CAR WARS! So, BMW's Dropping The All-New M4 BUT How's It Compare To The Audi RS5?

Today I arrived in Wisconsin. Although most of you may wonder why that's significant, there's a good reason. That's because I am here to drive — tomorrow — the all-new BMW M3 sedan and M4 coupe at the legendary Road America.

Considering I've been extremely excited about this vehicle's promise, it's a big deal to me. BUT, there's still competition it will have to fend off.

Being that it's a sports car, it will always see comparison to Porsche. Although it seems ridiculous to think so, Agent 001's question from this weekend happens more often than you think. That's because a large percentage of BMW M3 guys buy it BEFORE their dream 911 or Cayman.

More closely aligned with the all-new M4 though is the currently existing Audi RS5. Though I've piloted the RS5 extensively and I dislike its heft and isolated driving experience, the car does put up impressive numbers on paper. For some folks that's all that matters — bragging rights.

Recently Auto Zeitung put the two head-to-head to compare. This is what it found:


BMW M4 Coupé vs Audi RS5 Coupé

Weight:....1615 kg..........1788 kg

Performance Data:
0-40 km/h:....1,4 s..........1,2 s
0-100 km/h:...4,2 s..........4,3 s
0-160 km/h:...8,5 s..........9,3 s
0-200 km/h:...12,9 s........14,5 s

Laptimes Autozeitung Test Track Config:.........1.38,9 min..........1.41,5 min (fastest laptime list)
Slalom (18m): 70,8 km/h..........67,5 km/h

Braking (100-0 km/h, warm):....33,3 m..........32,8 m

Fuel Consumption:.....11,9 l/100 km..........13,8 l/100 km

Read Article

MattDarringer - 6/8/2014 7:38:33 PM

+2 Boost

I'll take BMW's RWD over Audi's numb AWD. Yes the Audi is remarkable, but Audi needs to go RWD. The FWD with the quattro band aid grafted in just isn't up to what BMW and MB do with their RWD designs. The RS/S/A5 is a gorgeous car...too bad it's not RWD.

Agent00R - 6/8/2014 11:48:20 PM

-1 Boost

Audi going RWD, I don't think we'll see the day.

Why do you find the RS5 remarkable? I can't think of a vehicle that over promised and under delivered SO much.

cidflekken - 6/8/2014 7:59:06 PM

+4 Boost

Way to go M4.

merce63amg - 6/8/2014 9:41:42 PM

+3 Boost

Damn the Audi is almost 400lbs heavier! Looks like an easy win for the M4, the 2.6 second lap diff., 2 mph slalom speed diff, and 1.6 diff. to 125mph are all pretty significant. Plus it more fuel efficient.

bw5011 - 6/8/2014 10:23:12 PM

+1 Boost

Car and driver had this going the other way and now we seeing questionable times... hmmmm

cidflekken - 6/8/2014 10:45:46 PM

+3 Boost

Take every publication's results with a grain of salt.

BMWm4 - 6/9/2014 11:11:21 AM

+1 Boost

going the other way? There is not another comparison with Car & Driver as of yet?

bw5011 - 6/9/2014 9:37:34 PM

+1 Boost

I stand corrected the article I read was the 435i vs the S5. The S5 beat it out.

quizz - 6/9/2014 6:08:08 AM

+3 Boost

As cars increase in HP, the laws of physics require that AWD be used to put all that power to the pavement. That's why all new AMG models will be AWD. When the next M3/M4 comes with 500+ HP, it will have no choice but to go AWD otherwise there will be too much HP lost to traction. The Ferrari F12 Berlinetta has huge problems with their 0-60 times for this reason - smooth starts for over 700HP on two rear wheels? No way. If the F12 had AWD its 0-60 time would be amazing.

Agent00R - 6/9/2014 6:52:29 AM

0 Boost

Great points.

DTMFan - 6/9/2014 8:31:17 AM

+2 Boost

As BMW have been keen to point out, they are not chasing horsepower, they are after weight reduction. The benefits of which can be seen here.

Power will make your car accelerate faster, and that's it. Lighter weight will help it accelerate, turn and stop better.

When the G series based M3/M4 arrive in 7 years time, It wouldn't surpris me if their combustion engines but out quite a bit less than the F8x models. Look along the lines of the i8.

MattDarringer - 6/14/2014 11:07:20 AM

+1 Boost

And with AWD come numbness. I'll stick with RWD.

bigheadmazda - 6/9/2014 9:14:44 AM

+2 Boost

I'm not surprised at all to see the M4 have better numbers than the RS5. Being that the RS5 has already been out for 4 years I would hope for BMW's sake that the new M4 would defeat to old RS5. To be honest the M4's numbers compared to a RS5's don't really impress me much for a car that had at least 3 years to knock it out of the park. At the end of the day I'll stay with the RS5. Especially as an everyday driving car. People love the look of the A/S/RS 5. It still turns heads everywhere. However, both of these cars can say bye bye once the new C63amg sedan/coupe drops.

PQ40 - 6/9/2014 10:18:21 AM

+2 Boost

The RS5 came out in 2010 and had 3 years over the last M3 E92 which came out in 2007, and Its numbers barely matched the M3's..They often lapped within tenths of each other. The M4's #s are more impressive considering it has only 11hp more than the last version. A 2.6 second lap difference is massive.

BMWm4 - 6/9/2014 11:34:09 AM

+1 Boost

That is a pretty good figure that the M4 put down. On a racetrack 2.6 seconds is a big gap. That is a good couple of turns of a lead. In fact by the second lap the M4 is out of sight to the RS5 and by the 20th lap the M4 is almost lapping the RS5

GermanNut - 6/9/2014 1:03:43 PM

-1 Boost

The Audi RS5 will obviously be slower than the M4 - it's three years older. BMW's only saving grace for high-performance models are the M3 and M4. The rest of the M lineup including the M5, M6, M6 Gran Coupe and X5M and X6M have strayed away from BMW's traditional M philosophy regarding driving enjoyment.

BMWm4 - 6/9/2014 1:47:14 PM

+3 Boost

Nuttie - Even when the E92 M3 was around the RS5 wasnt able to best it as it lost EVERY Comparison test .... Actually the M5 Competition package & the M6 Gran Coupe have proven very worthy towards the competition.

Plus how do you know anything about driving enjoyment? Have you even driven any of these cars? How bout sat in one? Most likely not