Saki GT

Car and Driver got the same results - http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/14...-08-bmw-m3.html

superjimbo

actually car and driver is one of the magazines that does not correct and thus they usually have the faster numbers.

derryck

I don't think it's really a surprise that the M3 won is it? I would like to see the IS-F in the comparo as well although it won't have an impact on first place.

kumainu

I thought I had read in one of their articles in which they said they did calibrate for accuracy. They used GPS-based device to measure, and they usually run in each direction a few times and take the average of the best run in each direction. C&D's times are very trustworthy. They usually get 14s @ 99-100mph for the S2000, and that's right on the money. Some owners may be able to beat that by a tiny bit, but most won't. In the end, that time is very dependable.

Mystiqueskillz

The RS4, is old, while its competitors are new.

kumainu

Maybe it will, maybe it won't. But until all cars are available for testing, especially by C&D, no one can be certain. To be fair, include the M3 sedan when it becomes available instead of the coupe. I'm sure the sedan will weigh a bit more than the coupe and may change the driving dynamics a bit. If all those 4 sedans are tested, we could only wait to see the results.

One thing is for sure, the RS 4 is the slowest of the group. In the C&D's comparo with the other two, it kept up to 60mph, then after that, it fell behind. By 120, it was pretty far behind, and by 150, it could barely be seen due to being so far behind. By 150, it was 7 seconds behind the C63 and 5 seconds behind the M3.

superjimbo

Every magazine uses GPS equipment to test and they use the best number out of several runs. C and D does not correct for ambient factors like humidity, etc which makes their times "faster" for the most part. I wouldn't say the magazine with the fastest times is necessarily the magazine with most accurate times.

Iceman1

i agree with that... as far as i have heard, MotorTrend is the only magazine that makes atmospheric corrections... there may be others...

kumainu

But C&D is the only one (I'm pretty sure) to run several times in EACH direction and take the average of the best for each direction. As far as I've seen, C&D's times are pretty dependable. The slowest times usually come from Autoweek and Edmunds.

superjimbo

I'm not saying C&Ds times aren't dependable, it's just that they don't run corrections like many other magazines do and thus their times appear to be faster (when it's really just a lack of correction). Also, most magazines use their best run and not an average of the runs. How do I know this? I work for one of the three big magazines and attend testing on a regular basis