The M5 killer...the Audi S4

Yeap, I hate to say it.. But if you guys see an S4 on the road, don't think that you can eat it for lunch. After test driving the car, because my friend wanted to buy one, I knew it will be an M5 killer after some minor tuning. Official acceleration data is out from Autothority stating that a chipped S4 can do a 0-60mph acceleration in 4.2 seconds. This confirms my fear that my M5 isn't that fast after all.

I'll try to have a couple of drag races when my friend takes delivery and chips his car in about a month's time. I'll let you guys know the results. I don't think the results will be too desirable though... I've pushed my M5 really hard in Sport mode with the DSC off...but I can tell you this, a stock S4 sure feels like it has power comparable to the M5. I dare not imagine what a chipped one will do.

Kelvin
'00 Carbon Blk / Le Mans

[greg]

First of all, 0-60 in 4.anything is freakin' fast. Period. Any car that does it is a standout car. If your buddy's S4 will do that after a chip implant, more power to him. The M5 is a totally different animal. It's OK with me if there are other fast cars. I like my M5.

Second - compare apples to apples. Put a chip in the M5, too! Stock is stock, mods are mods. You can get a Viper to go 0-60 in close to 3 seconds. All it takes is $$. The Audi is a lot lighter - and has 4wd, so I would expect it to have an edge in 0-60. I'd like to see it keep pace with the M5 over 125MPH, though.

Chips can't create magic power. They can increase the rev limit, creating instant extra horsepower - but this isn't usually useful power - its ONLY at high RPM and doesn't add TORQUE, which is what matters. The only way to add torque is to improve breathing, and the only way to have a significant impact is through displacement or pressurizxation (turbo or supercharger.) If a chip can add much power to an engine without other mods, it means only that the engineers of the original engine failed, or purposely restrained the engine.

I own (in addition to the M5) a '00 A6 4.2 - not the same as an S4, but it does give me some insight into Audi. Nice car, but virtually non-existant road feel through the steering wheel and an inecusably lousy automatic transmission. Still, I'd take that car to the mountains in winter over my M5 any day.

Greg,

A chipped M5 will not perform as well as a chipped S4. It's because the S4 is turbocharged. Chipping a turbocharged car does not only remove the rev limiter, but also increase the boost.

Just to illustrate to you, a chipped M5 can only gain about 25hp while a chipped S4 can gain about 70hp. Compare that in terms of percentages and weight to power ratios. You'll see what I mean. As for the 125mph test, it has to do with the car's gearing ratios. As I said, I'll test it out with my friend and we'll have the conclusions. We can even pick a test date and those who are curious about the REAL performance of the M5 can join up.

BTW, I do intend to chip my M5. Dinan's chip will be coming out in about 6 weeks.. I'll post some info on that as well.

[amfung]

I tend to agree with Greg. Stock is stock and mod is mod. S4/M3/C43 would be in one class, S6/M5/E55 would be in another, and S8/M?/S55 would be in a totally different class. I wouldn't say a chipped M5 is a S8 killer.

[JohnH]

Here in Europe the S4 is not highly rated. Its main weakness is the lack of feel in the steering, blandness and lack of sporty feel. It really gets killed by the M3 in every comparison over here although remember that the M3 has 340bhp. I have never heard of any of the chip manufacturers claiming an increase of 75bhp by only replacing the chip and no other work. Please let me know who it as I'm sure all the other S4 owners would like to know as well!!!!

[sam]

Let's not forget that the M5 engine is capable of far more than what it has been programmed to be right now. This is straight from the mouth of a BMW Motorsports engineer. (I forget which article, but I remember it for sure)

I would venture to guess that the largest delta in a chip upgrade would be in the tuning of the "VANOS" engine (V for variable) and have little to do with rev limiters.

Also, the thought of more horses on the M5 is downright scary. Brake upgrades would be a must.

Rumor has it that BMW will release an M5 chip upgrade to make ensure that M5 owners won't feel ripped off when a new M3 puts up a great fight.

Personally, I would rather wait and go with a chip upgrade from the BMW M engineers who know this incredibly complex engine best.

Don't forget the Porsche brake upgrade if this ever happens!

-Sam

[Gustav]

Have a loook under "road Kills" section on the MB and you'll see when I raced against an S4 Avant the other day with my 3.0 M3. Piece of cake. But it wasn't chipped.

Also, the S4 is boring, and handling isn't as fun as M3 /M5.

