daveak05

but there are such things as gearing, final drive ratio, power band(where peak power occurs), etc that can and does affect one car's performance over another.

the WRX Sti/M3 comparison. with very close power to weight(11.35 to 10.9), then addtl drivetrain loss of AWD WRX...and it is faster than the M3. you now say that's because of the turbo. before you said it wasn't possible.

there are other valid comparisons out there.

BTW, how did you come up with 10% drivetrain loss for the WRX? was that an arbitrary number you just tossed out there? you should keep in mind that the Subaru AWD system does not use another axle, but uses viscous drive couplings.

daveak05

there's no escaping BMW's new M3 emulating the RS4, sans the AWD.

BMW has also 'responded' to Audi in recently offering AWD on their cars.

Silver Fun

This car seems to have been built for Audi enthusiasts. That is probably a fairly good way to describe AW forum members.

Silver Fun

OOPS, I stand corrected.

daveak05

look how BMW responded to their enthusiast owners...making them way 2 full years on a new M3. bigger fish to fry.

daveak05

3650/414 vs 3957/420(w/AWD). according to your logic(AWD drivetrain losses), it will walk the RS4. we all know that isn't happening, right?

grip???...??????

chewym

The RS4 has done 0-60 in 4.3 seconds, a 12.8 1/4 mile. And there are no problems for Quattro with "not ideal conditions" which basically=real life, cause no one drives to work on a drag strip.

daveak05

which are determined by throwing a dart while blindfolded at a dyno chart...to hear some tell it : )

Silver Stealth

On a real road instead of a dyno, Quattro can get more power to the ground in all conditions.

daveak05

i was being facetious, based on an agonizing debate(see below in thread)