M3 Opponents

We can go on forever, The M3 stock is definitely a better car. All I'm saying is that dollar for dollar, I feel the S4 is a better buy.

I can buy a stock S4 and spend a few grand and have it perform better if not the same as an M3. ...and still have money to spend. Both in straight line performance, and handling!

You can't argue the numbers....'nuff said!

you know what they say... to each their own

The price jump from a M3 up to a RS4 was smaller than the price jump from a S4 up to a M3.
I agree they are different cars, but the RS4 has allways been compared with the M3 and the C32 AMG.

I would like to point out your are trying to compair a turbo car against and N/A one. Of course you can make a turbo car go fast for less money that it takes an N/A car to do the same. With the turbo you're just adding more boost (air) and boost is free. With a N/A motor is a little harder than just cramming more air and more fuel into the cylinder.

And with all due respect I think the S4 was built with the M3 in mind. M3's have been around since 86(I believe that was the first year) where as S4's only first appeared in the early 90's.

boost may be free marvelous-----but a turbo isn't. N/a vs. turbo/supercharger is all just the same. Look what Dodge did-----they put a long block in the Viper. A beastly one for that matter. Fair is fair----it doesn't matter how you make the power.

When a turbo comes stock with a car that's free enough to me. The point I was trying to make is that you are trying to compair a N/A engine which is limited by the amount of air it can get by simple physics. A turbo engine gets as much air as the turbo can spool...the S4's stock turbo system can handle more boost than it comes out of the factory with. I know, personally, that a S4 TT can support 320hp on the stock system with no problems. And you can get that power for lays say 2000$ and be on the high side. Tack on another 2000$, again on the high side, and you can have as much power as your tranny, and drivetrain for that matter, will hold with a T78 turbo. Ask any turbo supra owner and he'll tell you this.

Now on the flip side of the coin what does it take to get a M3 to that level? Well 320 isn't hard...it's got the displacement for that (current is 3.3liters) now getting to come up significantly from there is hard. The engine is limited because it is naturally asperated so it can only make as much power as it can get in the cylinder on it's own. You can bump the redline to 9 or 10 thousand RPM and you'd get a big gain but you'd also have no low end so it's a win-lose situation.

An E34(I believe that was the M3 we were originally refering to) rolls off the lot with like 280hp or something like that( I don't know the figure off my head). So what does it take to get this stock M3 to 350hp? Exhaust, intake, ECU, port and polish, cam gear...you get the picture. All of which costs money. Now take that S40 with comes off the lot with 250hp...want a 100hp increase? Easy...Chip, intake, exhaust, and more boost(to make both cars relyable you'll want plugs and ignition stuff probably so I'm leaving this out on both). You'll spend less tuning turbo car because, as I said before, air is free. Twist that however you like but the fact remains.

So what if Dodge put a 7 or 8 or however many liter V10 in the Viper? It uses the same technology Dodge used in the 60's IE Pushrods. Take a look at your own car? Ford no longer uses pushrod V8's because the finally discovered you could make far more power with a cam engine...you wouldn't have the diesel truck like torque but why would you need max torque at 1500RPM? Also that long block's hp per liter is pathetic...if your car is still making 1hp her cubic inch you are living in the 60's and you will get left in the dust, literally. Look at any GT racing car that's worth looking at...Most of them are turbo's, even the Saleen's.

Ford switched to the 4.6L because of tougher emmission standards set by the Fed gov't. The modular engine is cleaner and more efficient. Ford has now developed a new 5.0L engine that will be back in about 2-3 yrs---makes about 425hp - 375tque - according to the newest press release. The 4.6L can make power-----you just have to do a shitload of swapping from what is currently being put into stangs. The M3 though, is not making 333 flywheel hp----I have a buddy of mine---who has this car---(01) and his dyno reading--totally stock---showed 331RWHP----the M3s are making more power than what the manufacturer suggests. Its like the rating on the 03 Cobra. The 03s have shown bone stock----to slam down up to 380rwhp & torque. Thats over 430hp and torque---BONE STOCK. The M3 inline 6 is very efficient. But mods like a chip, exhaust, headers----are virtually inexpensive----when you look at the gains. You can get up to a 35hp gain on the M3 just by porting the stock cylinder heads----for $600---thats pretty good dollar to hp ratio.

Yet just the same, if you apply that 600$ port job to an S4 you'd see similar gains and actually those gains would be higher depending on the level of boost. Also the last I heard Dinan was having troubling making an ECU for the new M3 which is not the M3 I was refering to in my previous post...I'm talking 95-98M3.

