Audi RS3 Sportback vs BMW 1 Series M Coupe

I’ve been a BMW tech for the last 3 decades and I’ve been tuning BMW for hill climb racing since I was in school in 1989
I own a 1m and it’s modified to a clubsport spec. With a extra 120bhp and a 190kg weight reduction. AST/moton coil overs and Alcon brakes and pilot sport 4s tyres and the truth is that about 6 weeks of the year it’s faster than a 911 turbo but the rest of the time it will be beaten by a rs3 for no other reason than the weather and loss of traction. The car would be perfect in Dubai but not so much in the Uk sadly

the car must be compared with the same setup, the same stiffness of the shocks and springs;

then there are those who mount michelin super sport or cup2 can not be compared with those who mount standard performance tyres uhp

like golf mk7 R;

other important thing is the angles of camber etc etc:

(all angles are centesimal degrees)
* golf mk7 r and the other vag like s3, rs3 etc. etc. have a standard lady camber who goes to get the bread
  -0.85 front angle degree and -1.30 rear angle degree;

• a45 has -1.85 front angle degree and -2.45 rear angle degree;

• m2 -1.50 front angle degreeand -1.85 rear angle degree,

• focus rs has -1.50 front angle degree and -1.0 rear angle degree

• m3 e46 csl has -1.75 front angle degreeand -1.85 rear angle degree

angle give us a lot

BMW ftl

BMW is the best

BMW 1 M coupe is meaby faster on track. But its doesent mean its faster in usual way.

RS3 is still the best

[image redacted]

Mark, going by the points summary it appears more that the weighting of strait line speed is simply far higher than track performance, rather than say each contributing 50%/50% to total score. If each contributed 50% the results would be... 188.4 for the RS3, 192.9 for the 1m (done by converting track and strait line scores to each be percentages out of 100 with 100 being the higher scoring car)

Please change the way you give track times. It makes no sense, and this is clear example. There should be a handicap for wet laps as well.

Points aren't awarded on 4 vs 5
but on the total time they needed to do the lap or something like that

The reason it says the RS3 is faster is because of the SportAuto wet handling test where the 1M is 8s slower

Does anybody else here find it a bit strange that the points algorithm on a website called 'fastestlaps' decides that a car which is slower on 4 out of 5 racetracks and also slower from 0 to 160 and 200 kph (more meaningful benchmarks these-days than 0-40, 80 or 100) is nevertheless decreed to be 'noticeably faster' than the faster car!? Does this not indicate the points weighting system might need a bit of tweaking? If anything one could conclude the cars are about the same, certainly not 'noticeably' anything!

No, no- you overestimate RWD capability. Firstly, AWD RS3 will essentially always handle corners better than RWD 1M if conditions and drivers are like for like. It has too- RWD= too tail happy with non-prof drivers. Also, RS3 can exit corner earlier. Secondly, and very importantly, as most of us live in a variable weather world, it rains, it is icy and even snowy often during a typical year- these are not accounted for enough with (ideal world, almost lab conditions) on a dry track. In the real world track or straight line with even professional drivers, RS3 will win. In rain/ ice (I'll leave snow out, as that's laughable in a BMW), if BMW tries to keep up, driver will be in a ditch!

@carfan25

thats not correct
at a short track like Hockenheim Short, Autozeitung test track or contidrom
you can be faster (as a noob) with the bmw as the rs3
but you have to drive a "few" lap

Appreciate the comments but hold on, it's obvious that for all but professional drivers, in real life (rain, ice, slippy roads, etc) the RS3 wins every time. No-one who is not a prof driver will ever get those lap times in a bmw (they may in the RS3), so it's immaterial re: bmw. It's like taking Top Gear track times (by Stig) as the only criteria to buy a car in terms of performance. Professional drivers have done the 1M proud but for 99.9% of us, the RS3 will be much quicker- bmw too tail happy and as for damp, wet &ice ... don't make me laugh... RS3 on a different (far better) planet. 1M still v good though.

@requiem

German wheelbarrow...

BMW drive like a wheelbarrow and Audi drive like a Tron car.

... and RS are for people who do not like sportcars, unable to drive and also just want to show off car.

M Power is for stupid kids

@Georg:
you know that the RS3 won the test because it is a 5-door hatschback and the 1M is a coupé.
The BMW 1M lost the most points in the following categories:
space (front+back): 19 points
variability: 15 points
payload, towing capacity: 10 p.
interior noise: 15p
suspension loaded: 13p
traction: 43p

The text says that the RS3 is the better allrounder and the 1M is the better drivers car. Wich i thinks fits perfectly fine. The RS3 got understeer, burns rubber and the brakes are fading. Most of the points the 1M lost over the RS3 are in categories that dont matter in a sportscar.
So in the real world the RS3 is faster at the lights but when you go to a track and do more than 5 laps the 1M dominates the RS3.

P.S.: i got an Audi, a BMW and a Porsche so im definatly no Audi basher.

@Georg,

Yeah, you're right, but the glory of a car is made on good track results...see the M3 which trumped all its rivals, always.

So the pathway to glory is open to 1M (in the good tradition of M cars), and not so much to RS3 9in the good tradition of RS5, which failed big time).

But that is just my opinion based on only one track result so far....we shall see