars.
We did that for two hours this afternoon. What fun we had!
Anyway, let me tell you what we found.
We don’t like to race-launch the cars, so all we did was with the cars moving. We had Motorola TalkAbout radios to
coordinate when we hit it. In second gear @1500 rpms we hit it side by side. The S4’s turbo lag gave the M3 a half car lead
until the S4 stopped sliding and seemed to start coming back until the M3 got to about 5000 rpms and again pulled ahead a
door length. I (M3) up-shifted first and… WOW… that made the S4 half the gap (he was now half a nose-length back). He
up-shifted and dropped back gain and then…
…in third gear the M3 clearly pulled harder. By the time I shifted into fourth I was about two car lengths ahead. In fourth I kept
on gaining on him but then we hit traffic. We did this thing several times and the M3 was always faster.
We also did the highway thing. That is, we got side by side at 60mph and accelerated on the same gears. The M3 ALWAYS
pulled ahead. It was very evident that the S4 would run out of steam at higher rpms and that there WAS turbo lag. In fifth gear
at 80 mph the M3 would jump a full car length ahead before the S4’s turbos spooled and reduced his slide.
I also drove the car. It is VERY NICE indeed. My friend let me take several fast curves to test its handling. It’s surely an
under-steering car and it lags lots of grip. My friend thought I was exaggerating, so I took him through the same curves in the
M3 and he noticed the difference. The S4’s steering feel SUCKS, there is a huge absence of communication.
I also wanted to test the brakes, but my friend did not, so we did not. But by looking at the S4’s discs I suspect the M3 will
beat it easily. I’m not joking. If you ever get the see an M3 beside an S4, take a look at the discs and you will see what I mean.
The Audi’s back discs are so small, they look like an old 45 record.
Last, I played my favorite cassette on the S4 stereo. It’s good but the M3’s HK is much better. To tell the difference do the
following (if you ever sit in a S4), put the fader all the way to the front and you will notice that you are missing a large speaker
for the bass (the M3 has one beside each foot well).
I did like from the S4, however, the seats, all those features (6 positions for the heated seats for example) and general
ergonomics. The suspension is also nice and soft, much more than the M3’s which can be punishing on bad roads.
In the end my friend reminded me that his car had only 12 hundred miles and that it would get faster with more miles. He also
said he would chip it and then we could retest. If he does that before I get the M5 I have in order, he might have a chance.
We did that for two hours this afternoon. What fun we had!
Anyway, let me tell you what we found.
We don’t like to race-launch the cars, so all we did was with the cars moving. We had Motorola TalkAbout radios to
coordinate when we hit it. In second gear @1500 rpms we hit it side by side. The S4’s turbo lag gave the M3 a half car lead
until the S4 stopped sliding and seemed to start coming back until the M3 got to about 5000 rpms and again pulled ahead a
door length. I (M3) up-shifted first and… WOW… that made the S4 half the gap (he was now half a nose-length back). He
up-shifted and dropped back gain and then…
…in third gear the M3 clearly pulled harder. By the time I shifted into fourth I was about two car lengths ahead. In fourth I kept
on gaining on him but then we hit traffic. We did this thing several times and the M3 was always faster.
We also did the highway thing. That is, we got side by side at 60mph and accelerated on the same gears. The M3 ALWAYS
pulled ahead. It was very evident that the S4 would run out of steam at higher rpms and that there WAS turbo lag. In fifth gear
at 80 mph the M3 would jump a full car length ahead before the S4’s turbos spooled and reduced his slide.
I also drove the car. It is VERY NICE indeed. My friend let me take several fast curves to test its handling. It’s surely an
under-steering car and it lags lots of grip. My friend thought I was exaggerating, so I took him through the same curves in the
M3 and he noticed the difference. The S4’s steering feel SUCKS, there is a huge absence of communication.
