[thebigcheese]

Originally Posted by KillerExcessive

That was my experience with my 1-year ownership of a B9.5 S5 (I didn't get the RS5 because I didn't feel like the differences were worth the higher price tag)- I enjoyed sitting in it and looking at it more than I did driving it.

My G82 is sharper, tighter and louder in every way. It did take me about 2 weeks to acclimate- I thought the car was super twitchy and much too aggressive when I first picked it up, but now I'm used to it and the sharpness is just right (This is why a simple test drive won't do for these cars, as I thought the S5 was nearly perfect when I test drove it). The quattro on the Audi is amazing in bad weather though- sticks to the pavement like pigeon guano to car bonnet.

"Soulless" is a common adjective used for Audi by many folks who've sampled the different offerings. The 5-pot in TTRS and RS3 are amazing though, I still miss having that engine in my life but both cars are a bit too small for my liking.

I daily a B9 S4 and heavily modded it due to it being "souless". I knew the car had potential - and it it very fun to drive now.

With that being said. I also looked at an RS5, and i didnt see any differences between it and my S4 (after the mods). Looking forward to getting my M3 CS!

[22M4inMA]

Originally Posted by MinMax

Audi has invested way too much budget on developing their headlight instead of their platform…

Yep lol, they are winning the Headlight wars for sure...

[JetDriver]

I am cross-shopping the new RS3 and G80c-x right now. It's impossible to get test drives in any of these cars these days, which I guess is understandable, but when one is spending some serious coin on a vehicle, it'd be nice to make sure you're really going to enjoy it. I'll be on vacation in Miami later in the month and found a G80c to drive around with Turo rideshare for 2-1/2 days. It's almost the exact spec that I would order and I get 300 miles to play with for about $750. Not cheap, but at least I get to spend some time with the car. I can't find any RS3's on Turo right now. They are too rare. I have the opportunity to be #2 on the waitlist for the RS3 with a $1,000 refundable deposit, which is about a year wait for most likely a 2024. I don't think there's any doubt the new RS3 is no slouch. 7:40 Nurburgring time vs. 7:28 for the M4c-x. Not bad for a car with 100 less hp. If I optioned it out with the CCB's and the whole 9 yards, I'm looking at about $74k. A similarly optioned out G80cx is near $100k. I know this is sort of an apples to oranges comparison and on paper, the M3cx performs better, which it probably should for the price difference. Hopefully I can get some seat time in the RS3 to compare the two, but I will probably get my name on the list.

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by JetDriver

I am cross-shopping the new RS3 and G80c-x right now. It's impossible to get test drives in any of these cars these days, which I guess is understandable, but when one is spending some serious coin on a vehicle, it'd be nice to make sure you're really going to enjoy it. I'll be on vacation in Miami later in the month and found a G80c to drive around with Turo rideshare for 2-1/2 days. It's almost the exact spec that I would order and I get 300 miles to play with for about $750. Not cheap, but at least I get to spend some time with the car. I can't find any RS3's on Turo right now. They are too rare. I have the opportunity to be #2 on the waitlist for the RS3 with a $1,000 refundable deposit, which is about a year wait for most likely a 2024. I don't think there's any doubt the new RS3 is no slouch. 7:40 Nurburgring time vs. 7:28 for the M4c-x. Not bad for a car with 100 less hp. If I optioned it out with the CCB's and the whole 9 yards, I'm looking at about $74k. A similarly optioned out G80cx is near $100k. I know this is sort of an apples to oranges comparison and on paper, the M3cx performs better, which it probably should for the price difference. Hopefully I can get some seat time in the RS3 to compare the two, but I will probably get my name on the list.

I assume you realize the RS3 is much smaller and would compare with an M2. I'd rather have the M2 than the RS3 unless you need 4 doors. The RS3 is much less satisfying than the M3CX, which is in a whole different ballgame. The M3CX can be got for low to mid 80s if you option it lightly.

[Znomorph4theWin]

I had ‘18 RS5 that I traded in for my soon to be delivered M3CX.

I had the RS5 for 4 years so I’m more than qualified to offer opinions on it.

1. The car was plain gorgeous. Loved looking at it after a nice drive.
2. The interior was ok. Nothing super special in terms of materials. BMW m3 has a much nicer special feeling. Better materials and build quality in the M3
3. The RS5 interior has to many squeaks and rattles. Dealers tried to fix them but never really did. Became worse over time and just learned to live with it.
4. Engine was nice and had a pretty good sound to it. But it is much slower than the M3. Also, the m3 inline 6 is way smoother/responsive than the v6 in the Audi.
5. Suspension was just ok. It has a weird hobby horse feeling when going over bumps. The rebound damping seemed off.
6. The ambient lighting was very nice. Lots more colour options and than the m3. You can also separate the upper dash colours from the footwells ones.
7. The chassis of the rs5 had too much twist/flex. Car creaked like a old wooden fence…
8. I had the ceramic front brakes. Tons of stopping power but very difficult to modulate. They were very grabby at slow speeds. Little/no brake dust was nice. However, I was always worried about the cost of replacing the rotors should they get chipped. Chose the steel brakes for the m3
9. Driving it was a bit snoozy. Never raised my heart beat up.