Put that 600$ into an S4 and it would buy you a custom remapped ECU that could gain you at least 40hp.

i'd hate to see the S4 with ported heads and a turbo vs. an M3 with ported heads and a turbo. Audi is going in the right direction----but they always seem to be 2-3 years behind every one else as far as launching powerful cars.

"still"

I wouldn't consider their RS cars to be lower than anyone else in the sport saloon market.

Take the same amount of money you'd dump into strapping a turbo onto a N/A M3 and you can put an even bigger turbo for the S4.

A S4 with ported heads and a turbo VS a M3 with ported heads and a turbo, the S4 would make more power...why? Because the CR of the S4 is lower than the M3 so it can run more boost.

The point I've been trying to make is that a S4 can be upgraded for less money than a M3. I think I've succeeded in doing that so I'm done with this post as it has gotten redundent the past couple posts. Good luck to you sir...

Originally posted by Marvelous3
"still"
I wouldn't consider their RS cars to be lower than anyone else in the sport saloon market.


So that is why the M3 and the M5 get their ass kicked by the S4 and the RS6, respectively?

the RS6 is a twin turboed V8 making 450hp ---its 1/4 mile times---DO NOT KICK AN M3s ass. Learn about the M3s test numbers. RS6 is faster-----just barely. The 1/4 miles are true test------so I could care less about its claimed 0-60 being at 4.7-4.8. Also, the Rs6 doesn't have the M3s handling----:greenchai
Lastly, you must be talking about the Audi S4 MTM as being the so called blistering call as you keep alluding to---because any other stock S4 is nothing to get excited about.
Your turboed twosome----aren't that overly impressive compared to the N/A M3 & M5. You sound so silly----talking about those 2 cars---like they have some kind of talk dog performance. Those cars only impress in the 0-60------sure as hell don't in the 1/4 mile------and as far as handling goes-----you can't even compare them to the handling of an M3 or M5. :bloated:

I wasn't comparing the M3 to a RS6.
The RS6 beat the M5 around the Nordschleife, fair and square.
And the 344 hp, 410nm S4 isn't impressive to you? Driving it sure got me excited.

0-60 and 1/4mile times are 95% driver and 5% car. Any real racer knows about that...I would love to see someone in real life turn out a "tested" 0-60 and/or 1/4 mile time.

I've been driving heavy duty clutches on muscles cars since I was 18. You don't need to be a racer to pull out a blistering 1/4 mile or 0-60. YOU NEED TO HAVE EXPERIENCE working clutches on high horsepower cars. You need to know your shift points in any car. I've had plenty experience ripping through the gears------especially with cars with more aggressive gear ratios-------and so have thousands of other people. If you can finesse your way through a heavy duty clutch, with high horsepower and agrresive gearing---you can easily rip off good times in any car as long as you have some time to toy with the car.

the M3 is a better handling vehicle than the M5. So yes, I'm not really impressed with the S4 doing a number the M5. Wait till the upcoming M3s and M5s----precious Audi is trying to do a number with their new updated sports coupes on carry over models of BMW---lets see them up against the upcoming pussycats.

Originally posted by vortech
the M3 is a better handling vehicle than the M5. So yes, I'm not really impressed with the S4 doing a number the M5. Wait till the upcoming M3s and M5s----precious Audi is trying to do a number with their new updated sports coupes on carry over models of BMW---lets see them up against the upcoming pussycats.

This could go on forever. You do know the C6 A6 will be introduced soon, don't you?

Driving a muscle car(pushrod) and driving a Euro car (cams) is completely different

Marvelous---thanks for enlightening me----yea you are right, us pushrod guys are to FUC%IN stupid to know the difference in driving a euro car. Personally the euro market can tailor to its execs type---and people who won't go to the aftermarket to tinker with their toys----but just remember-----its the pushrod-----that inspired the Euro boys-----not the other way around.

I know about the upcoming Audi, but we'll see what it actually does on the road. Ford is saying the GT will outperform the 03 Viper----but I still have to see it to beleive it.

Originally posted by Deakins


So that is why the M3 and the M5 get their ass kicked by the S4 and the RS6, respectively?


what a ridiculous post. Audi havent made an involving car to drive in 2 decades. I can understand why u think the RS6 kicks the M5's ass, as it has more hp, but then that shows how narrow minded you are. The M5 is infinitely superior in every other aspect of performance, handling, steering feel, EVERYTHING.

to suggest the S4 kicks the M3's ass is the most absurd thing i think ive heard in my entire life. the point is audi performance cars are lifeless uninvolving, and uninteresting when compared to most performance cars out there. if thats your thing then fine, but dont claim to enjoy the challenge of driving car, cos with an audi there just plain isnt much...