I also wanted to test the brakes, but my friend did not, so we did not. But by looking at the S4’s discs I suspect the M3 will
beat it easily. I’m not joking. If you ever get the see an M3 beside an S4, take a look at the discs and you will see what I mean.
The Audi’s back discs are so small, they look like an old 45 record.
Last, I played my favorite cassette on the S4 stereo. It’s good but the M3’s HK is much better. To tell the difference do the
following (if you ever sit in a S4), put the fader all the way to the front and you will notice that you are missing a large speaker
for the bass (the M3 has one beside each foot well).
I did like from the S4, however, the seats, all those features (6 positions for the heated seats for example) and general
ergonomics. The suspension is also nice and soft, much more than the M3’s which can be punishing on bad roads.
In the end my friend reminded me that his car had only 12 hundred miles and that it would get faster with more miles. He also
said he would chip it and then we could retest. If he does that before I get the M5 I have in order, he might have a chance.
11-01-1999, 01:30 PM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
This message got ripped for the B-S it is in the BMW forum
This exact same message got really seen for what it really is-B-S.
BIg time.
From the ALWAYS statements to the crap about the stereo.
I have had 3 BMW's with upgraded sound systems and the Audi Symphony stereo is the best I have ever heard in any car.
And the stuff about the brakes. I guess the M3 guy can just look at them and see which is better. A far better and non biased test then Car and Driver which had the stopping distance almost equal.
And what about the crap about the S4 sliding off the start. I have tried and tried to spin out/slide etc.. and with the quattro that is almost impossible.
In fact, in a 0-60 the S4 should be faster since only 1 shift is needed while the M3 needs 2.
I hate posts like this.
00 S4
Black/Black and Silver
Convience
Bose
BIg time.
From the ALWAYS statements to the crap about the stereo.
I have had 3 BMW's with upgraded sound systems and the Audi Symphony stereo is the best I have ever heard in any car.
And the stuff about the brakes. I guess the M3 guy can just look at them and see which is better. A far better and non biased test then Car and Driver which had the stopping distance almost equal.
And what about the crap about the S4 sliding off the start. I have tried and tried to spin out/slide etc.. and with the quattro that is almost impossible.
In fact, in a 0-60 the S4 should be faster since only 1 shift is needed while the M3 needs 2.
I hate posts like this.
00 S4
Black/Black and Silver
Convience
Bose
11-01-1999, 02:34 PM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
You should try both before you become another instant expert.
The m3 needs 2 shifts to 60mph?
not so.
I test drove a couple of S4's (two of them) while looking at Avant's. Today I'm buying an A4 Avant/SC from a co-worker. I like the car and appreciate it for what it is.
The stereo is not better then the HK (upgraded 12 speaker w/ 2 subs) BMW stereo in M3, 540, etc. I would rate the BMW stereo a bit better. But neither are in need of an upgrade unless you're a true audiophile, in which case neither will do.
The handling on the S4 is very good. But as most who've driven both will note, it's softer then an M3. What this means is that for most folks it's easier to live with. I don't think this was a design oversight. I think Audi opted for a more luxury feel then a closer to sport feel that the M3 offers.
I would also say that the M3 handles better. In and out of turns it gives you better control and more useable feedback. Part of this is tires, part of this is suspension, part of it is different car balance and geometery. Who knows. Can the S4 become more dialed in? Certainly, but likely at a cost of having a stiffer suspension.
The brakes in the M3 feel easier to modulate, but stopping distance felt about the same. And both are very confidence inspiring. The larger disc's might not hurt stopping distance much, but those of you wanting track days (etc) will certainly want a big brake kit, since a larger disc (rotor) will help alot with heat disappation and help avoid warped rotors under hard driving.
Again, entirely no need to fix unless you're in a small select group.