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by Znomorph4theWin

I had ‘18 RS5 that I traded in for my soon to be delivered M3CX.

I had the RS5 for 4 years so I’m more than qualified to offer opinions on it.

1. The car was plain gorgeous. Loved looking at it after a nice drive.
2. The interior was ok. Nothing super special in terms of materials. BMW m3 has a much nicer special feeling. Better materials and build quality in the M3
3. The RS5 interior has to many squeaks and rattles. Dealers tried to fix them but never really did. Became worse over time and just learned to live with it.
4. Engine was nice and had a pretty good sound to it. But it is much slower than the M3. Also, the m3 inline 6 is way smoother/responsive than the v6 in the Audi.
5. Suspension was just ok. It has a weird hobby horse feeling when going over bumps. The rebound damping seemed off.
6. The ambient lighting was very nice. Lots more colour options and than the m3. You can also separate the upper dash colours from the footwells ones.
7. The chassis of the rs5 had too much twist/flex. Car creaked like a old wooden fence…
8. I had the ceramic front brakes. Tons of stopping power but very difficult to modulate. They were very grabby at slow speeds. Little/no brake dust was nice. However, I was always worried about the cost of replacing the rotors should they get chipped. Chose the steel brakes for the m3

This reverberates with my Audi experience as well. But he's cross shopping an RS3 not an RS5. The RS5 also has terrible residual value relative to an M3CX.

[JetDriver]

Originally Posted by M3macster

I assume you realize the RS3 is much smaller and would compare with an M2. I'd rather have the M2 than the RS3 unless you need 4 doors. The RS3 is much less satisfying than the M3CX, which is in a whole different ballgame. The M3CX can be got for low to mid 80s if you option it lightly.

Well that is what kind of attracts me to the Audi. I miss the size of the E90. The G80 sits somewhere between the E39 and E60 M5. It is not a small car. The M3 keeps growing, but then again so has every other vehicle in existence today. I do prefer 4-doors for convenience, so the M2 would be out. I have kids; none of which would feel uncomfortable in an RS3-sized vehicle. I could definitely option out a bare-bones M3cx and keep it in the 80's, but then again I could option out a bare-bones RS3 as well and keep it in the low 60's. Either way you cut it, they are $20k apart unless I compare the RS3 to the regular RWD M3.

I have to go see if I can sit in an A3 at an Audi dealer so I can get a feel of its size, although according to specs, the RS3 is slightly larger than the A3 (not sure if that includes internal dimensions).

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by JetDriver

Well that is what kind of attracts me to the Audi. I miss the size of the E90. The G80 sits somewhere between the E39 and E60 M5. It is not a small car. The M3 keeps growing, but then again so has every other vehicle in existence today. I do prefer 4-doors for convenience, so the M2 would be out. I have kids; none of which would feel uncomfortable in an RS3-sized vehicle. I could definitely option out a bare-bones M3cx and keep it in the 80's, but then again I could option out a bare-bones RS3 as well and keep it in the low 60's. Either way you cut it, they are $20k apart unless I compare the RS3 to the regular RWD M3.

I have to go see if I can sit in an A3 at an Audi dealer so I can get a feel of its size, although according to specs, the RS3 is slightly larger than the A3 (not sure if that includes internal dimensions).

Wow, the RS3 is 11" shorter in length but has the same amount of legroom in front and second rows... weird. Must be the hood and the trunk, unless the bench is narrower and perhaps the front seats as well. Something seems odd there.

As for the length of the M3, I was doing the same comparison the other day - the G80 is almost exactly the same length as the E39. Weighs 150-200 pounds less, has 103 more HP, and 110 more lb ft of torque at 1,050 lower rpm.

[JetDriver]

Originally Posted by M3macster

Wow, the RS3 is 11" shorter in length but has the same amount of legroom in front and second rows... weird. Must be the hood and the trunk, unless the bench is narrower and perhaps the front seats as well. Something seems odd there.

As for the length of the M3, I was doing the same comparison the other day - the G80 is almost exactly the same length as the E39. Weighs 150-200 pounds less, has 103 more HP, and 110 more lb ft of torque at 1,050 lower rpm.

Has the same amount of legroom as the G80? Wow. I didn't even realize that. I figured the G80 was larger both inside and out. Looks like the M3 has quite a bit more headroom in the rear though so the RS3's may be a bit cramped for taller passengers. Yeah, it's definitely got less trunk space. Just looked that up - 11.3 vs. 13.1 cubic feet. The front end/engine bay is also shorter in the RS3 given the transverse engine layout vs. the inline 6, which all accounts for an overall shorter car while maintaining the same internal dimensions. This makes me feel a little better. Don't get me wrong; the M3 has been on my bucket list for almost two decades and I've just managed to feel comfortable enough financially to spend 100 grand on a car (my wife still doesn't agree) so it's taking everything in me to humor the Audi, but I believe, at least with the RS3, it deserves consideration. Apparently these RS3's are putting down 410-420whp and nearly 400 ft-lb of torque stock. Much like the G80, the are way under-rated from factory in hp and torque. Even with a stage 1 flash (a bunch of companies are working on one now), this thing will be in the 460-480whp range with very little effort.

