[Conissah]

Originally Posted by Captain Blood

Unless you are 6 foot, and your wife is 4'11.......

Lol, y'all kill me. Slide it all the forwards for her, and when you get back in, just slide it back. Pretty easy to make a mental note of where it was. I'm just saying that ruling a car out of a potential purchase because it was a manual seat over power is hilarious.

Everyone complains about how piggy the M2's are, but then aren't willing to compromise on any feature to actually save weight, it's ridiculous. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by Conissah

Lol, y'all kill me. Slide it all the forwards for her, and when you get back in, just slide it back. Pretty easy to make a mental note of where it was. I'm just saying that ruling a car out of a potential purchase because it was a manual seat over power is hilarious.

Everyone complains about how piggy the M2's are, but then aren't willing to compromise on any feature to actually save weight, it's ridiculous. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Agreed. I hate power seats. I swear that each time I press the memory button on my wife's car, it picks a random new position instead of actually returning to any previous setting.

Manual seats are faster, lighter, and less likely to fail. I had a friend who bought a nice used 850i and it immediately needed something silly like $3k in repairs to the seat motors.

[stein_325i]

Here you go, this thread should help. The original poster owns both an M2C DCT and RS3 and compares the two. https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1636740

[DrFerry]

I must've been asleep at the wheel. This one snuck by me after its launch last year.. I'm just now catching up on what Audi have achieved. I wonder if they offer a Coupe version of the RS3. 0-60 in 3.3 to 3.6 seconds, (depending on who's testing it) cheaper than an M3/M4 and all wheel drive (quatro).

Audi's RS3 Is So Insane It Has To Be Our 2023 Car of the Year by Alex on Autos

.
2023 Audi RS3 Review // Trick And Treat by Throttle House

.
Carwow's Audi RS3 Review

.
The 2022 RS3's Doug DeMuro score is intriguing due to its proximity to the 2021 M3 in his list.

[wtwo3]

Originally Posted by DrFerry

0-60 in 3.3 to 3.6 seconds, (depending on who's testing it) cheaper than an M3/M4 and all wheel drive (quatro).

The 2022 RS3's Doug DeMuro score is intriguing due to its proximity to the 2021 M3 in his list.

It's not an M3/M4 competitor - it's an M2 competitor. If you're referencing Doug's score (which I personally don't put a lot of stake in), it's rated similarly to the F87 - The F87 beating it out in handling and fun to drive - the RS3 winning in practicality and comfort (you're comparing 4 doors to 2). Will be interesting how it compares to the G87.

Beyond that, M cars don't typically focus on 0-60 metrics. They focus on handling and overall driving dynamics.

I'm not taking anything away from the RS3 - it's a brilliant car, but I would never cross-shop that with an M3/M4.

[DrFerry]

Originally Posted by DrFerry

I must've been asleep at the wheel. This one snuck by me after its launch last year.. I'm just now catching up on what Audi have achieved. I wonder if they offer a Coupe version of the RS3. 0-60 in 3.3 to 3.6 seconds, (depending on who's testing it) cheaper than an M3/M4 and all wheel drive (quatro). The 2022 RS3's Doug DeMuro score is intriguing due to its proximity to the 2021 M3 in his list.

Originally Posted by wtwo3

It's not an M3/M4 competitor - it's an M2 competitor. If you're referencing Doug's score (which I personally don't put a lot of stake in), it's rated similarly to the F87 - The F87 beating it out in handling and fun to drive - the RS3 winning in practicality and comfort (you're comparing 4 doors to 2). Will be interesting how it compares to the G87. Beyond that, M cars don't typically focus on 0-60 metrics. They focus on handling and overall driving dynamics. I'm not taking anything away from the RS3 - it's a brilliant car, but I would never cross-shop that with an M3/M4.

I didn't actually mean to infer to the reader that the new '23 RS3 was a competitor of the M3/M4, but I admit such a meaning could be gleaned. What is (was) intriguing to me is the RS3s proximity to Doug's M3/M4 score, though I don't put much stock in Doug's score(s) either. Given that Doug's RS3 score is right on top of the F87 M2, you're right the RS3 is perhaps more of a 4 door, all wheel drive, F87 M2 competitor (?). The G87 might eventually surpass the RS3 in all areas except for the RS3's quatro system and better aesthetics (looks) over the G87. I tend to think the G87 is one of the uglier cars BMW has ever made. But that's just me, since looks are subjective i.e. beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

In my experience, the "M" brand, and M cars in general, have tended to focus on all three of the metrics you mentioned i.e. 0-60 times, handling, and overall driving dynamics (and even practicality since many M car variants have four doors). I say this because, BMW M brand have decreased 0-60 times ever since 1999, at least for their M3 models, and that's been done even in the face of escalating curb weights. See chart below.
.
https://autofiles.com/0-60-times/bmw/m3/
.
https://www.zeroto60times.com/2018/0...of-the-bmw-m3/
.

[wtwo3]

Originally Posted by DrFerry

In my experience, the "M" brand, and M cars in general, have tended to focus on all three of the metrics you mentioned i.e. 0-60 times, handling, and overall driving dynamics (and even practicality since many M car variants have four doors). I say this because, BMW M brand have decreased 0-60 times ever since 1999, at least for their M3 models, and that's been done even in the face of escalating curb weights. See chart below.
.
https://autofiles.com/0-60-times/bmw/m3/
.
https://www.zeroto60times.com/2018/0...of-the-bmw-m3/
.