I can also tell you from personal experiance (with a G-Tech Pro) that the M3 is faster. With a 120 or so miles (clearly not broken in) the S4 did 0-60 (tested no further) with one driver (250lbs) and 1/8 tank gas, the S4 went 0-60 for me in 6.2... (something like 6.185) same test/same day/same parking lot(as close as an amatuer like me could get it) my M3 (stock) could go 5.7 (5.63?). Not perfect shifting on either. And my engine is also not fully broken in at 3800 miles (at that time, 4700 now) but was obviously closer to broken in then then the S4 was.
The point is, you should not be bothered with what others drive and what they think of your car. You should enjoy your car because Audi builds good cars. And your's is argueably the best they've ever brought to this country (usa).
It's fast, Audi says 5.9. BMW says the M3 is 5.7 (though every test (dozens of them), except the most recent in C&D, always says 5.5) While the S4 can likely do as most Mag's thus far say, which is get damn close to 5.6. Neither are as fast as a Firebird. But neither punish the owner the way a Firebird does (crappy insurance, crappy drive, crappy mpg, etc).
I think the S4 is prettier then a M3. I also think it's a better buy (better bang for the buck). I don't think anyone who owns either, should be bothered by the existance of another fine car. If I owned an S4, I would not be tempted to "upgrade" to an M3. And owning an M3, it's not that tempting to get an S4. It's slightly better in the Snow vs slightly better on other days. In Seattle it snows so little, it's not an issue and both cars are very competent in the rain. If there were race's and contests between the two, the better driver would win most no matter which car he was in. In most situations, the M3 driver would win the "draw" but not by enough to bother the S4 driver, I'm sure. Since you could easily console yourself with the better looks, easier to live with suspension, etc.
not so.
I test drove a couple of S4's (two of them) while looking at Avant's. Today I'm buying an A4 Avant/SC from a co-worker. I like the car and appreciate it for what it is.
The stereo is not better then the HK (upgraded 12 speaker w/ 2 subs) BMW stereo in M3, 540, etc. I would rate the BMW stereo a bit better. But neither are in need of an upgrade unless you're a true audiophile, in which case neither will do.
The handling on the S4 is very good. But as most who've driven both will note, it's softer then an M3. What this means is that for most folks it's easier to live with. I don't think this was a design oversight. I think Audi opted for a more luxury feel then a closer to sport feel that the M3 offers.
I would also say that the M3 handles better. In and out of turns it gives you better control and more useable feedback. Part of this is tires, part of this is suspension, part of it is different car balance and geometery. Who knows. Can the S4 become more dialed in? Certainly, but likely at a cost of having a stiffer suspension.
The brakes in the M3 feel easier to modulate, but stopping distance felt about the same. And both are very confidence inspiring. The larger disc's might not hurt stopping distance much, but those of you wanting track days (etc) will certainly want a big brake kit, since a larger disc (rotor) will help alot with heat disappation and help avoid warped rotors under hard driving.
Again, entirely no need to fix unless you're in a small select group.
I can also tell you from personal experiance (with a G-Tech Pro) that the M3 is faster. With a 120 or so miles (clearly not broken in) the S4 did 0-60 (tested no further) with one driver (250lbs) and 1/8 tank gas, the S4 went 0-60 for me in 6.2... (something like 6.185) same test/same day/same parking lot(as close as an amatuer like me could get it) my M3 (stock) could go 5.7 (5.63?). Not perfect shifting on either. And my engine is also not fully broken in at 3800 miles (at that time, 4700 now) but was obviously closer to broken in then then the S4 was.
The point is, you should not be bothered with what others drive and what they think of your car. You should enjoy your car because Audi builds good cars. And your's is argueably the best they've ever brought to this country (usa).
It's fast, Audi says 5.9. BMW says the M3 is 5.7 (though every test (dozens of them), except the most recent in C&D, always says 5.5) While the S4 can likely do as most Mag's thus far say, which is get damn close to 5.6. Neither are as fast as a Firebird. But neither punish the owner the way a Firebird does (crappy insurance, crappy drive, crappy mpg, etc).