I never said the RS6 is more fun to drive, but it's faster than the M5.
And the same goes for the S4, well, not straight ahead, but around a track.

but the RS6 and S4 only outhandle the M3 in your dreams. The M3 is still superior in handling----like I said before it even exceeds the performance of the M5. You are falling in love with horsepower numbers-----and thats not the basis of what I was arguing. Don't be foolish about what you are claiming-----Crazyjay knows what has already been shown to be fact.

there just aren't too many stock cars for mass production that can handle a road course like an M3.

Originally posted by vortech
Marvelous---thanks for enlightening me----yea you are right, us pushrod guys are to FUC%IN stupid to know the difference in driving a euro car. . . .

Umm, doesn't your American Beast have DOHC's?

URL=http://www.fasterfitness.com/cobra]I've got a Cobra Monster, too[/URL]

somehow that link didn't post right- try this

http://www.fasterfitness.com/cobra

in aprevious post he was putting down the pushrod guys----I'm abig fan of the pushrods.

the euro fans think because their engines incorporate newer technology---that are superior then what American car makers use. I guess some of these euro guys never heard of the 427 engines and the Hemis. I guess those engines were just slop served up to the public.

if that mustang owner upgraded the rods and rings-----cause I didn't see any mention of an intercooler-------and the 15psi----is just too much for the stock rods & rings. But maybe he did and just didn't mention it.

Originally posted by vortech
if that mustang owner upgraded the rods and rings-----cause I didn't see any mention of an intercooler-------and the 15psi----is just too much for the stock rods & rings. But maybe he did and just didn't mention it.

rings and pistons- yes. rods- no. True Blue tells me the rods aren't a weak link in the mod motors- aren't they the ones that are broken and re-welded at the factory for greater strength?

they are actually known as the powder coated rods. They are actually one of the first things to go when forced induction comes into play. It happened on my 1st 01 motor. If he is still running that kind of boost and the engine is still sound------then lol-----I think we have come across a divine miracle. The rods have failed on owners just from running 6000rpms and up. But I guess, you can always have an exception to the rule.

I will put down pushrod engines till the day I die...they are inefficient and have emitions out the wazoo.

Euro engines are superior to American engines...they figured out a long time ago you can make a smaller engine make just as much power as a stupid V8 by switching from pushrods to cams.

The 427Hemi was introduced as Dodge's way to go fast in the 60's, it is a shame they still have the same philosophy almost 50 years later. Vipers are cool but get little respect from me...Flame me all you want but as you said before, a Ford V8 breaking rods at 6000RPM without forced induction is pathetic

well what can you do-------the engine was made for only 320hp ----- and wasn't made for aggressive tuning----but Ford isn't the only other company that has had problems with the engines. Besides, the engine failures---were like I said----due to tuning them. In stockform, they did OK. But I won't argue about that-----because even I agree that the internals used in the DOHC, except for the 03----were crap. Can't argue about something that is very true.

you probably aren't an old muscle car fan----since you do put down the pushrods. But like I said---they were the predecessors to the fuel injected engines. I think todays Euro engines are becoming to high tech----but I can't argue that they are pretty efficient. But the pushrod goes hand in hand with the nasty exhaust growlers that we build-----not so sissy w000000000000ng sounding imports that sound like an engine in total distress. The pushrod transcends a culture and period of time---where you didn't need to have luxuries like heated seats----and heated mirrors.

Originally posted by vortech
but the RS6 and S4 only outhandle the M3 in your dreams. The M3 is still superior in handling----like I said before it even exceeds the performance of the M5. You are falling in love with horsepower numbers-----and thats not the basis of what I was arguing. Don't be foolish about what you are claiming-----Crazyjay knows what has already been shown to be fact.

Ok, lets stick to facts: SportAuto tested the RS6 and the M5 around Nürburgring: Audi RS6 8:20, BMW M5 8:28.
And around Hochenheim: Audi RS6 1:17.5, BMW M5 1:18.5.
As far as I know, the fastest stock E46 BMW M3 around Nürburgring used 8:22.

Straight from Autocar: "Learn to work your way through the inconsistencies of the steering and you can carry so much more speed into the corners, knowing that the S4 has plenty of adhesion, that it's easy to use all the power. In contrast the M3 is twichy, awkward, demanding concentration, and noticeably slower."

