Review: Audi RS4





Audi has released its new RS 4 sedan, with Avant and convertible variants to come. NZ Autocar's Peter Louisson gets to grips with the V8-powered 4wd RS 4 on the road and Taupo's extended race track.

Memories are made of drives like these. Special drives when the traffic melts away, you're on a road that swoops and dives, and you're in a vehicle that is designed to thrill. Most such memories are created not on the cols or passes through the French Alps however.

No, they're created here in New Zealand, where we are privileged to have some of the best bitumen snakes in the world. So anyway, there we were, on another of the countless brilliant roads that stud the central North Island in what will surely be remembered as one of Audi's most outrageous road-going vehicles yet, the RS 4.

If ever a compact flyer was going to give BMW's M3 a decent hurry along, this is it. And for proof, Audi decided to take the RS 4 and the local motoring scribblers to the newly-extended circuit at the Taupo Motorsport Park for a few hot laps.

Full review here



chewychewy - 6/23/2006 3:39:56 PM
+1 Boost
From the August issue of Road & Track



As you can see 0-60 in 4.3 seconds, 1/4 mile 12.8@109.7.


dblo7dblo7 - 6/23/2006 5:58:15 PM
+1 Boost
Performance is lacking. Nice ride but .88G lateral is sad for a sports car. Obviously due to its weight of nearly 2 tons! Wish Audi could have engineered the car with materials to reduce the weight to 3400Lbs and that would be a killer ride. I guess we will have to jsut yank out the rear seats and very heavy spare, purchase a set of light sport wheels, replace the front seats with light Sparcos, Carbon Fiber hood, and date girls that are in good shape!


chewychewy - 6/23/2006 6:55:59 PM
+1 Boost
They are sorta low, but in the Inside line (Edmunds) test there were better grip and stopping numbers, the test track for the one I posted was probably was not very grippy. Here are the handling numbers from another test, in this two test from Inside Line, the RS4 outhandles and outstops the BMW M6

BMW M6
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=115864/pageId=98987

Audi RS4

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=115689/pageId=98163




three2fourthree2four - 6/23/2006 8:15:12 PM
0 Boost
Chewy, get off of it, those test results are bs, they probably tested the cars with little fuel going downhill. Audi has professional drivers and they know what their car can do. These road and track writers are not professional drivers. Audi says that the RS4 can hit 60 in 4.8 seconds and porsche says that the 911 Carrera 4S hits 60 in 4.6 seconds. Now are you gonna say that Porsche underrates their times also, get an education, companies like this strive to be faster than their competition, and Porsche has a lot of it. Ferrari, Corvette, and Lamborghini just to name a few.


chewychewy - 6/23/2006 8:43:33 PM
+2 Boost
Go back to that thread. Read it again. Audi and most German companies undersestimate their times. Unlike American companies, which sometimes overrate the times, Audi does not. Have you ever seen a drag strip going downhill. They probably also test the car with a full tank of fuel, which is how curb weight is measured. Why is it so hard to believe the magazine. I also have a VIDEO where the Audi RS4 goes 0-62.5 in 4.4. It it a GERMAN VIDEO. Here it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odtZ-I28Tf4&search=RS4

Watch this video. Does it look like they are going downhill?


three2fourthree2four - 6/23/2006 8:57:33 PM
+1 Boost
They test the 60 time at the end of the entire test, so it is running on fumes. The stats are biased and thats all im gonna say, how about you go buy an RS4 and try to achieve that time. Well your time will be a little higher because it will probably take you 4.4 seconds to shift from 1st to 2nd gear. If you drive the way that you think your 60 time will be up in the 10-second range and you could make a video and tell everyone that you achieved better than factory at 4 seconds flat.


chewychewy - 6/23/2006 9:13:05 PM
+1 Boost
I think that Road and Track and all magazines test their cars they same way. If they got the time of 4.3 for the Audi and 4.1 for the Porsche that means the Porsche is .2 second quicker. I don't understand your point. I gave you two intances. In the Video, I think both the RS4 and the C55 were tested under the same constants. That means that the RS4 is .6 quicker than the C55. Road and Track got a time of 4.9 seconds for the BMW M3, that means that the Audi RS4 is .6 seconds faster. Here is proof.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/roadtests/pdf/2003/2003_03_z_comparison_data.pdf

I don't think that it takes 4 seconds to shift a gear. Why are they biased, is it because the RS4 outperformed your favorite car?