I think the S4 is prettier then a M3. I also think it's a better buy (better bang for the buck). I don't think anyone who owns either, should be bothered by the existance of another fine car. If I owned an S4, I would not be tempted to "upgrade" to an M3. And owning an M3, it's not that tempting to get an S4. It's slightly better in the Snow vs slightly better on other days. In Seattle it snows so little, it's not an issue and both cars are very competent in the rain. If there were race's and contests between the two, the better driver would win most no matter which car he was in. In most situations, the M3 driver would win the "draw" but not by enough to bother the S4 driver, I'm sure. Since you could easily console yourself with the better looks, easier to live with suspension, etc.
11-01-1999, 02:44 PM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
M3 owners perspective
The S4 is a better car. Because it represents a better bang for the buck. It's also got better lines.
The M3 used in the C&D test was broken (slowest m3 ever tested). And while the M3 is ultimately more capable (stock vs. stock) then an S4, it comes at quite a premium in price.
Besides:
Audi lets owners see Tech Service Bulletins online, while BMW expects users to pay 110.00 for them and a upgrade fee to stay current.
And it's alot cheaper to get an S4 to 300hp then a M3 (e36).
The M3 used in the C&D test was broken (slowest m3 ever tested). And while the M3 is ultimately more capable (stock vs. stock) then an S4, it comes at quite a premium in price.
Besides:
Audi lets owners see Tech Service Bulletins online, while BMW expects users to pay 110.00 for them and a upgrade fee to stay current.
And it's alot cheaper to get an S4 to 300hp then a M3 (e36).
11-01-1999, 02:55 PM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
In an M3, I came up next to an S4.
We caught each other checking out each others cars, both felt silly and waved.
M3: advantage
faster, more agile, better drivers feedback.
S4: Advantage
Better bang for the buck, and much cheaper to upgrade, better looking (subjective), newer style (likely to age better), AWD = much better in the snow (also wet leaves, even more slippery then ice), softer suspension might be easier to live with in the real world.
Also remember you can't currently buy a new M3. 1999 was the last year in the e36 body.
Drive them both. The S4 is good enough (in my opinion) that most would prefer it due to it's price level alone.
M3: advantage
faster, more agile, better drivers feedback.
S4: Advantage
Better bang for the buck, and much cheaper to upgrade, better looking (subjective), newer style (likely to age better), AWD = much better in the snow (also wet leaves, even more slippery then ice), softer suspension might be easier to live with in the real world.
Also remember you can't currently buy a new M3. 1999 was the last year in the e36 body.
Drive them both. The S4 is good enough (in my opinion) that most would prefer it due to it's price level alone.
Trending Topics
11-01-1999, 02:58 PM
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Normally I stay out of these debates, but if someone posts a 6.2 0-60 in an S4 then I must speak
Uhhm, I have one (an S4). Uhhm, it is fairly broken in. Uhhm, it is faster than any of three different M3's I've driven (not a lot mind you, but a little). There may have been something wrong with the S4 you drove (either that or the fact that it only had 100 miles). I haven't G-Tech'd mine yet, but a friend did to his (in the wet & w/ a 3/4 tank and still under 2000 miles) and with good 3000RPM launches got a 4-run G-Tech average of 5.48 (I believe best was 5.3x) and let me tell you, I had a spectacular launch the other day on my S4 (not a drop clutch but a really awesome power slip), and while I didn't have a G-Tech, I stopped it about 5.3 with a passenger and 3/4 tank and no M3 (unmodified of course) is gonna' keep up with that. Remember, these S4's *DO* make more than 250HP. Hell, I bet a 6.2 could be done shifting at about 5300RPMs (instead of 6800 and staying in 2nd all of the way through 60).
