C4S vs RS4 - latest R&T
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 200
From: Boston, MA
Rep Power: 30
C4S vs RS4 - latest R&T
The latest R&T has a comparison between the C4S and RS4. I had also considered the new RS4 when I ordered my C4S as I had really liked the quality of my old Audi TT. The RS4 is really fast,...almost identical times in acceleration vs the C4S - so, if you find yourself in a race, go for the 155-mph governed speed against the Audi!
Enjoy!
Enjoy!
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,733
From: Kuwait City,Kuwait
Rep Power: 334
Originally Posted by pilone
Thanks for the review...I red one on Evo Mag few days ago...The C4S has less explosive power kick but is more enjoyable on track! 
Porsche rules again
Porsche rules again
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,013
From: Athens
Rep Power: 62
Trending Topics
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 348
From: TX
Rep Power: 36
I drove one this weekend. Great car, but hardly a substitute for my C2S. Less visceral, floaty. Felt quite a bit more disconnected.
Steering was light. Engine note in Sport was to die for. Fit/finish awesome. Some plastic-y ness though along the dash and center console. Not a big fan of CF, would get the Al trim.
4000 lbs cannot and is not a sports car, and as R&T reported, it is a full 2.5 seconds slower on a short track, which is an asskicking.
Thought the interior quietness and space were awesome. Love the styling.
If you have kids, I'd get a low mileage E39 M5 over the RS4.
Steering was light. Engine note in Sport was to die for. Fit/finish awesome. Some plastic-y ness though along the dash and center console. Not a big fan of CF, would get the Al trim.
4000 lbs cannot and is not a sports car, and as R&T reported, it is a full 2.5 seconds slower on a short track, which is an asskicking.
Thought the interior quietness and space were awesome. Love the styling.
If you have kids, I'd get a low mileage E39 M5 over the RS4.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,493
From: Pescara, Italy
Rep Power: 164
Originally Posted by MeanMachine
It lacks torque, Trust me , I have driven one and the SLK'er kicks in quicker especially at 4,000rpm!
Anyway your wonderful SLK could not be as quick as 4S on track...the weight is the worst thing for supercars!
Don't misuderstand me...I love your car pretty much Mohammed..
Banned
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,103
From: Kirkland, WA
Rep Power: 147
Originally Posted by frayed
I drove one this weekend. Great car, but hardly a substitute for my C2S. Less visceral, floaty. Felt quite a bit more disconnected.
Steering was light. Engine note in Sport was to die for. Fit/finish awesome. Some plastic-y ness though along the dash and center console. Not a big fan of CF, would get the Al trim.
4000 lbs cannot and is not a sports car, and as R&T reported, it is a full 2.5 seconds slower on a short track, which is an asskicking.
Thought the interior quietness and space were awesome. Love the styling.
If you have kids, I'd get a low mileage E39 M5 over the RS4.
Steering was light. Engine note in Sport was to die for. Fit/finish awesome. Some plastic-y ness though along the dash and center console. Not a big fan of CF, would get the Al trim.
4000 lbs cannot and is not a sports car, and as R&T reported, it is a full 2.5 seconds slower on a short track, which is an asskicking.
Thought the interior quietness and space were awesome. Love the styling.
If you have kids, I'd get a low mileage E39 M5 over the RS4.
