[footie]

AMS has just tested the RS3 against it's rivals to see if it's really that good, they brought along the ultimate expressive of a small sportscar in the form of the Porsche Cayman R, arguably the best handling at almost any price and to keep the comparison truly relevant it included probably the RS3's biggest competitor, the mighty 1M coupe.

Well the results and final placing speak for themselves.


1st place - Audi RS3 (251/300 points, 84 %)
It's AMS guys, so the best car for everyday use won. And that's the Audi. But the performance is great as well, 4,5 seconds to 100 km/h, fastest laptime on the wet and it's faster than the 1M around the dry track.

Engine: i5, turbo, 340 hp, 450 Nm
Drive: AWD, 7-speed-DSG
Weight: 1590 kg
Vmax.: 250 km/h (limited)
0-40 km/h in 1,2 s
0-100 km/h in 4,5 s
0-200 km/h in 15,7 s
Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 6th gear: 6,3 s
18 m slalom: 65,2 km/h
Braking (100-0 km/h): 33,5 m (warm, Continental SportContact5)
Average fuel consumption: 12,7 l/100 km

2nd place - Porsche Cayman R PDK (245/300 points, 82 %)
The sportiest car of the trio. Direct, precise and brutally fast. Fastest dry lap. 0-100 km/h in 4,4 s (0,2 s faster than factory's claim).

Engine: b6, 330 hp, 370 Nm
Drive: RWD, 7-speed-DSG
Weight: 1360 kg
Vmax.: 280 km/h
0-40 km/h in 1,5 s
0-100 km/h in 4,4 s
0-200 km/h in 15,5 s
Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 6th gear: 9,7 s
18 m slalom: 67,4 km/h
Braking (100-0 km/h): 33,0 m (warm, Bridgestone Potenza RE050)
Average fuel consumption: 12,5 l/100 km

3rd place - BMW 1M (232/300 points, 77 %)
Great biturbo engine, weak traction on wet. However, it's still a great "Funmachine" for everyone.

Engine: i6, biturbo, 340 hp, 450 Nm (Overboost: 500 Nm)
Drive: RWD, 6-speed-manual
Weight: 1500 kg
Vmax.: 250 km/h (limited)
0-40 km/h in 1,6 s
0-100 km/h in 4,7 s
0-200 km/h in 16,6 s
Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 6th gear: 6,5 s
18 m slalom: 68,5 km/h
Braking (100-0 km/h): 34,4 m (warm, Michelin Pilot Sport)
Average fuel consumption: 12,9 l/100 km

Dry laptimes:
0.58,7 min - Cayman R PDK
0.59,8 min - RS3
1.00,2 min - 1M
Wet laptimes:
1.03,2 min - RS3
1.04,8 min - Cayman R PDK
1.05,7 min - 1M

To boost the appeal of the RS3 as a true driver's car Audi are to offer an additional performance enchancing option in the form of a wider wheel/tyre combination, wheel width at the front goes up to 8.5" and rubber to 255. If there were doubts about the nose staying firmly on line round a corner before then this option will put those fears to rest.

I bet with this option the Cayman R wouldn't have even won in the dry and the 1M would have felt like it was there only to make up the numbers.


Source: **************

[pixelblue]

EVO tested the RS3 vs Litchfield Impreza Type-20 vs Ford Focus RS MP350. it came last. the usual sentiments were expressed. "great fit and finish, fast point to point car but uninvolved and numb". another example that numbers only doesn't mean anything. nothing new here but I am glad you have found something to validate your belief

[johanness]

Originally Posted by pixelblue

EVO tested the RS3 vs Litchfield Impreza Type-20 vs Ford Focus RS MP350. it came last. the usual sentiments were expressed. "great fit and finish, fast point to point car but uninvolved and numb". another example that numbers only doesn't mean anything. nothing new here but I am glad you have found something to validate your belief

Well said

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by pixelblue

EVO tested the RS3 vs Litchfield Impreza Type-20 vs Ford Focus RS MP350. it came last. the usual sentiments were expressed. "great fit and finish, fast point to point car but uninvolved and numb". another example that numbers only doesn't mean anything. nothing new here but I am glad you have found something to validate your belief

Oh snap!

[Year's_End]

I would expect as much of AMS to place the RS3 in front of the Cayman R. Their comparisons always have unusual standings at the end.

[TK-421]

Originally Posted by pixelblue

EVO tested the RS3 vs Litchfield Impreza Type-20 vs Ford Focus RS MP350. it came last. the usual sentiments were expressed. "great fit and finish, fast point to point car but uninvolved and numb". another example that numbers only doesn't mean anything. nothing new here but I am glad you have found something to validate your belief

Oh really? Wow, I wonder why Footie didn't post that comparo? Actually, why he is even here would be a better question.

[Echo M3]

Guys, please keep in mind the tires each car was running on.

The RS3 was running on CSC's, which are superior to the Michelin pilot sports in wet weather. We haven't been told if the other performance tests (0-60, etc) were done in wet, dry, or damp conditions.

That being said, very impressive figures being thrown up by the RS3. I still wouldn't ever buy one, though, as I don't appreciate the philosophy or driving experience that AWD gives (having owned one in the past). I feel vastly more in control (and trusting) of my M3 than I ever did of any previous AWD cars I have owned.

[CAPSGOD]

Originally Posted by pixelblue

EVO tested the RS3 vs Litchfield Impreza Type-20 vs Ford Focus RS MP350. it came last. the usual sentiments were expressed. "great fit and finish, fast point to point car but uninvolved and numb". another example that numbers only doesn't mean anything. nothing new here but I am glad you have found something to validate your belief

Modded vs stock is like comparing apples to oranges.

