I'll be the first to admit I'm no expert on either car, but maybe someone could explain this. I've been kicking around the idea of buying an R8. From what I know, the two cars share (basically) the same engine, transmission, drive train, and brakes so any excuse about development costs vs. limited production seems flawed. Also the R8 has two less doors, and one less rear seat. I'm also going to assume that the suspension just HAS to be cheaper than the RS4's.

So that leaves basically only the body and frame that's different. So why does one R8 cost as much as two fully-loaded RS4s?

It does seem to be an RS4 in a smaller package which logically should mean less materials and thus not SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive like it is.

But here's what you do....wait a couple of years and then pick one up for half the original MSRP on the car. Even high-end cars these days are getting rocked with terrible resale value which can be GREAT for those in the market for a purchase. Hell my RS4 was almost exactly 1.5 years from in-service date, had 11k miles on it with a ****load of money put into it for suspension/wheels/etc and it was just over 30k off the sticker price (which from what I saw did NOT include any dealer markup).

aluminum space frame.
<img src="http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics-2009/a/2009-Audi-R8-5-2-FSI-quattro-Aluminum-Space-Frame-1920x1440.jpg">

That said, I hear where you're coming from.... but I also think that the R8 is a "good value" when you compare it to a 997TT, V8 Vantage, and similarly priced sub-exotic. If you drive one, you'll quickly realize why you'll be spending $50k more on a car with essentially the same powertrain.

But then if you wait and get the V10 version, I'm sure any doubts will be erased :)

with a car that's produced in huge numbers.

Also, isn't that chassis/frame made of more expensive materials? Trans has to be different due to engine placement, AWD split too.

you going to report me to the nomenclature police?

hand built

&lt;/lax&gt;

8:01.90 153.99 km/h - Audi R8, 420 PS/1620 kg (AutoBild sportscars 11/08)

8:09 --- 151.66 km/h - Audi RS4, 420 PS/1728 kg (sport auto 06/06)


At the time, the RS4 was the fastest 4-door sedan (beat the mighty E60 V10 M5 by 4 secs). Now the CTS-V is sub 8mins, which means it beats the R8...

8:13 --- 150.43 km/h - BMW M5 (E60), 507 PS/1844 kg (sport auto 12/04)

7:59.22 154.70 km/h - Cadillac CTS-V, 550 PS/??? kg,

bought it 3 years old for about the same as the R8 was going for..........<ul><li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wXnW1skhVY">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wXnW1skhVY</a</li></ul>

The similarities between the RS4 and R8... start and end with the engine! That's all, and more often than not I'd be compelled to think they were not made from the same DNA (visually especially). I had a chance to try the R8 and RS4 (including hot laps at Infineon), and you would not think they have ANYTHING in common (with the exception of the high strung engine as mentioned above). Talk about nose heaviness vs tail happiness and overall balance and composure, entirely different way of approaching and taking/exiting an apex (if you jumped from one car to the other immediately after a hot lap you will almost crash unless you adjust your approach, but I digress). So R&amp;D accts for a huge factor to build this car from the ground up (vs. dumping an engine in an existing A4 body [granted minor mods on the fenders/bumpers] and having to worry about improving the suspension, basically). The one-of-a-kind nature of the R8 means custom, expensive and specific products and materials that need to be developed that by definition will not be rolled into another setup (aluminum frame, carbon, full interior/cabin and specially developed trim, etc.) In other words, such cost cannot be disbursed and absorbed across a wider model range.

Look over to the BMW camp. Take the latest M5 and M6 for example. Same engine, marginally different in pricing ($85K vs $102K base). But those cars are just about the same, short of the 2 extra doors. Both front engine (technically mid engine), same suspension setup, tranny, brakes, exhaust, intake, etc. etc. Then BMW has the luxury to spread the R&amp;D and production costs over a lot bigger base (both bodies were developed for the entire range of engines). There will be 2,000 total RS4s imported in the US vs 25,000 M5s (5K per year times 5 model years). Ditto for the M6 vs. R8 where that figure will be even more drastic given the limited production of R8 (which again gives the manufacturer grounds to raise price based on a 'loose' interpretation of the principle from economics - Perfect Price Discrimination). Now if the M6 didn't have sybllings in the form of 630i (Europe), 635i, 645i/650i, 630D/635D (Europe) but was a 'custom' built body just for the M6 and didn't leverage off so heavily from the M5, then I recon it would be double it's price.

