C&D: 1M Takes Down Audi TT RS and Infiniti IPL G37 in First 1M Comparo Win

[oztiks]

Dissapointed enough to cancel my 1m purchase. Will go with a 500 fiat sport a family cruise and still manage to keep 40 k in my pocket. I'll wait until they decide to make a car that's worth me spending my money on.

[superchargedman]

Because that topic has been beaten to death. [QUOTE=IS3andME;9229730]

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

MT vs DSG doesn't make a 1 second difference.

It is because american car magazines use a 1 ft roll out when sprinting to 60. They make everything artificially faster than it actually is. The Europeans do not use the roll outs as the Americans do. That is why the 1 second difference exists.

Nope, some maga do and some mags don't. C

[superchargedman]

Autocorrected dsg to dag. Sorry.

Originally Posted by superchargedman

Yes, correct. For god's sake, people need to start reading previous posts before they start posting. It's all context dependent with multiple added variables, which include dag and launch control. Add into the possibility that it's a ringer.

[pyrat]

Originally Posted by wisesoul

People mention 3.6 for the TT-RS as a typo when they clearly meant to put it there. That's why they compare it to the Zr-1 and SL BS acceleration stats. Mighty impressive, but that thing is pricey.

+ 1 If you read the article instead of just looking at numbers, you will realize this is not possibly a typo. The TT-RS that they tested definitely, positively went 0-60 in 3.6s.

So, if you want to buy a car that in Europe can go 0-60 under 4, the TT-RS is your car...

Despite C & D's BMW bias, I think it is clear that the 1M is a value for its performance.

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by oztiks

Dissapointed enough to cancel my 1m purchase. Will go with a 500 fiat sport a family cruise and still manage to keep 40 k in my pocket. I'll wait until they decide to make a car that's worth me spending my money on.

why? what particularly is disappointing about this review of the 1M?

[MrRoboto]

Originally Posted by pyrat

+ 1 If you read the article instead of just looking at numbers, you will realize this is not possibly a typo. The TT-RS that they tested definitely, positively went 0-60 in 3.6s.

So, if you want to buy a car that in Europe can go 0-60 under 4, the TT-RS is your car...

Despite C & D's BMW bias, I think it is clear that the 1M is a value for its performance.

I too dont believe it. There are Revo tuned TTRS' with 430 hp reaching 3.55 sec. Every other publication shows the acceleration at ~4.3 - 4.6 with S-Tronic.

The 5-60 time is the indicator that it is bunk.

[jpdb]

Here is a link of some TTRS times:
http://www.fastestlaps.com/cars/audi_tt-rs_coupe.html

[Mako]

First, this is a BS comparison, these cars don't match up in size, price or utility. I mean they compare the rear seat comfort and space, really? Who buys a TT-RS and gives a damn about rear space in it? that is like saying people who buy a Porsche 911 care about the rear seating... If you eliminate price, and some of their other BS grading measures like rear seat space and rebates/incentives (WTF is that, 1 point for BMW?) then the Audi TT-RS actually wins by 1 point in my calculations. So no the 1M did not smoke the Audi, it won based on being bigger and cheaper

They are both great cars but not the same buyer, no one looking at the TT-RS will pick the BMW instead, they will look at a Cayman or Z4is maybe (or even an M3 Coupe, same price). Now compare the A3-RS to the 1M and thats a real comparison. Why is the infiniti even in here, to show they have no business in this category?

And again to all the people saying 3.6 is impossible, no its not! at these times so much depends on tires and traction, the Audi with AWD and launch control is a huge advantage, thats why the rolling start results are similar, because its not using the launch control with a rolling start. As another person said, the GT-R also has amazing numbers because of this combo. So if you are at a stop light, will the TT-RS smoke the 1M, probably not, if you are on a track and doing a drag, it probably will...

[MDORPHN]

M cars are about well-rounded performance, not simple straight line speed, and I fully expect that 1M to be phenomenal on the track.

Based on the C&D data, the torquey motor, seriously set-up suspension and good brakes are a winning combination.

However, if you live your life 0-60 at a time, there are scores of other cars --many of which are less expensive -- that will make you happy.

And, if you are really concerned about power, Cobb Tuning's AccessPort and Vishnu's PROcede will more than satisfy your concerns.

That's my 2 cents!

Neil

[kinan_sleiman2006]

SCMan, Nice find man! Thank you

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by Mako

First, this is a BS comparison, these cars don't match up in size, price or utility. I mean they compare the rear seat comfort and space, really? Who buys a TT-RS and gives a damn about rear space in it? that is like saying people who buy a Porsche 911 care about the rear seating... If you eliminate price, and some of their other BS grading measures like rear seat space and rebates/incentives (WTF is that, 1 point for BMW?) then the Audi TT-RS actually wins by 1 point in my calculations. So no the 1M did not smoke the Audi, it won based on being bigger and cheaper

They are both great cars but not the same buyer, no one looking at the TT-RS will pick the BMW instead, they will look at a Cayman or Z4is maybe (or even an M3 Coupe, same price). Now compare the A3-RS to the 1M and thats a real comparison. Why is the infiniti even in here, to show they have no business in this category?

