Let us rejoice! WebRidesTV.com’s Shootout #4 is here, “Sibling Rivalry.” This shootout already has current and prospective BMW E92 M3 owners in a frenzy, as their tightey whiteys bunch up from our conclusion that an aftermarket tuned 335i is a better buy. Well, before your Fruit of the Loom gets any tighter around your sphincter, let us examine the facts. We can only squeeze in so much into the video, so let’s really delve into the numbers.

When we were considering vehicles to pit against the M3, many came to mind. The venerable Audi RS4 , the newcomer Lexus IS-F , and the overpowered (in our opinion) Mercedes C63 AMG . But really, how fun would it be to do the same thing everyone else is doing? So after much debate about the match up, our own Larry B and I came to the same conclusion – how about an aftermarket tuned 335i? And although there are plenty of tuning houses out there making obscene horsepower with the inline-6, we selected Dinan ’s stage 3. Sure, Dinan tends to be on the conservative side of the tuning spectrum, but a car needs to be reliable regardless of how much power it may make. Afterall, if you can’t drive your car because it’s constantly in the shop, that’s a deal killer for us.

Personally speaking, I have always loved the M3 – E30 with its bold fender flares and kick-ass performance (for its time); the E36 took a complete 180, with its under-the-radar looks; the E46 with its awesome on-track performance right out of the box. Certainly, the E92 M3 continues the tradition and I would certainly consider one if I was in the market for a performance coupe. With that being said, one can’t eliminate the 335i from consideration either, as boost is oh-so-sexy.

We calculated the bang-for-the-buck value based on completely bone stock models of each car. Since there has been so much debate about the price issue (since we compared bone stock to bone stock without any options), let’s take a look at the pricing structure of each vehicle equipped with popular options:

BMW M3 = $65,925
- Premium Package
- Technology Package
- 19″ Forged Wheels
- Gas Guzzler Tax
- Destination & Handling

BMW 335i + Dinan Stage 3 Package = $61,825
- Premium Package
- Sport Package
- Comfort Access System
- Navigation System
- 19″ Forged Wheels
- Destination & Handling

That’s a difference of $4,100 right off the bat, but when you account for the mark-up many dealers are charging for the M3, the difference becomes even bigger. And as the supply of 335i’s are plentiful at dealerships, you can acquire them for less than MSRP, which further widens the price gap between the M3 and the 335i.

Scorecard:
M3: 0
Dinan-prepped 335i: 1

So how efficient are each of the powerplants in delivering the goods?

BMW M3
- $159.24 per bhp
- $223.47 per ft-lbs

BMW 335i
- $206.03 per bhp
- $206.03 per ft-lbs

BMW 335i + Dinan Stage 3 Package
- $152.28 per bhp
- $134.40 per ft-lbs

With the addition of the Dinan goodies, the value proposition in terms of power output is vastly improved.

Scorecard:
M3: 0
Dinan-prepped 335i: 2

In terms of driving feel and performance, the script changes a bit as the M3 really shines. Although the Dinan-prepped 335i represents a vast improvement over the stock 335i, it still falls short of the M3.

- The M3 beat the Dinan-prepped 335i by an average of 4mph; peak velocity was 2mph faster for the V8
- The M3 was more crisp and responsive on the road course
- The Dinan-prepped 335i seemed to roll its front tires quite a bit through tight downhill turns at Horse Thief Mile; both cars were equipped with Michelin Pilot Sport rubber, although the wider tread footprint of the 335i probably represented a penalty through greater rolling resistance
- The M3 provided excellent steering response, while the 335i felt a little lazy
- The M3 was better off the line that the 335i during the quarter mile, although the 335i’s peaky power graph would have afforded the inline-6 an advantage if the run was longer; this is evidenced by the higher trap speed at the quarter mile

Scorecard:
M3: 1
Dinan-prepped 335i: 2

In terms of the driver experience, the M3 represents a more refined package. Even though I’m 6′3″, I was still able to find a position that permitted the use of a helmet during some of the stunt driving I performed with Craig Standton. With that being said, I still believe Audi does a much better job with seats and seating position, better than even the Japanese automakers. The steering wheel in the M3 was thick and sturdy, which is nice especially for track duty. All buttons, including DSC and the dynamic suspension system were easy to find. And although I am no fan of the iDrive system, the iteration in the new M3 seemed much more intuitive and easier to navigate.