[michael s]

i agree with blue max. maybe it was a red audi! after driving my '92 M5 since new, and preparing to take delivery of a new M5 next week, i'd never look back, unless to see a receeding audi in the rearview...

Guys,

I'm an M5 owner too.. and frankly, I am not too happy with the knowledge that the S4 costing half the price of my car can handle and accelerate that well.

Sure that car doesn't have as much feel as the M5, but you get less body roll and more power (weight to power ratio). I have driven many fast cars before I owned the M5.. and frankly, I think the M5's power is disappointing. For a 400hp motor, I expect to be able to feel more thrust.

I guess this is the result of my expectations after reading about the M5 on the Messageboard. Some people make absurd claims that the M5 can outrun a 911TT, keep up with a Lambo Diablo, possibly outrun a F355. I just think that these expectations should be brought down to more a realistic picture of what the M5 can really do. We're not the king of the hill guys..

I'm not saying that the M5 is a bad deal here.. For $82,000 I'll still buy the M5. It definately has the most luxurious contemporary interior styling and quality I have ever seen. It has enough power to play with at times. It has the most unique and beautiful wheels. If we were to do a comparison to the E55 and the XK8, none of them come close to what BMW has to offer. We're getting a good deal.

[Ken]

I agree with Kelvin, but I'm glad he said it first. I, too, am somewhat dissapointed with the raw acceleration of the M5. Don't get me wrong; the car is very quick, but somehow I expected to be shocked by how quick, which I am not. However, I still am very happy that I chose it, and would make the same buying decision over again. It is a great all-around machine.

[Jack]

I must also agree with Kelvin and Ken based upon first-hand knowledge. I'm able to compare my M5 to both a 993TT and the S4 on any given day. While I think the M5 is a great car, it's no performance match for the TT. My wife's S4(stock)is obviously not as fast as the M5 and the tranny/shift linkage needs some aftermarket improvement to be up to par with the M5, but IMHO it's a blast to drive -- feels more nimble--and offers great value. I'm often caught liberating my wife's car for a fun drive. There are lots of great cars in the market place--just because the S4 is one of them, this in no way diminishes the magnificence of our M5.

[Tom]

Hey guys, i'm a E39 M5 owner too. I think you're unfortunately too used to the power of your 400 hp's, and the feeling of power in a car is completely different think than the effective acceleration you have.

We bought in our business this M5 and for this summer a Ferrari F355 F1 Rosso Corsa (that is me that compared on raw straight accelerations). We exchanged the cars for some days and i drove the F355 F1.
The Ferrari is of course another car ; you get a much better feeling of performance, with all the big sound around and the hard pedals. But i can confirm that before 5000 rpm, the acceleration of the F355 is clearly worse than the M5, and in this time the M5 is much better. I pushed the F355 to 280 kph on the speedo, and it was then very hard to push more. Moreover, after 240 kph the acc. begins seriously to disappear, more than in the M5.
The M5 engine is a more powerful engine than the F355, that's all.

Kelvin, if you do not trust me that the M5 has almost better straight accelerations than the F355 over 60 mph, did you compare these cars in reality ?? Please do !
Same point with the Lambo (Diablo model 2000) ; do you think i'm just kidding telling that it is similar acceleration on motorway compared to the M5 ? I'm like you, before i saw that yes i wouldn't expect that at all !!

Why do you say that you're disappointed by the raw acceleration of your M5, as you know as well as me that the acc. perception is very subjective, depending on what car you've driven before, or if you've your M5 for months or just some days !!
I'm sure your M5 would do 0-60 0.5 sec better you'd still be disappointed by its acc one month after !

Buy a superbike if you don't want to be disappointed by the acc. for some months !!

The M5 delivers it's performance in such a refined fashion that you can't be surprised that people think it is slower than what it is. You read about how incredible the performance is and then take the car out and expect it to be so fast it's scary ... in truth, the car is so driveable and the power very useable that you can be fooled into thinking it's not so fast until you look at the speedo. In addition, I noticed increased performance as I put the miles on.

Chip the M5? Somebody let Mike Valentine know that we need an upgrade.

[Mr Janne]

I agree totally with Tom. You cannot compare two cars acceleration just by feel. Old cars with around 180-200 bhp often feels pretty quick while newer cars with 300bhp can feel less quick. Newer cars often has much smoother engines with less peaky torque curves and everything is more refined. Compare a E36 328i with a E46 328i, the E36 feels much faster but they are about equal. Or a M Coupe(Euro) and a M5...