three2fourthree2four - 6/23/2006 10:05:35 PM
0 Boost
The RS4 would never outperform my favorite car because it is an F430. I was talking about you taking 4 seconds to shift a gear if you didnt catch that sarcasm which was about half of my comment. I could care less about a C55, I don't look at any Benz under $100k, because that's how much you have to pay to get a good mercedes.


chewychewy - 6/23/2006 10:16:32 PM
+2 Boost
But why are you so afraid of the Audi RS4 going 0-60 in 4.3 seconds. BTW, here is a Road and Track results for a test of the Ferrari F430


http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/0501_ferrari_data_panel.pdf

They must have been going downhill, jk.


chewychewy - 6/23/2006 11:54:08 PM
+2 Boost
Truth hurts. First you guys (BMW lovers/Audi haters) proclaimed that the Audi RS4 will not match the current BMW M3/M5 with numbers. Now that you have been owned with real data, you are out of ideas, you are out of ideas, now Audis just suck. BTW, the EVO is more like 4.6.


rackrack - 6/24/2006 12:03:10 PM
+2 Boost
"I don't care if a audi rs4 is faster than a 911, Mercedes sl amg 55, or an M6, an audi is not in them same league as BMW, Mercedes, or porsche.."

What league is audi not in? If I can beat an sl55, or 911 with a sedan for under 80k, and still fit in in my parking garage, where do I sign up?


Evo's are different beasts, and evo drivers will tell you that. Evo's are made for people under 25. Which is not a bad thing.


chewychewy - 6/24/2006 10:48:04 PM
+1 Boost
The slalom speed of 68.9 is better than the Covette
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/0412_comparo_data.pdf
Better than the Viper
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/0512_rivals_data_panel.pdf
Mazda MX5 and the Solstice
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=2907&page_number=2

It looks like the RS4 has very good handling. Sure it is heavy, but Quattro and DRC definately make up for that.


chewychewy - 6/24/2006 11:03:44 PM
+1 Boost
It is also better than the Corvette. I just gave data that showed that the RS4 handles better than the "iconic" MX5. Obviously it is not "overweight barge" like the other poster proclaimed.


chewychewy - 6/24/2006 11:19:41 PM
+1 Boost
BTW, the RS4 is 2.3 miles faster at the slalom than the old BMW M3. 68.9 versus 66.6.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/roadtests/pdf/2002_05_bmwm3.pdf


chewychewy - 6/25/2006 3:57:24 PM
+1 Boost
I said that the Audi RS4 has BETTER HANDLING THAN THE CORVETTE, I did not say that is a better car, which it is.


PlanoA4PlanoA4 - 6/26/2006 9:03:20 AM
+1 Boost
Audi Driver Magazine show the Curb weight as 3638 for the RS4.



PlanoA4PlanoA4 - 6/26/2006 9:21:15 AM
+1 Boost
Chewy
I agree with you, I think that R&T is pretty consistant with their testing criteria. If a car is .2 seconds quicker, then in real life it probably is. It makes no sense to plug and play figures from other tests and compare the results.


dbloseven
.88g sad for a sports car? This is not a Ferrari or even a 911. The R8 will be a "sports car", this is a "sport sedan". Besides it is the total of the package that matters, not one static test result.

You can take a car that wins on every single static test , and put it on the track and get beat by a car that is more balanced or is easier to drive. The Top Gear S4 vs M3 video proved that. The S4 was slower and uinderstaeered more, but on the track it had better balance and made less mistakes, hence it was fast.

This is similar to a triathlon athlete that posts outsatnding swim, running, and cycling times tested independently. But when put to the total test simply is not as consistant on the circuit. The winner is the one that has the best balance of the total sum of its parts.


PlanoA4PlanoA4 - 6/26/2006 9:36:33 AM
+2 Boost
Audi shares some common parts with VW (So does Porsche). But to say they are rebadged copies of a VW shows your ignorance of the facts. Yes they share floor pans in general (and even these are modified) but after that, few models share significant components with the VW sister model. Check the part numbers bubba and you will see this real quick. This type of sharing is not like a Toyota/Lexus where damn near everything in chassis and power train are identical. There are unique differences in the engineering of each brand.


PlanoA4PlanoA4 - 6/29/2006 3:38:46 PM
0 Boost
Sounds like you got a bad case of "Audi Envy".

As soon as you get facts you lay off, or misquote even more. Maybe the Audi guys are a bit more educated on the facts and provide less cannon fodder for you.

Hint: You want an easy target? Go for the Toyota/Lexus guys they are easier to screw with. I have thrown a few bogus bones in their camp on purpose to see what happens and they never figured it out. Key word in all of this is RESEARCH.
Copyright 2026 AutoSpies.com, LLC