And again to all the people saying 3.6 is impossible, no its not! at these times so much depends on tires and traction, the Audi with AWD and launch control is a huge advantage, thats why the rolling start results are similar, because its not using the launch control with a rolling start. As another person said, the GT-R also has amazing numbers because of this combo. So if you are at a stop light, will the TT-RS smoke the 1M, probably not, if you are on a track and doing a drag, it probably will...

+1 to everything you said except 1M won by being cheaper - price is an important factor in all C & D tests because it impacts the buyers decision - they cars are not compared as if they were a gift to the user who may just pick the favorite - so cost plays a factor.

[Mako]

Originally Posted by antzcrashing

+1 to everything you said except 1M won by being cheaper - price is an important factor in all C & D tests because it impacts the buyers decision - they cars are not compared as if they were a gift to the user who may just pick the favorite - so cost plays a factor.

Right, I am just saying people who think this article means the 1M is a "better" car, that is not true, and not just in 0-60 times the TT-RS is great on the track as well. Basically this article is saying the TT-RS isn't worth its asking price, not that the 1M is a better car! You could say the same about the M5 compared to a Mustang or a CTS-V, its much more expensive and the same track times.

They shouldn't compare cars with huge price gaps like this.
Porsche Cayman S/R vs TT-RS vs Z4is vs new SLK AMG now that would be a nice comparison, similar cost, similar power, similar buyers.

How many people reading this article are considering all three cars? most of the time you have a set number you want to spend and might go up a little from there, if that number is $65K you probably will not buy a 1M, just like when they compared the Mustang to the M3, who really considers both when buying? Now if your budget is $45K and they are comparing a $40K, $45K, and $50K car (similar cars) then price would matter...

[JB135MDCT]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

How does C&D even have a car to test?

And what's the point of the comparo if they are not available to buy.

[adrean8j]

The reason they are comparing these three cars is that they are all:

1. 2+2
2. Similar sized (l/w/h) Coupes
3. Similar weights
4. Similar BHP
5(?). Foreign made


And yes I crossed shopped these three platforms when I was looking to purchase (as well as the Cayman)...it wasn't the money for me...if was the size and form-factor that I wanted. The TT, G37, and the 1er all fit that criteria for the most part.....

[MrRoboto]

It certainly is interesting reading the M3 forums. Almost like some are glad to see the 1M fail. Some nervous energy it seems.

[Mowse]

I think a better car for this comparo would be a Cayman S. It's priced below the TTRS and more in the ballpark performace wise than the infiniti.

[EmmDrei]

I seriously doubt that the 1M will fail! And honestly... comparing numbers on paper is something I used to do when I was about eight, playing cards with my friends. How credible is a comparison between a car that is never going to be available as tested to the market that reads the test and a car that is pre-production and was put together to be used as a pace car?

The german SportAuto lists the TT RS with 4.4 0-100km/h (DCT with activated launch control) and BMW says the 1M can do that in 4,9. Sounds a little more credible to me. And that's straight-line... let's add a couple of real corners and I'd love to see the average TT RS driver try to understeer around a 1M.

[///1M]

The rolling 5-60, top gear 30-50 and top gear 50-70 numbers speak volumes.

The 1M essentially wins all 3 of these real-world tests. Notice that the Audi couldn't be tested in either of it's top 2 gears in the 30-50 pull, I assume they were too high of gears at this range.

Why are these measurements more important than 0-60? Go figure!

[darkvaderr]

Just for comparison, I dug up C&D stats for the manual 135i and manual M3.
The one thing that doesn't make sense to me is how the 1M has M3 brakes and weighs less than the 135i yet gets a 70-0 braking distance worse than both the M3 and 135i.

135i / 1M / M3

0-30:
1.9 / 1.8 / 1.7
0-60:
4.8 / 4.5 / 4.4
0-100:
11.8 / 10.9 / 10.3
0-130:
21.4 / 20.1 / 18.2
5-60:
5.4 / 5 / 5.1
30-60:
6 / 6.6 / 7.7
50-70:
5.9 / 5.6 / 7.1

1/4 Mile:
13.4@105 / 13@109 / 12.9@111

Lane Change:
67 / 69.4 / 75

G:
0.91 / 0.97 / 0.94

Braking:
158 / 159 / 158 (wtf?)


But numbers is less than half the story, ultimately, how good a car is on the track, how great it is to drive, how capable it is, is completely dependent on unmeasurables, like how well the chassis is composed (which numbers like g force can hint at, but still can never reveals the full story)

[JHOOPS2]

Originally Posted by darkvaderr

Braking:
158 / 159 / 158 (wtf?)

LOL. Doesn't make any sense does it? Makes one wonder if the 135i brakes aren't a better match for the 1 series. I think that we can all agree to rule out tires as being the reason. If anything they are helping the 1M.

[darkvaderr]

Originally Posted by JHOOPS2

LOL. Doesn't make any sense does it? Makes one wonder if the 135i brakes aren't a better match for the 1 series. I think that we can all agree to rule out tires as being the reason. If anything they are helping the 1M.

I guess maybe wins out in terms of brake feel, brake fade

[///1M]

Is that 75-mph lane change correct for the M3? If so, wow.