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by JetDriver

Has the same amount of legroom as the G80? Wow. I didn't even realize that. I figured the G80 was larger both inside and out. Yeah, it's definitely got less trunk space. Just looked that up - 11.3 vs. 13.1 cubic feet. The front end/engine bay is also shorter in the RS3 given the transverse engine layout vs. the inline 6, which all accounts for an overall shorter car while maintaining the same internal dimensions. This makes me feel a little better. Don't get me wrong; the M3 has been on my bucket list for almost two decades and I've just managed to feel comfortable enough financially to spend 100 grand on a car (my wife still doesn't agree) so it's taking everything in me to humor the Audi, but I believe, at least with the RS3, it deserves consideration. Apparently these RS3's are putting down 410-420whp and nearly 400 ft-lb of torque stock. Much like the G80, the are way under-rated from factory in hp and torque. Even with a stage 1 flash (a bunch of companies are working on one now), this thing will be in the 460-480whp range with very little effort.

It will be a bit narrower and less head room, I would imagine. But probably worth keeping the wife happy and saving the $$$.

[JetDriver]

Originally Posted by M3macster

It will be a bit narrower and less head room, I would imagine. But probably worth keeping the wife happy and saving the $$$.

It'll definitely be "The Battle of the Front Grills" between the two of them.

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by JetDriver

Has the same amount of legroom as the G80? Wow. I didn't even realize that. I figured the G80 was larger both inside and out. Looks like the M3 has quite a bit more headroom in the rear though so the RS3's may be a bit cramped for taller passengers. Yeah, it's definitely got less trunk space. Just looked that up - 11.3 vs. 13.1 cubic feet. The front end/engine bay is also shorter in the RS3 given the transverse engine layout vs. the inline 6, which all accounts for an overall shorter car while maintaining the same internal dimensions. This makes me feel a little better. Don't get me wrong; the M3 has been on my bucket list for almost two decades and I've just managed to feel comfortable enough financially to spend 100 grand on a car (my wife still doesn't agree) so it's taking everything in me to humor the Audi, but I believe, at least with the RS3, it deserves consideration. Apparently these RS3's are putting down 410-420whp and nearly 400 ft-lb of torque stock. Much like the G80, the are way under-rated from factory in hp and torque. Even with a stage 1 flash (a bunch of companies are working on one now), this thing will be in the 460-480whp range with very little effort.

Found another video - I'm now not so sure this car has the same amount of interior space as the M3, even if C&D says they do... very thorough review of the driving dynamics.

[Allerum]

Originally Posted by M3macster

Wow, the RS3 is 11" shorter in length but has the same amount of legroom in front and second rows... weird. Must be the hood and the trunk, unless the bench is narrower and perhaps the front seats as well. Something seems odd there.

As for the length of the M3, I was doing the same comparison the other day - the G80 is almost exactly the same length as the E39. Weighs 150-200 pounds less, has 103 more HP, and 110 more lb ft of torque at 1,050 lower rpm.

So If you stay away from e85 and have just basic bolt on's intake/dp/inlet/IC you can get a happy 550hp ish. About 500 whp. These weigh around 3500-3600 lbs. So yes that 11 inches is half from the nose and half in the trunk. You are maybe talking 1 inch less room at the shoulder, inside compared to M3.

I wanted a bigger trunk and RWD focused car, but I have enjoyed my 4 years with my RS3 and tracking it even mostly stock. Gets about 30 mpg if your nice and 20 average because I love that sound hah.

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by Allerum

So If you stay away from e85 and have just basic bolt on's intake/dp/inlet/IC you can get a happy 550hp ish. About 500 whp. These weigh around 3500-3600 lbs. So yes that 11 inches is half from the nose and half in the trunk. You are maybe talking 1 inch less room at the shoulder, inside compared to M3.

I wanted a bigger trunk and RWD focused car, but I have enjoyed my 4 years with my RS3 and tracking it even mostly stock. Gets about 30 mpg if your nice and 20 average because I love that sound hah.

Do you have any gopro videos of the sound/track days you could share?

[Allerum]

Originally Posted by M3macster

Do you have any gopro videos of the sound/track days you could share?

I haven't uploaded in a while. But I have some videos on my channel from track days and deals gap. I did place first on the cold and wet day so that was fun.

I did do a run after a tune and it ran 11.468 @ 120. uploaded comparison to stock same mods delta is just a tune.

But I was on all seasons and the 330 wasn't very good, so it will probably get down to 11.2 ish. This is without a downpipe and just a tune and intake with intercooler.


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7X...SH6b9OJxxHappw