"Some here might have guessed that already, the M3 won that comparison. Sport Auto's verdict pretty much summed up that the M3 and the RS5 are built for different people. It's not so much a surprise that the M3 beat the RS5 in virtually all performance categories, surprising though is that Sport Auto even liked the ride in the M3 (EDC) more than Audi's adaptive suspension. On top, the M3 testcar was roughly 10k € cheaper.

As to the M3, this is the first Hockenheim time we have for a ZCP E92 with DCT, which -- on regular Michelin PS2 -- was even a tenth faster than the E92 M3 (6MT) on Cup+ tires.

Best regards,
south(M3Post)"

 

Never thought I would say this but; I'd rather have the BMW.

 

^ Same here.

 

Thanks for the post... both are incredible machines.

 

BMW for performance but RS5 for exclusivity factor.
M3's are a dime a dozen these days.
+ No one drives at those speeds mentioned in the test on a daily basis.

RS5 for me, plus its got Quattro, where i live, its a huge plus.

 

No surprise really. The M3 is a fantastic drivers car. Best bang for the buck.

 

I like the BMW over the Audi. BMW's are just so nice to drive. Even a 328XI holds the road really well.

 

Here's something from the biggest Audi fan in the world: I would rather have the M3 as well.

I'm a little frustr ... no, I am pissed off that they can't seem to construct a car that isn't massively overweight. The S5 is the comfortable cruiser - this is supposed to be hardcore and nimble. Cutting off the steering wheel at the bottom and adding some horsepower is not how you compete with an M3. Shesh.

 

RS5 for me.

 

I have the magazine at home...
they were hating so hard on the RS5.....and if you read it you might conclude :

the RS5 is nice,but the M3 does everything better,is less expensive and actually makes sense to me