I don't think the price differential of the R8 to the RS4 is stratospheric all things considered (probably because the RS4 is so expensive to begin with, think about it, it is the priciest compared to anything in its class: ///M3, C63, IS-F, CTS-V). Some might say it is prepostorous to pay for 1 RS4 what you can pay to have 2 A4s. To each there own. So while I don't have an issue with the relative price of RS4 vs. R8, I have an issue with the absolute price of the R8 (especially since up until a mere few months ago you couldn't even get it at sticker). It is not an exotic in the pure sense of the word (looks maybe, performance def not), so for that ballpark I would personally rather go for something from Stutgart, or add a bit to the budget and find where Maranello is on the map (or Bologna for that matter) ;-o)

Now with the V-10 off the Lambo, it is approaching exotic car territory, but if Audi slaps it a 200K+ price, than I think they will shoot themselves in the foot...

mercedes had a lot of success rewrapping the e-class into a cls, bmw less success making the m5 into the m6. for an emotional purchase, i'd imagine most people would opt for the sexier design even if it does cost more money. i mean coupes always cost more than sedans even tho the difference is two freakin doors.

These are very different cars that happen to share an engine and badge.

that shares more with the Gallardo than any other Audi product. Yes the engine is very similar to the RS4, but the R-tronic is out of the Gallardo.

It is not just some gussied up lesser Audi product.

audi used rs4 parts to make a baby gallardo. so you are saying the chassis is worth an extra 70k? im not saying it's bad or anything, hell if there's any car around 100k i'd have a hard time choosing between this and a maserati gran turismo, i doubt there was much cost difference for them to make an r8 versus an rs4 when the platform was already engineered. before it came out it was supposed to be priced closer to a 911 s, and now it's at the turbo's price level. they know they had a winner and charged accordingly.

yeah of course it had to be reworked for the midengine platform so it costs more money overall, but the engine is mostly the same. I have no qualms with specific parts being more expensive for a low production car, or reworkings, but for what the OP was wondering about costs, I still feel that in the end you are still paying 70k for the engine to be in the middle than up front (i know other stuff is different but you get my general point).

And I'm sorry you smell like poop.... perhaps this could be clouding your appreciation for the differences. :)

im just addressing the op's concern, and the fact that it's a 70k difference. engines are a big part of the equation for supercars and the fact is, this semi-supercar has the same engine as a souped up 4door a4 may make people wonder where the extra 70k went. i think that's why there's such hoopla over the v10 making it a legitimate supercar and viable alternative to the gallardo.

If you have a few beers and snort a line, they look almost identical, too.

Heck, even the tires are made out of the same material!

B6/B7 is the same, A3 = Golf, the list is long.

it's a lot to do with the timing

on a 70k rs4, considering the engine is over 20k uh yeah that is a lot more $$$$ than the exhaust system or the oiling system. And name one supercar where the engine was not the centerpoint of the car? Again, a lot of the things you and other ppl are mentioning were done to put the engine in the middle, i still dont get what you are having trouble understanding. I didn't say any of that stuff was free, nor did I argue with the results.

The OP was asking what the ultimate differences are, and those are the main differences, engine now in the middle and better styling.

edit: you guys are unrelenting. im reminded of a bunch of sarcastic teenage girls. what's different? well, just like everything duh. i have my opinion you have yours, dont see why everyone has to get off to say theirs is the correct one.

You can only recoup so much money on a car sold in low numbers, on a small assembly line. The specialized parts on an RS4 versus an A4 not only include the limited number that are made, but the cost to keep those parts stocked... there is certainly more profit built into the R8, but probably not as much as we might imagine...

If I post that the RS4 has a 3 cylinder engine, are you going to say that I'm entitled to my opinion? Or are you going to say that I'm wrong?