i've test driven 2, still in the break-in period, but even below 5K RPM, the thing does not feel fast. it's down right slow in fact. for various reasons, i am thinking of making move to m3, but after the test drives, i'm really reconsidering. thoughts?

Its funny, I feel the exact opposite. The M3 motor needs to be reved, but when you get on it, it rips through the rev band harder and faster then my RS4 did.
The RS4 motor def has more power down low and its more usable for daily driving.

Plus the M3 is lighter.

I passed on the M3 for the same reason (and about 10 more - and this while having my beloved M5 and being a huge bimmer guy!) No joke, I was not in the Audi camp just yet, so it tells you how much the RS4 did for me to jump across to the 'dark' side ;-o). In fact, there are at least 3 other former M5 owners on this board alone who made the transtion from the E39 M5 to the RS4 (me, ELEVENS, Jenner, GreatWhite).

The M3 felt seriously underpowered, no sign of tq until 5K rpm, and the V8 exhaust note didn't even sound muscular or visceral relative to the RS4. I liked the design of the coupe (especially in white or LeMans Blue with the carbon roof), but coupes almost always look better than their 4-door sedan brethren, so passing on the E90 M3 was an easy choice. The hood scoops as seen from the driver's viewpoint reminded me of sitting...in a Mustang! Too much in your face and downright tacky from my perspective. I am more about the power of understatement and a wolf in sheep's clothing guy, hence why both the E39 M5 and RS4 were my toy. Needless creases, vents, side grills, air scoops/gills, etc. - no value for me. For example, one vent on the hood is non-functional (like the RS4 the E9x M3 has one intake) and purely cosmetic, which I felt was tacky and just wrong for an ///M (bling like that is more suited for an Evo or STI IMO).

I ended up getting a 135i which in fuly stock form makes more tq than the M3 (300lbs vs. 295). In fact, that number is under-rated, dynoes show these cars to be making right around 290 tq at the wheel, vs. 270 for the RS4 which is rated at 317tq at the crank. What's even better - max tq is achieved at a low 1500 RPM, while the M3 is pointless to drive under 4500RPM. A simple Dinan or Vishnu chip gets you right about the 400hp category for the N54 engine (3.0TT), there are a lot of 335i's out there giving the M3 more than a run for it's money. The M3 engine is pretty much maxed out (as is the RS4 or any N/A engine producing 100hp per liter), the N54 is just a start IMO ;-o)

I am sure member Nicht will chime in, he is the best person to give you a real life comparo as he has had both the RS4 and E90 M3 (DSG) in his stable. As much as I am a stick guy, the truth is the E9x M3 and E60M5 are better suited for the DSG/SMG tranny than a manual. So on that principle alone the M3 lost for me. Add the exclusivity (or lack thereof for the M3), I was sold on the RS4. Total imported RS4s over the 2 model yrs stand at under 2300 (sedans, not counting verts), while the annual production run of the M3 is a shade under 5000. That explains why in my metro area there are so many of them, literally for every RS4 I see about 10 M3s, not exaggerating. If I were to consider a car today and the RS4 was unavailable, I may even prefer the CTS-V over the M3 (something I never thought I would live the day to say - a Caddy over a Bimmer!)

I had a friend visiting this weekend with a new M3 sedan with the DCT. I thought is was a fabulous car (though it needs a Tubi just like the RS4 does). The seats are great, the steering is great, the package is really nice.

Remember to hit the M button, or you do not have full power. It's not like the S button for us, you truly do not have all the beans without it.

I thought the transmission when used in anger was incredibly fast. If you are just driving about there is some lag when you pull the paddle until things start to happen that imparts a "paddle shifter auto" feel to the box. This disappears at high throttle inputs where the shifts seem almost instantaneous. The engine does feel like it needs higher revs, something I find easier to do in a paddle shift car. It's a great package.

I prefer the manual over the DCT. I prefer to be more involved, but the DCT is good fun when you are at the track.