In the 335i, the driving position seemed really weird and I couldn’t get myself into a comfortable position. And forget about wearing a helmet inside the 335i. No matter how low I adjusted the seats, I seemed to sit in a weird position. This vehicle just didn’t seem like a car for anyone over 6 feet. Finally, we could not find a switch for DSC anywhere in the car. On the dash, under the dash, center console… we looked everywhere but it was a futile effort.

Scorecard:
M3: 2
Dinan-equipped 335i: 2

With gas prices rising almost on a daily basis, fuel economy can’t be something easily ignored. Sure, buyers of the M3 or Dinan-prepped 335i may not care now, but fuel prices are becoming hard to ignore.

The M3 is already hampered by lower city and highway mileage figures out of the box compared to the stock 335i. Even with the Dinan package, the modified 335i suffered very little fuel efficiency loss as long as the engine was kept out of decent boost range. So for most highway cruising duties and light city driving, the turbocharged engine rules over the naturally aspirated V8.

It would have been interesting if BMW pursued an evolution of the turbo inline-6 rather than a brand new V8 for the new M3. Imagine more displacement, a stout bottom end, bigger turbos and bigger boost. THAT would have been VERY interesting indeed. (GT-R twin-turbo V6 comes to mind, for some reason)

Scorecard:
M3: 2
Dinan-equipped 335i: 3

So there you have it. The Dinan-equipped 335i wins on value, power output and fuel efficiency. The M3 wins out on driving dynamics and sheer driver experience. At the end of the day, what you may considering purchasing really depends on your priorities. The M3 does offer an excellent package right out of the box, but the 335i offers something darn close (and something superlative for a little more turning and $). If you want 100% of the experience and major trackability, then buy the M3. If you want 95% of the experience and less track-inclined driving for major savings, then an aftermarket tuned 335i might be the choice for you.

Either way, you can’t go wrong.

BOUT OF THE MIDDLEWEIGHTS

Ah joy, another Shoot Out under our belts and, yes, that’s a pun on our title fight theme, “Bout of the Middleweights.” We have and will always be huge Audi fans. A while back we took an RS4 out to a dry lake bed and had a BMW driver put it through its paces. The guy pushed the car so hard that he broke the clutch doing dust bunnies at close to 200 mph! I got to ride-along with him before the “malfunction” and nearly soiled my pants multiple times between overwhelming bouts of laughter and screaming. At the time, the RS4 was the true high-water mark for performance sedans. The new M3 sedan had not made it to our shores and the Lexus IS-F was still in-the-womb. A 4-door performance sedan from a luxury brand, whose commercials feature silver balls rolling around the perfect gaps of body panels, hard to imagine, right?

Well like most performance freaks, I was skeptical that Lexus had the huevos to build a performance sedan that would challenge my beloved RS4. So when the car arrived at WebRidesTV HQ, I was stoked to take it out for a quick spin and size it up. That was if I could get past the crowd that had gathered in the parking lot. All the guys were fighting over who got the honors of the first drive. I had to admit, the IS-F looked real good: nice aggressive stance and meaty low-profile rubber wrapped around sweet rims. Even the four fake exhaust pipes were forgivable. After a quick lap around the local office circuit, I thought, holy shit, those sly bastards had done it! The IS-F was a real contender and that exhaust note, at full throttle. It sounds like a panther climbed into the cockpit and ripped my ear off!

There was only one thing left to do… We had to pit the Lexus IS-F against the Audi RS4 in a no-holds-barred Shoot Out. Would the RS4 clean its clock or would the unproven IS-F give the Audi the shocker. Well my friends, it was a clear upset. Lexus does have the “silver balls” after all! We hope you enjoy the video and we want to share all the detailed stats from our data loggers because you car freaks love charts and graphs.

First, the IS-F is more competitively priced in stock, no option trim. Standard features are similar across the board, satellite-based navigation being the most expensive option you can order with either vehicle. Although the brand perception / equity of Lexus has risen quite high, there is definitely a bigger prestige factor in owning the German Audi.