11-01-1999, 03:09 PM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
The slow numbers for all 4 cars had a lot to do with heat in that C&D test
They don't tell you that in the article, but if you look at the weather at the time those were tested (tests had to be done in late July I figure in Ohio where it was running close to 100 every day), it was VERY HOT. A lot hotter than it usually is when the magazines test cars. This can mean maybe a 7% power loss over cooler test conditions and certainly a few tenths off all of the acceleration runs. At first, I had thought that the numbers were corrected for atmospheric conditions but then I think I found in the test summary digest or somewhere that weather conditions affect performance so that is apparently not the case. Also, you'll notice that when R&T does a full test, it reports temp., altitude and humidity, so I don't think those correct for conditions, either (besides if they did that, how would they correct for trap speed in the quarter mile -- that's harder than simply correcting times). The C&D 9/99 M3 may have taken 6.0 to do 60, but let's say that's more like 5.7 in that same car on a cool day ... you see where I'm going. The R&T test for 10/99 issue was indeed in cooler weather (70 degrees at about 1000 feet), so it's understandable that a the runs were 0.1 sec faster 0-60 and 0.5 sec faster 0-100. Now, if these cars were to be tested on a 50 degree day at sea level then I'd expect another 0.1 sec to come off 0-60 and another few tenths off of 0-100 as well.
11-01-1999, 03:16 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Normally I stay out of these debates, but if someone posts a 6.2 0-60 in an S4 then I must speak
Sure I know I could do better then that myself.
And I wasn't trying to claim the S4 could go no faster, which is why I gave those cavets.
My best in my M3c is actually a bit higher, around 5.5 (but it's a convertible = more weight). And that was with a pretty good clutch drop on a cool evening.
Audi's aren't the only car to under state the power output of their engines. Most M3's test in at least 10hp higher.
New another M3C I tested before I ordered mine went 0-60 in around 6.0-6.1 (not broken in with 2-300 miles). Which is still faster then the stock S4 I drove. The 2nd one I drove felt no faster. But of course that's only seat of pants, no G-tech with the salesman in the car.
Few stock M3's can go 0-60 in 5.3 (I saw a review by C&D a few years ago (96?) where the one they tested did. But mine hasn't. but it's the much heavier M3c. I suspect few can. Most go around 5.6 or so (stock). Mine's has a slightly stonger then average engine (since it's a M3c and can keep up with most M3's, but that's just good luck not good driving)
If you can really go 0-60 in a stock S4 in 5.3 (in most s4's?) which I doubt. It would certainly make the average S4 faster.
I can say this, with just a decent chip the S4 is certainly faster then an M3 with just a chip. But all that was said before. I don't desire a long debate on this issue. I said it in my previous post, that the cars are pretty even. I still think that (having actually driven several examples of both cars).
And I wasn't trying to claim the S4 could go no faster, which is why I gave those cavets.
My best in my M3c is actually a bit higher, around 5.5 (but it's a convertible = more weight). And that was with a pretty good clutch drop on a cool evening.
Audi's aren't the only car to under state the power output of their engines. Most M3's test in at least 10hp higher.
New another M3C I tested before I ordered mine went 0-60 in around 6.0-6.1 (not broken in with 2-300 miles). Which is still faster then the stock S4 I drove. The 2nd one I drove felt no faster. But of course that's only seat of pants, no G-tech with the salesman in the car.
Few stock M3's can go 0-60 in 5.3 (I saw a review by C&D a few years ago (96?) where the one they tested did. But mine hasn't. but it's the much heavier M3c. I suspect few can. Most go around 5.6 or so (stock). Mine's has a slightly stonger then average engine (since it's a M3c and can keep up with most M3's, but that's just good luck not good driving)
If you can really go 0-60 in a stock S4 in 5.3 (in most s4's?) which I doubt. It would certainly make the average S4 faster.
I can say this, with just a decent chip the S4 is certainly faster then an M3 with just a chip. But all that was said before. I don't desire a long debate on this issue. I said it in my previous post, that the cars are pretty even. I still think that (having actually driven several examples of both cars).