CH on Cars (M135i vs RS3)

[Poverty]

Does the TTRS understeer that badly in standard form?

No.

TTRS is 200kg lighter, lower center of gravity, runs 255 width tyres all around aswell as different camber and track iirc.

TTRS s-tronic smashes the e92 m3 around the track by quite a margin.

[sub39h]

Very impressed with that BMW but like most BMWs I just don't "want" one in the same way I long for an RS3 (tho if I had the money I'd buy a 2nd hand TT-RS instead).

... it is an RS Audi. The brand represents what Audi can achieve in a sports car...

No it doesn't. Audi is a company. They design their cars for maximum profit. This amounts to two things: compromise for the sake of better margins, and compromise for the sake of increased sales. Audi know what they are doing, hence why their sales have grown year on year at a faster rate than BMW and Mercedes and why the A3, A6 and TT are the best selling cars in their respective segments.

Not everyone is an enthusiast. Not everyone wants a racecar for the road. Audi have positioned their car and engineered in attributes that it feels will give it the greatest profit. As a technical exercise, I don't think this is the best Audi engineers could do as you have implied.

[Oli]

Some of the RS3's ive been looking at have a wider alloy wheel option, with a 255 front tyre - Presumably this is to help reduce understeer??  Does anyone know if this wider wheel was available on the launch cars or just the second batch of cars?

[sub39h]

There was a big hoo-ha about it on World Car Fans prior to launch because it's an odd characteristic to have wider wheels on the front of a car. Based on this I'd imagine it was available as an option from launch

[Poverty]

I thought at launch the rs3 ran 235 upfront and 225 at the rear. No expert though

[rich83]

I thought at launch the rs3 ran 235 upfront and 225 at the rear. No expert though

thats what i thought... the wheel widths are the same allround AFAIK, but the rear tyres are narrow. This to me is the most ridiculous thing I've every heard!

[andrewparker]

... it is an RS Audi. The brand represents what Audi can achieve in a sports car...

No it doesn't. Audi is a company. They design their cars for maximum profit. This amounts to two things: compromise for the sake of better margins, and compromise for the sake of increased sales. Audi know what they are doing, hence why their sales have grown year on year at a faster rate than BMW and Mercedes and why the A3, A6 and TT are the best selling cars in their respective segments.

Haha, well if that isn't reason to criticise it then I don't know what is. Quattro GmbH should be ashamed.

[sub39h]

You're kidding yourself if you think every other car company doesn't do this. Their primary motivation is to make profit. That is the only reason they are here.

I'm sure even M cars could be made better. Why not make their entire body out of carbon fibre? Because the car would cost too much and it wouldn't sell. So they compromise for the sake of better sales and hence better profitability.

I also think it's kind of ironic that you mention that it's something to criticise when we're members of a car modifying forum? We spend our money rectifying all the things VAG compromised on on our respective cars.

[andrewparker]

I'm not disputing what you're saying, I agree, but I think Audi deserve a fair amount of flack for diluting their Motorsport brand.

From the RS3 brochure:

"In the world of Audi Motorsport, there are few things more evocative than the letters RS"

They're f*cking their heritage.

[sub39h]

M from a few years ago (paraphrased) "we will never have a turbocharged, automatic or SUV M car".

Porsche from a few years ago (also paraphrased) "there will never be a diesel Porsche."

I rest my case.

[Sunglasses Ron]

I think you're both right to a certain degree.. Yes car manufactures are there to make money, but they are also out there to promote what they can do with certain models of their cars.
The 'RS' models for example are never going to be a huge money spinner, as there just isn't the volume there to do this. A 2.0TDI A3 will get a lot more attention when it comes to money making as there are frankly millions of them (as there is with the X2.0d BM's).
I remember when Ford launched the first Focus RS for example - It was reported that they actually lost money on every car they sold and was more of a 'this is what we can do' exercise..

[Sunglasses Ron]

M from a few years ago (paraphrased) "we will never have a turbocharged, automatic or SUV M car".

I rest my case.

That's not through choice though is it? More to do with tight EU emission laws which has just about every other car manufacture's arm up there back too (other than super car marques which are in a totally different category).
What BMW have tried to do with their TC's engines though, is try and make them as close to a NA feel as possible..

[sub39h]

It is through choice. They can still sell whatever car they like, but if it's taxed more people won't buy it. So they sell short their heritage for profit.

It really is no different imho, it's all chasing sales.

[andrewparker]

M from a few years ago (paraphrased) "we will never have a turbocharged, automatic or SUV M car".

But look what they did with them. The 4.4L twin-turbo V8 is an absolute peach. It's quicker than the V10, it's more economical, and more useable. It improved the M5 unquestionably. When the M3 gets a smaller capacity turbocharged engine that will undoubtedly be a better car, not because it makes BMW more money, but because it makes the car better! The DCT 'box is arguably the best semi-automatic 'box available. Again, it betters the PERFORMANCE of their cars.

[tony_danza]

Does the TTRS understeer that badly in standard form?

No.

TTRS is 200kg lighter, lower center of gravity, runs 255 width tyres all around aswell as different camber and track iirc.

TTRS s-tronic smashes the e92 m3 around the track by quite a margin.

Sport Auto Ring lap times.

M3 8:05
TT RS 8:09

Or are we playing modified cars vs stock again?