Scorecard
IS-F: 1
RS4: 1

Second, although the IS-F seems to have the upper hand in the powerplant department, with its slightly higher horsepower output and markedly bigger torque figure – which can be attributed to bigger displacement – the RS4 presents the driver with a much flatter and progressive torque curve over its 5.0L Japanese rival. The IS-F’s torque curve is peaky at onset but falls flat on its face as the revs move upward, while the RS4’s curve continues to climb at a smooth and progressive rate, largely due to the magic conjured up by the direct fuel injection FSI system. This system allows for better fuel atomization and efficiency over its port injected brethren and this may have been the saving grace on the road course. When it comes to the transmission, the IS-F’s automatic system works quite well. It was surprisingly crisp and quick in upshifts and the ECU definitely made quick work of rev matching when downshifting. About the only complain in the lower gears was how the tranny seemed to catch 2nd and 1st way too hard during downshifts and seemed rather unrefined. Regardless, having 8 gears assures that the driver is ALWAYS in the right rev range on the track. Audi’s 6-speed manual was very silky. Gears were easy to engage and heel-toe downshifts were easy to execute. But the added weight from the Quattro all wheel drive system and the natural tendency for AWD vehicle to understeer definitely detracted from the track experience. The addition of a thicker / stiffer rear anti-roll bar, a stiffer rear spring and more aggressive rear dampening would work wonders to bring the handling balance closer to neutral. As we discovered in the slalom course, the better balanced RWD system of the IS-F would pay dividends.

Scorecard
IS-F: 2
RS4: 1

Finally, the IS-F comes out ahead in the weight department, weighing nearly 70lbs less. But the significance isn’t this difference. Rather, it’s how that weight is distributed wheel to wheel. Audi took steps with the B7 chassis to bring the weight of the engine closer to the firewall, hopefully generating better fore-aft weight balance. Despite this attempt, however, the RS4 is still a front heavy vehicle which further exacerbates the understeer problem presented by its AWD system. A slightly longer wheelbase, such as that found in the IS-F, would give engineers a few more precious inches to work with further driving the engine away from the front axle. The AWD drive system also adds pounds to the RS4 that the IS-F does not have to deal with. With that being said, if the RS4 was a FR platform it’s safe to assume that it would be a lighter vehicle. But the fact of the matter is that the RS4 is weighed down by a front differential, transfer case and center differential in addition to the usual driveshaft and rear differential found in the IS-F. Although AWD is a Godsend in inclement weather, it didn’t add a marked advantage to the RS4.

Scorecard
IS-F: 3
RS4: 1

In the slalom challenge, Craig Stanton was able to deliver on the promise of the IS-F with a higher G-load and faster trap speed. As alluded to earlier, the front heavy qualities of the RS4 did not allow the vehicle to transition side-to-side as quickly as the IS-F.

The center of gravity on the RS4 seemed higher, pitching the car ever so slightly more side to side. Throw in more significant fore-aft weight transfer and you have a vehicle that’s going to lose its poise far more quickly and harshly in a slalom environment.

More and more, manufacturers are adopting lighter materials to lower the center of gravity in their vehicles. The E46 Euro-spec M3 CSL used a carbon roof, which has also been adopted for the E92 M3. Mitsubishi uses an even lighter aluminum roof in the Lancer Evolution IX MR to the same effect. Audi would be wise to take on this practice in the next iteration of the RS4.

The IS-F also possesses a quicker steering rack @ 13.6:1 over the RS4’s 13.1:1. And ultimate turning circle for the IS-F is 3 feet shorter. Any one wonder why the IS-F felt more crisp?

Scorecard
IS-F: 4
RS4: 1

In the braking department, the RS4 beat out the IS-F. Whereas the IS-F is equipped with a 6-piston calipers up front, the RS4 comes in big with 8-pistons of clamping power. The same system found on the Lamborghini Gallardo. Better distribution of braking pressure across the rotor and two-piece rotors for better heat dissipation led to the RS4’s victory. But one has to wonder whether the extra 2 pistons per corner were added to compensate for the front heavy nature of the Audi.

Scorecard
IS-F: 4
RS4: 2

The last, yet most important, challenge was on the road course. The culmination of each vehicle’s performance characteristics. As you may have already guessed, the IS-F beat out the RS4 in this challenge as well. But aside from sheet elapsed time statistics, it was the IS-F’s fun factor that really shined on the track.

Simply put, the IS-F is a more fun car to drive. With traction & stability control turned off, the IS-F loves to swing its tail out through throttle oversteer. The car rewards you with a fun quotient much higher than the RS4 and that’s what defines a car’s value to a driver at the end of the day.

Although the IS-F won this round of the battle, the RS4 cannot be counted out in the war. The new R8 is a prime example of a neutral, superbly balanced car from Audi. As this is the last model year for the RS4, we can only hope for even more stunning performance from the next iteration.

But until then, the Lexus IS-F rules the roost!

Final Scorecard
IS-F: 5
RS4: 2

]]> http://blog.webridestv.com/2008/04/webridestvcom-shootout-3-beyond-the-screen/feed/ 1