Lexura1414

iTrader: (6)

Enjoy!

05RollaXRS

The RCF and RS5 weigh about the same, but they complain only about the RCF weight? What am I missing here?

shadow1118

off topic, but y'all see the new RS3??? that car is ****ing sick.

Deanrcf

iTrader: (1)

These two did a entire review of these cars without any slalom, 1/4 mile, braking, or later g measurements. All they had was time and a couple of cameras. They didn't even have the budget to rent time at a track. They complained that the RCF didn't "feel" fast. No real car reviewer would say that without data to back it up. The entire review was based off their subjectivity, not facts. I don't even believe they actually did a 0-60 run, they used another source's info or simply estimated.

drgrant

Audi makes a lot of sick cars. (I really like the TT RS, for one) Problem is the long term reliability is suspect. I'm reasonably certain that if I buy an RCF, GSF, etc... the car will be running 100K and beyond with not
much maintenance.

-Mike

Kerune

Even better no real footage of them "driving" the cars, I mean 7th gear in M mode at 45mph in one part of the video seems like that's all he ran.

Slash300zx

The problem is the RS5 make about 50 lb ft of torque more so it helps out with the acceleration whereas on the RCF, it lacks the torque it should have to compensate for the weight... it makes up for it in high speed though. If the RCF had more torque or weighed 2-300lbs less it would be beating every other car in the segment. Right now it's only beating everything else in how satisfying the engine is with the V8 and it's roar, and how much more reliable it is than all the others but apparently that is something nobody cares about because none of the reviewers ever mention this

05RollaXRS

Yes. I agree.