M4 vs. The Competition: Audi RS5

by Bernie McGroarty on December 18, 2013, 5:03 pm
Let's see how the M4 matches up against it's competition in this photo comparison. BMW M4 vs. Audi RS5.

Audi's RS5 is sleek looking machine offering up 450 hp and 317 torques. The Audi's power is pushed through all-wheel drive. That power is good for a 0-60 of 4.5 seconds. On the other hand, BMW's muscular M4 packs 425 hp and a bit more torque at 406. BMW keeps it real letting the power escape to the rear wheels.

This is about style and design though. Which do you choose?

”rsfive”

”rsfive”

”rsfive”

More info on the M4 is right here!


Leave a Comment

You must be a registered member to comment on stories. Please take a moment to register for your free account now. If you already have an account, log in using fields below.










19 responses to M4 vs. The Competition: Audi RS5

bigscore commented:
December 26, 2013, 1:20 am

Dont forget the M4 weighs quite a bit less than the audi as well and will be easier to tune!
skier commented:
December 26, 2013, 3:06 pm

M4 for me!
F32435xi commented:
December 27, 2013, 7:27 am

This is a great comparison, great enough that I'm focusing on performance rather than style for now. The RS5 is a high revving (8000+ rpm) N/A V8 with nominal torque, kinda like the outgoing M3. The M4 is a TT I6 with lots of torque. As good as the RS5 is, the new powertrain in the M4 is awesome. Initial indicators have the M4 pegging 60mph in 3.9 seconds. That's with RWD and that's .6 seconds faster than the AWD Audi, both being equipped with a DCT. Round one goes to BMW.
Keepittrill commented:
December 27, 2013, 10:42 am

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32435xi View Post
This is a great comparison, great enough that I'm focusing on performance rather than style for now. The RS5 is a high revving (8000+ rpm) N/A V8 with nominal torque, kinda like the outgoing M3. The M4 is a TT I6 with lots of torque. As good as the RS5 is, the new powertrain in the M4 is awesome. Initial indicators have the M4 pegging 60mph in 3.9 seconds. That's with RWD and that's .6 seconds faster than the AWD Audi, both being equipped with a DCT. Round one goes to BMW.
Do you really believe the RS5 does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds?

More like 4.1-4.2

Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
maisav commented:
December 27, 2013, 6:14 pm

m4, for sure. In my opinion, m3 was already better than rs5.
I drove stock m3 in Monza circuit for about 20 laps and i was in my friend rs5. I know both the car.
skier commented:
December 29, 2013, 11:26 am

F82 M4 is much lighter at 3,300 lbs vs RS5 4,000 lbs. Huge difference for cars in the same category.
smashhell commented:
December 31, 2013, 9:55 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keepittrill View Post
Do you really believe the RS5 does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds?

More like 4.1-4.2

Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
M3 is also faster than 3.9.
These are manufacture time. They are both quoted slower than they are.
I am expecting the new M3 to do 0-60 in 3.5-3.6


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
jasonsaltz commented:
January 6, 2014, 4:05 am

The whole Audi 5 line has its basic shape from the E92, which I love. Both of these vehicles have some ugly front ends. M4 lower portion of the front spoiler doesnt look good to me in pictures, and the Audi looks likes the new Lexus, which cannot be good. Both are awesome to drive, but my butt will be in the M.
kosmo commented:
January 6, 2014, 10:03 am

I'm with Jason.

The grill on the M4 isn't perfect by any means, but the Audi's is just plain ugly as sin.

Sadly, the only thing that will result in actual ownership for me is the materialization of the lightly-rumored M3 wagon.

I've been waiting for an M3 wagon since 2004.
bmw325 commented:
January 6, 2014, 10:11 am

I slightly prefer the Audi's looks and NA v8 but would be hard pressed to turn down the m4 for its much lighter weight.

Pretty sure the m4 only achieves 3300 pounds of you get it with carbon roof, ceramic brakes and no other options. But even if its 3500 as typically equipped that's still much lighter than 4k.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
everettpa1 commented:
January 8, 2014, 2:54 pm

RS5 still looks better even after 6 years on this body style. M4 interior, tech, and powertrains are better. I was real close to buying an RS5 last year and loved it's character, exhaust note (best I've heard) and rumbly V8. But the low end torque sucks and you need to really out your foot into it to get going. I still think about the RS5, so much character.

Personally, I think the M3 looks better than the M4.
Alpine300ZHP commented:
January 8, 2014, 4:26 pm

I love the RS5, but I ended up with an M3. They are very close in performance, but the M is a bit better.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
2010drive commented:
February 13, 2014, 1:30 pm

The RS5 will be a serious contender in 2016 when it gets the 4.0 twin turbo V8 that's in the RS7
2010drive commented:
February 13, 2014, 1:39 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by smashhell View Post
M3 is also faster than 3.9.
These are manufacture time. They are both quoted slower than they are.
I am expecting the new M3 to do 0-60 in 3.5-3.6


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
Considering my C6 Z06 with 505HP and 345's on the rears did 0-60 in 3.7 without needing to shift out of first gear I highly doubt this car will be a 3.5-3.6.
Keepittrill commented:
February 13, 2014, 3:21 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010drive View Post
Considering my C6 Z06 with 505HP and 345's on the rears did 0-60 in 3.7 without needing to shift out of first gear I highly doubt this car will be a 3.5-3.6.
60 in first gear? I'm in love!


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
falar commented:
February 20, 2014, 4:43 pm

No comparison. That Audi is sporting a seriously ugly front.
Keepittrill commented:
February 20, 2014, 8:53 pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by falar View Post
No comparison. That Audi is sporting a seriously ugly front.
Yeah, but so is the M4...


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
nhman commented:
February 21, 2014, 7:29 am

While "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", I don't find the upcoming M4 to be attractive. Perhaps it is the two colors being shown on a regular basis or maybe it will be different in the RW. For the moment, comparing the exterior design between the M3/M4 and RS5, I would be the latter.

In-terms of performance for the M3/M4, let's wait until the reviews from CAR, EVO, C&D, MT, etc. It certainly will be better in most performance metrics vs. the E9x (history has shown this for each M).
Jason_G commented:
March 2, 2014, 11:25 pm

None of them, M3 for me