My issue right now, is that I can get a brand new M3 for the same price or even less then a used RS4 in Canada, plus the whole FSI issue is of great concern, so not sure if I want to get another RS4 now. Both are fantastic cars.

the sport button on an e9x M3 does not increase HP, only the throttle curve...

it does go from 400 to 500 HP on the e60 M5

the M3 is by no means a 'down right slow' car

it's a good bit faster from 60 to 100 than the RS4, maybe as much as 1.5 to 2 seconds...

it's torque is comparable...295 vs 315, and the M has a wide band 90% from 2000 to redline iirc...similar to the RS4...plus it's 300 lbs lighter, almost 8%, which offsets the T difference...

all that can be manipulated with gearing and power band...

the M3 is an amazing car, 50/50 wt dist and pristine handling...
but imho the RS4 is a better all around package and daily driver and gives up very little in performance in the dry, and pulls ahead in less than ideal conditions...

the sport button on an e9x M3 does not increase HP, only the throttle curve...





Looking into it, seems you are right. But gee, they make it look more like that than even the S button. It even has a "power" setting in the menu.

I will say it FEELS faster with the quickened throttle response (especially if you are driving a friends new car...). Adds more support to my theory that many chip tuners do little more than ramp up throttle response on NA engines.

Side by side, the RS4 and the M3 are both just fantastic cars. We should all count ourselves lucky.

Yea I agree. I know the numbers, but when I drove it, it felt pretty relatively weak under 5k (yes I had everything set up correctly). I know its fast, but I just didn't feel it.

I thought it was pretty interesting.

I have owned 7 BMW's including my share of M3's and an E39 M5 and have been a BMW lover. My M Roadster is my 2nd favorite car of all time. While I did not jump from the E39 to the RS4 like others here (I jumped from a W208 CLK55, my favorite all time car), I found the RS4 to be most like the E39 of any other car I have ever driven, particlarly as to the suspension, only better. I loved my M3's, but my love for BMW's stops around 2002, when Bangle took over. While I have not driven the current M3, I am no longer a fan of BMW design and that simple fact stops me from even wanting to test drive an M3 or M5 or M Roadster. On design alone, I would rather buy a used pre Bangle BMW, regardless of performance differences. That is why I went to Audi, in part. I still like Mercedes designs, but Audi gave me BMW like performance with Benz design sophistication. Right now, Audi is the leader in the marriage of design and performance IMHO.

I've driven both, and they are different and fine cars. They are close enough that ultimately it's the skill of the driver that determines which outperforms. I needed 4 doors and 6 months of the year I'm on winter rubber, so for me the choice was obvious. Own an RS4 and enjoy it all year, or own the M3 and spend half the year sulking in the frigid snow in a winter beater.

Besides, my highly modified Triumph Thruxton with 2 carburetted cylinders outperforms any of the cars mentioned here, so when I feel the need to accelerate, there's always that.

I currently have an E90 M3 (with M-DCT) and previously had an RS4. The RS4 has a bit more torque on paper, but feels a lot torquier. The M3 feels soft below 4K but, like the V10 in the M5, it only feels slow - it really ain't. The M-DCT was not my first choice. There is a learning curve with it. If you try to drive it like a torque convertor automatic, you will be frustrated. Drive it like a stick, being aware of what is going on underneath you, and it is a fine transmission. Three point turns are a pain, as changing from first to reverse is a slower process. I took the car off the lot as I needed to get into a car quickly. I prefer a three pedal car. That said, the M-DCT is faster, rev matches beautifully, and just rips through the gears. There are optional shift lights in the M-DCT car and are needed as it tears from 5-8K and I hit the rev limiter easily. Both cars move, really move.

the M3 has a great intake sound. Really good. The exhaust sound is unpleasant. RS4 wins hands down on V8 sound. I have heard aftermarket exhausts for both cars and this sound issue can be customized. The AC Schnitzer is my favorite m3 exhaust, with a real Ferrari howl. I was happy with the stock exhaust of the RS4 (with the valves deactivated to full open all the time).

Styling is subjective. I liked the styling of both cars, although different. I have had other Audis and also a BMW Z4. Audi does better interiors. The RS4 is a dated B6 interior, updated a bit. The dual binnacle design of the infotainment system of the E90 is in a better location. it is a little spartan, but very functional and most things are where you want them. The optional stereo in the E90 sounds better than the Bose in the RS4. TheE90 NAV is inferior and actually frustrating to use. the new iDrive is a big improvement over the old one and actually doesn't suck. Seats and ergonomics in both cars are excellent.