Thats is because Audi uses Quatro

sportauto stated that----thats one testers opnions-----while many others don't feel the same way about the conclusions on the handling. You are basing your remarks on one postive review----though AutoSport is very credible----its still only one opinion. The M3 garners better reviews over the two vehicles in question by other publications.

Hmmmm, no one has said the words GTO yet. Aussie quality with American muscle...maybe sorta worth looking at against the M3 since this is what the thread is all about?

that car will be interesting when it hits the ground here in the states. I hope its more than a paper pleaser witht he 350 + horsepower-----hopefully--it will have some mean performance----but being Pontiac---that might be wishful thinking-----but I still think---the GTO will kick some ass for a $35K car.

350bhp for $35k is a lot of bang for your buck! yeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaa!!!!

If Pontiac can figure out how to put that much power in a car

will make a good deal of power-------from everything I've read-----its going to be using almost the same 5.7L that used to be in the firebird & Camaro----and those were easily modded to make over 350hp without a blower.

Still... I am a fan of the GTO and all but the new one is a bit scetchy. A camaro engin? I thought it would be more like a Mustang. Will it come in convertible. Now, that I think about it. I might consider buying one(compared to a Z4)

its definetely using a 5.7L engine----and in Australia----where the car sold as a Holden Monaro---there was no convertible. With the current design---I don't think it would look good at all as a convertible.

I think it would look ok as a convertible or "T" top.

the coupe is gonna look pretty bangin if its got some nive chrome rims, performance tires, and tint. The Austrailian model was pretty low to the ground and aggressive looking----thats gonna work real nice here in the states. I think that car is going to sell a shitload of units in the states.

yah

Yah especially in California

Originally posted by snorlaxtowncar



WHAT!!?????????????????????????!??!

the M3 would kill all three of these cars, the M3 convertible beat the CLK55 convertible in a recent car mag, so i am sure the m3 coupe would beat the clk55 coupe, the camaro is, well, a camaro, which is fgast but not as fast as the m3, and then the S4!!!! it would have no chance against the M3!


yeah the only real thing the NSX has over it is weight, and hp to weight ratio.:spam: :spam:

The NSX is a fine car and would fare much better against the M3 than any of those Mercs, the Camaro (hahahahahahahahha!!!!), or the S4

i would put money on it that the NSX would beat the M3. the NSX-R just got voted car of the year by EVO magazine, and they focus on the thrill of driving

yah, the NSX would deffinatly win

That wasnt a standard NSX. It was an NSX-R, which would beat an M3, though maybe not the looming CSL.

Anyhow, the thrill of driving has nothing to do with what's quicker :cool:

Originally posted by crayzayjay
That wasnt a standard NSX. It was an NSX-R, which would beat an M3, though maybe not the looming CSL.

Wow, that would be an amazing showdown...
Although, I watched Japanese Best Motoring once w/ circuit racing involving a BMW M roadster, NSX, and some other cars, the M won; although, it was a low-speed course.

ANother time, I watched a high-speed course (Sugo) and the NSX beat out every car there [including a F355, M Coupe, Skyline GT-R34, RX-7, LanEVo VI, and the STI Ver V (I think)]

sure, a lot comes down to the circuit and the human factor... certain cars are more difficult to drive than others but in the right hands wipe out everything in sight

My modded 00 S4 beat my friends modded 99 M3 on the street both off the line and top end and I completely made of fool of him (and many others) in my 01 A4 Quattro 1.8t (modeded) at Willow Springs. With modifications made dollar for dollar the S4 will hand you your ass on a silver platter. The only reason that I am selling my S4 to buy an M3 is because there are no classes for the S4 at the club level, only the pro. SCCA and other sanctioning bodies outlawed them for a reason; if they were allowed to compete there would be no competition.
Keep in mind that I am still a huge BMW fan. No flames please, I will be one of you soon!

Dont worry, there'll be no flaming. My personal opinion is that in the right hands, around a circuit, an M3 will humiliate an S4. Drag races dont mean anything to me, not a single thing

K i didn't kno it was an NSX-R, yeah NSX and NSX-R's are both great cars.

would an s4 beat an M5 at drag/lap race?

If you keep up with the Speedvision race series you should already know what the S4 is capable of. Many private owned street machines have much more power than the two time champion S4. Watch for Audi to dominate the touring car division this comming year along with the GT.

i don't watch tv that much