True - although you can probably pull a similar chart for any brand/model - that's just natural progression. Cars (typically) don't get slower despite getting heavier.

The reason I say that M cars (particularly M3/M4) don't focus as much on 0-60 times is because of the gear ratios paired to the S58 - which are meant more for top end performance than they are for 0-60 performance. If they wanted to focus more on 0-60 times, they'd adjust gear ratios to more closely resemble the ratios paired to the m340i's b58 motor. IMO the M3/M4 offer the 0-60 times that they do more so to stay competitive in the segment - but the real focus is top end performance and handling.

[Donatello.]

I've driven the RS3. Very fun to drive, but the price is too high for the car IMO. Especially used market as things are still correcting. I ran a modded one from a roll in my Hellcat. I had at least a car length on him the whole time.

[10"]

the ONLY thing good about these is the 5 banger turbo engine—which is of course a thing of beauty. Basically half a V10 and it sounds incredible.

The rest of the car is a sloppy mess of a bastardized VW GTI. Literally nothing else interesting about the RS3 besides the engine, IMO.

[BMWCCA1]

Originally Posted by 10"

the ONLY thing good about these is the 5 banger turbo engine—which is of course a thing of beauty. Basically half a V10 and it sounds incredible.

The rest of the car is a sloppy mess of a bastardized VW GTI. Literally nothing else interesting about the RS3 besides the engine, IMO.

After 19-years of selling Audi before and after the Unintended Acceleration crisis, I never want to see a 5-cylinder VW truck engine again. They sound just as bad as any Subaru.

[Coconut]

Either way the 5-cylinder is unique and makes a great sound. It does actually sound similar to the V10, just lesser.

[pikkagtr]

It is a fwd based car with fwd underpinning
The engine is transverse mount and most of its weight is in the front
Haldex built in understeer
The "performance" package has staggered wheels which the tires are wider in the FRONT
That tells you all you need to know about it's driving dynamics
Hard pass

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by Onesie

Why do people keep repeating this thing about a 5-cylinder being a V10 cut in half?

I have never heard anyone claim their “4-banger” or “4-pot” (usually referred as “you couldn’t afford the 6, so you bought the 4”) being referred as a V8 cut in half.

And it makes the same sense if someone did. Stop this nonsense please. Make it stop. V10s don’t rumble. V10s aren’t unbalanced.

Uh, yes, V10s are unbalanced. And sometimes even manufacturers refer to fours as half of a V8
https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/bl...e-ls-head/amp/

[10"]

Originally Posted by Coconut

Either way the 5-cylinder is unique and makes a great sound. It does actually sound similar to the V10, just lesser.

Yep. They sound great. Some peeps are clueless.

[10"]

Originally Posted by Onesie

Why do people keep repeating this thing about a 5-cylinder being a V10 cut in half?

I have never heard anyone claim their “4-banger” or “4-pot” (usually referred as “you couldn’t afford the 6, so you bought the 4”) being referred as a V8 cut in half.

And it makes the same sense if someone did. Stop this nonsense please. Make it stop. V10s don’t rumble. V10s aren’t unbalanced.

what in the world are you talking about?? LOL. The Audi 5 cylinder is legendary in its own right—-and yes it does sound like a V10 with a slightly different tone.

Your post is unbalanced!

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by pikkagtr

It is a fwd based car with fwd underpinning
The engine is transverse mount and most of its weight is in the front
Haldex built in understeer
The "performance" package has staggered wheels which the tires are wider in the FRONT
That tells you all you need to know about it's driving dynamics
Hard pass

True of the 8V, but the 8Y doesn’t use Haldex, but instead the newer Magna torque vectoring rear diffs. They do continue to offer the reverse staggered tires, but they appear to be standard now.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by 10"

and yes it does sound like a V10 with a slightly different tone.

Well then everything sounds like a V10, with a different tone...

[G MONEY]

Originally Posted by 10"

Yep. They sound great. Some peeps are clueless.

They do sound good!! The clueless ones are saying the F/G M cars can sound good. When I'm fact, they are horrendous!!! G's are a bit better than F but both sound like chainsaws on steroids with pops and bangs to make it even worse. Lol

[x622]

Originally Posted by G MONEY

They do sound good!! The clueless ones are saying the F/G M cars can sound good. When I'm fact, they are horrendous!!! G's are a bit better than F but both sound like chainsaws on steroids with pops and bangs to make it even worse. Lol

Agreed, my RS3 sounded better than my F80.

I still want to do a TTRS as a track dumpster.

[wtwo3]

Originally Posted by Onesie

I can’t believe you’re saying a V12 cut in half sounds bad.
V12s sound awesome!! What’s wrong with you…

Personally I prefer 4 cylinders in multiples of 3.

[FrostyDC4]

Are these things reliable when stock and not being tuned within an inch of its life?

[G MONEY]

Originally Posted by FrostyDC4

Are these things reliable when stock and not being tuned within an inch of its life?

Stock? What the hell is that? 🤪😉🤣