The M3 has a better ride, as it is adjustable. comfort mode is a pleasure for highway cruising. Both cars are stable at speed and both handle well, very well. It is difficult to take either of these cars to the limits on the street, at least lawfully. Driving at less than 8/10ths both cars are very predictable. The RS4 is tuned to compensate for the engine being mounted ahead of the headlamps where the M3 is lighter and naturally balanced.

I do miss quattro. That said, I had no problems over the winter driving in snow with snow tires. It just isn't fun like it is with quattro. Audis are like rally cars in the snow. The M3 never got stuck. Good tires and the electrical nannies make the car very drivable. Happy to have my summer tires back on, though.

The warranties are different. Audi has many excluded items (brake pads, clutch, etc.) BMW covers everything and offers full service, all included in the price. Parts are expensive in these cars. It adds up quickly.

The RS4 is more exclusive. There are fewer of them than M3s. Not a big issue for me, but it is true and an issue for some. The M3 has a bit more interior room in the back seat, with a correspondingly smaller trunk. Still more than adequate in this segment.

Both are great cars. Both will make you smile.

Great review, as usual! This should make it straight to Car and Driver! ;-o)

Thanks for that review. I've been looking at both cars and every magazine review talks about how they are on the track and what turns the fastest lap time... since I won't be tracking the car, it's nice to hear a real-world comparison.

If there is a specific question about either car, feel free to ask. Both were (are) fine daily drivers, very tame around town. Both are comfortable cars with nice features. Both really rip when you get on them. The M3 feels faster 60-90 than the RS4, but I cannot tell you if it really is.

Great review, as usual! This should make it straight to Car and Driver! ;-o)

+1. That's a great comparison, nicely done.

I have owned 7 BMW's including my share of M3's and an E39 M5 and have been a BMW lover. My M Roadster is my 2nd favorite car of all time. While I did not jump from the E39 to the RS4 like others here (I jumped from a W208 CLK55, my favorite all time car), I found the RS4 to be most like the E39 of any other car I have ever driven, particlarly as to the suspension, only better. I loved my M3's, but my love for BMW's stops around 2002, when Bangle took over. While I have not driven the current M3, I am no longer a fan of BMW design and that simple fact stops me from even wanting to test drive an M3 or M5 or M Roadster. On design alone, I would rather buy a used pre Bangle BMW, regardless of performance differences. That is why I went to Audi, in part. I still like Mercedes designs, but Audi gave me BMW like performance with Benz design sophistication. Right now, Audi is the leader in the marriage of design and performance IMHO.

Actually, your sig pic looks like a good marriage of design and performance. Of course, I won't comment on which is the better performer and which is the better design.

Don't know about the M3, but I also notice that my RS doesn't have any nuts until 5k rpm, then it's like a light switch comes on. Maybe I need a software update? Thoughts anyone?

Don't know about the M3, but I also notice that my RS doesn't have any nuts until 5k rpm, then it's like a light switch comes on. Maybe I need a software update? Thoughts anyone? I wouldn't say it has no nuts under 5K, but it certainly likes being reeled up high. Not in an Evo/STI way, but certainly likes high revs. I was actually pleasantly surprised at the low end torque despite it's 'modest' 317 rating, coming from a modded M5 which had 70 wheel tq more than the RS4, I expected more of a letdown. I think the gearing is quite optimzed in the RS4.

+1. That's a great comparison, nicely done.

I appreciated it too; short and to the point. Lots of editors in the auto industry (ahem) try to sound too cute or too judgmental. This was nice to read.

Speaking of judgemental, the current E90/M3 styling is *extremely* polarizing. So many crease and angles, and lines that don't belong. The new decklid looks like it was designed for a completely different car. We just bought a white sedan at Edmunds as our next long-termer and it's frequently parked next to mine. The styling is night and day different. I guess I'm more for the plain look, even though I hate the way the B8 A4 looks (it's just painfully boring).

I'm a big fan of clean exhaust integration, and the two cars couldn't be more different in that regard. On the M3 you can clearly see the muffler through the bumper mesh, and I think they could have done a far better job making it look good, and not so obviously tacked-on. Possibly by lowering the mesh and sticking the pipes through it. Curiously, they did the same thing with the E92 M3. The E92 335i has a great looking rear end/exhaust, but the M3 version complicates it.