[pixelblue]

^ the test wasn't an analytical comparison per se. there were no 0-60, slalom speed or etc,. it was more a subjective, seat of the pants impression while the cars were flogged up and down France's southern Alps mountain roads. although you are correct the other cars were modded but we can all agree those cars can not even be compared to Caymen R or the 1M. I tend to trust EVO's opinion in their reviews. they are probably the least biased publication out there with the exception of some bias towards british cars in general of course.

[footie]

Originally Posted by pixelblue

^ the test wasn't an analytical comparison per se. there were no 0-60, slalom speed or etc,. it was more a subjective, seat of the pants impression while the cars were flogged up and down France's southern Alps mountain roads. although you are correct the other cars were modded but we can all agree those cars can not even be compared to Caymen R or the 1M. I tend to trust EVO's opinion in their reviews. they are probably the least biased publication out there with the exception of some bias towards british cars in general of course.

Why assume that these modified cars (Imperza and Focus) aren't worthy of comparison with either the 1M or Cayman R, after all the RS3 has been compared to both here by AMS and it beat the pair of them 'overall'. That statement of overall doesn't necessarily mean that the RS3 was the most entertaining or the best balance car of the three, only that the differences compared to the rest wasn't significate enough to sway the outcome as must have done everything else better. Remember this is a complete test of everything and not only performance.

Each are equally great in their own right, those interested in either of the other two won't feel short changed or anything, only that the RS3 is the more complete package, something that quattroGmbH try to do with every one of their models.

Buy your 1M and feel happy, one or two results where the RS3 beats it only means those tests looked at the bigger picture.

[footie]

Originally Posted by pman10

Guys, please keep in mind the tires each car was running on.

The RS3 was running on CSC's, which are superior to the Michelin pilot sports in wet weather. We haven't been told if the other performance tests (0-60, etc) were done in wet, dry, or damp conditions.

That being said, very impressive figures being thrown up by the RS3. I still wouldn't ever buy one, though, as I don't appreciate the philosophy or driving experience that AWD gives (having owned one in the past). I feel vastly more in control (and trusting) of my M3 than I ever did of any previous AWD cars I have owned.

Many would say that the MPS are the best dry weather performance tyre of the three here, yet it still placed the 1M behind the RS3 in the dry lap test. Give the car and the company some credit here, they beat the 1M fair and square, not only on the track, not only in acceleration but also overall.

[koreez88]

Not sure how Cayman R is even considered a rival. it's 20k more, and a stripped lightweight version of a regular Cayman S with no radio and stuff.

[OBI_agent]

Good point by Koreez.

And RS3 really appeals to me. I dunno about steering feel but if someone wants a quick hatchback, RS3 is the way to go. I wish BMW would have offered their 1M in a hatchback form as well.

[footie]

I think their results are spot on here, if you ignore practicality then the Cayman R wins by 8 points over the RS3 with the 1M a further 12 points back, but with everything taken into consideration then the RS3 wins by 6 points.

So they are basically repeating my own opinion that the RS3's performance abilities are close enough in most people's eye to make the areas that it's outstanding at seal the deal. But the same could very well be said about the 1M, it's traction issues only really show up in poor conditions and as they did say it's a real hoot to drive so it too is a car that though it didn't win it has still enough plus points to be a rewarding thing to own, maybethose points in some poeple's eyes make it the best of the bunch.

What these reviews shows is that both these two cars are exceptional driver's car in their own right and worthy of the badge bestowed on them and at a price that more can afford.

[BMW269]

Looks like the 1M is not that good. Better for me to pass it by.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Levi

Looks like the 1M is not that good. Better for me to pass it by.

That's your opinion, I and probably others might view it a little differently in that AMS and CAR looked at the whole package and felt the RS3 was better, in fact the journalist for CAR would have put he's money in the 1M but acknowledge the RS3 to be better overall.

We don't have to agree all the time and nor do we need to want the same things.

[MikeyV]

The test in this months CAR put the RS3 ahead of the 1M too, George Kacher was the journo.

[Brandon26pdx]

Originally Posted by koreez88

Not sure how Cayman R is even considered a rival. it's 20k more, and a stripped lightweight version of a regular Cayman S with no radio and stuff.

Somewhat agree. It's a CSL'esq version of what should have been a Cayman S in the comparison. They just grabbed the fastest version of each car I think.

[footie]

Originally Posted by koreez88

Not sure how Cayman R is even considered a rival. it's 20k more, and a stripped lightweight version of a regular Cayman S with no radio and stuff.

Do you not think that both the RS3 and 1M fared so well against the greatest Cayman Porsche has yet developed is credit to just how good both the RS3 and 1M are, after all they are lowest run of their respective performance ladder.

On pure performance the Cayman R is still king here, the RS3 gets surprisingly close in ability and the 1M on pure exciting but neither of them can combine the two. I guess that's why it cost as much as it does, whether you feel it's worth this is up to the individual, personally I think any one of them would be a pleasure to own.

[newowner35i]

Funny how with other tests the 1m was quicker than the rs3 and some faster than the cayman r

[footie]

Originally Posted by newowner35i

Funny how with other tests the 1m was quicker than the rs3 and some faster than the cayman r

Which tests had the 1M quicker?

[miiipilot]

I think the RS3 is a solid car. Prolly a blasty to drive.

miiipilot