If the long-term editors ask to swap cars for lunch some time, I'll consider it, as it's still a very fun car to drive.

Agree, the rear bumper/diffuser on the sedan especially looks very out of place. Should have had perhaps more of a valence/true diffuser setup. The sedan has always seemed to me like an after-thought relative to the coupe. I honestly think the ///M Division created the M3 coupe from the ground up, and MBAs in the BMW marketing dept insisted on a 4-door version so they can increase target audience and thus sales, so the M3 coupe was 'stuffed' into the sedan.

That perhaps explains why the front fascia is 1-1 (thankfully!), and the bumm was left as-is... And I wonder how 08 M3 sedan owners feel when they discovered that in 3 months time their 'new' M3 sedan just had a new face- (actually butt) lift...

Agree, the rear bumper/diffuser on the sedan especially looks very out of place. Should have had perhaps more of a valence/true diffuser setup. The sedan has always seemed to me like an after-thought relative to the coupe. I honestly think the ///M Division created the M3 coupe from the ground up, and MBAs in the BMW marketing dept insisted on a 4-door version so they can increase target audience and thus sales, so the M3 coupe was 'stuffed' into the sedan.

That perhaps explains why the front fascia is 1-1 (thankfully!), and the bumm was left as-is... And I wonder how 08 M3 sedan owners feel when they discovered that in 3 months time their 'new' M3 sedan just had a new face- (actually butt) lift...


I actually like the O8 rear tails better then the 09s.

I actually prefer the tail lights on my 2009 E90 M3, over the 2008 lights. To each his own, I guess. I like some of the (softened) Bangle styling. The 6 is still a miss, looking like it had droopy eyelids and someone backed it into a guardrail. The 3 and 5 are attractive cars and I loved my Z4. the original 7 series - not so much.

I will agree that the rear muffler assembly hanging down like udders under the back of the car is a styling miss, but no car is perfect. Aftermarket systems sound better and look better.

A four door serves my needs better, but I will agree that the E92 M3 is a prettier car than the E90 M3.

I was looking for either a RS4 or a 4 door M3 for the past few months. My RS4 got totalled by a drunk driver some months back.

Closed the deal on a 2008 White 4 door M3 today.
Just wanted to thank this community for all their help.

StalkinRs4- Enjoy your new M3!

Make sure to come back and leave impressions of one ride vs. the other.

StalkinRs4- Enjoy your new M3!

Make sure to come back and leave impressions of one ride vs. the other.

The cars are very different. I do miss the low end torque on the RS4 and I like the more simple interior, the seats are better on the RS4 too. The M3 is much more nimble, and revs more freely.

People spend a lot of time talking about just the car and not DRIVING the car. A car is only as capable as a driver. The ultimate limits of the M3 as a machine are higher (not by much) than the RS4. By this I mean that on a dry track, in the hands of a professional driver, the M3 will turn a faster time. However, if you are not on a racetrack and/or it is not dry and you are not a professinal driver, you will fare much better in the RS4. Quattro allows you to push the car harder and faster with a far greater degree of safety and control than in the M3.

In short, in absolutely ideal test track conditions, the M3 is a better performer. Under all other circumstances the RS4 is a better choice of vehicle.

People spend a lot of time talking about just the car and not DRIVING the car. A car is only as capable as a driver. The ultimate limits of the M3 as a machine are higher (not by much) than the RS4. By this I mean that on a dry track, in the hands of a professional driver, the M3 will turn a faster time. However, if you are not on a racetrack and/or it is not dry and you are not a professinal driver, you will fare much better in the RS4. Quattro allows you to push the car harder and faster with a far greater degree of safety and control than in the M3.

In short, in absolutely ideal test track conditions, the M3 is a better performer. Under all other circumstances the RS4 is a better choice of vehicle.

I have over 35 track dates. I have run local tracks such as Mosport and gone as far as Sebring for track days. I am by no means a professional driver, but I can hold my own quite well.
Conditions do not have to be ideal for the M3, its simply a great handling car, and very easy to drive fast, unlike a 911.

95% of ppl out there have no idea how to drive these cars, be it a RS4 or a M3. Great cars. The only time I will miss Quattro is in winter, when there is snow.