Skip advert

Audi RS5 vs BMW M4 vs Mercedes-AMG C63 S - Supertest review - The data

The Audi RS5 meets its arch rivals, the BMW M4 Competition Pack and the Mercedes-AMG C63 S for an evo supertest.

The data

To Millbrook for the acceleration and braking tests – and a potentially embarrassing weigh-in

Parked at the start of the Millbrook mile straight, the C63’s engine is settled to a low, purposeful idle that hints heavily at the performance potential. Pull both aluminium gearshift paddles towards you to engage the launch mode, then tap the right one briefly to confirm you’re ready. Plant your left foot on the brake and your right foot on the throttle and wait for the V8 to start bellowing and crackling at a preset 3500rpm before side-stepping the brake and letting the computers do the rest.

Advertisement - Article continues below

It sounds easy, but in reality getting the rear-wheel-drive Mercedes off the line takes practice. Selecting the traction control’s halfway-house Sport setting and carefully feathering the throttle helps the C63 roar to 60mph in 4.3sec, which is a few tenths behind Merc’s claim of 3.9sec to 62 but an impressive achievement when you consider the C63 tips our scales at a portly 1847kg.

The carbonfibre-roofed M4 is far trimmer, weighing in at just 1645kg. This helps explain why it’s just a tenth slower to 60mph than the C63, despite a 59bhp power deficit. That’s about as big as the gap gets between these two, and remarkably they both flash past 150mph in 21.1sec. Launch control is standard, but as in the Mercedes it’s tricky to get the BMW off the line. You can alter the starting revs up to a maximum of 4000rpm, but even then the M4 feels like it’s bogging down on Millbrook’s track surface, possibly explaining why that 0-60mph time is four tenths behind BMW’s 0-62 claim.

Skip advert
Advertisement - Article continues below

No such worries for the Audi. Yes, it weighs a not insubstantial 1799kg, but four-wheel-drive traction and a gearbox that features eight closely stacked ratios allow it to erupt off the line without wasting a single horsepower. As in the M4 and C63 S, there’s launch control, yet unlike in those two, the Audi’s system is brutally effective. Out of the corner of my eye I can see the head of deputy editor and today's designated ballast Adam Towler being flung back against his headrest as the RS5 catapults off the line like a fighter jet being fired down the deck of an aircraft carrier. The result is 60mph in a laugh-out-loud 3.6sec. Audi modestly claims 3.9sec to 62.

Advertisement - Article continues below

However, the Audi’s mass and weaker top end tell eventually and beyond 100mph it starts to lose ground to the other two. By 150mph it’s a full two seconds in arrears.

Our braking test features ten consecutive stops from 100mph, which is enough to put even high-performance setups under strain. The Merc’s optional carbon-ceramics give the impression of refusing to wilt, the pedal action remaining resolutely firm. However, the data shows a 21.5-metre difference between the best and the worst stop – the largest spread here. The C63 also records the longest stopping distance, by over 5 metres.

Skip advert
Advertisement - Article continues below

The lighter BMW, on standard cast-iron brakes, stops in the shortest length, recording 86.5 metres early on – 1.6 metres better than the Merc’s best. However, during the eighth stop the pedal begins to go long and wisps of smoke rise from the under-pressure pads. The Audi’s brakes – also cast-iron – suffer the same symptoms at about the same time, but unlike the BMW, the RS5’s pedal feel and brake bite are fully recovered by the time we hit the road again.




Audi RS5


BMW M4 Comp Pack


Mercedes-AMG C63 S



V6, 2894cc, twin-turbo


Straight-six, 2979cc, twin-turbo


V8, 3982cc, twin-turbo




444bhp @ 5700-6700rpm


444bhp @ 7000rpm


503bhp @ 5500-6250rpm




442 lb ft @ 1900-5000rpm


406lb ft @ 1850-5000rpm


516lb ft @ 1750-4500rpm




Eight-speed auto, four-wheel drive, electronically controlled rear LSD


Seven-speed dual-clutch (option), rear-wheel drive, LSD


Seven-speed MCT auto, rear-wheel drive, electronically controlled LSD




275/30 R20 front, 275/30 R20 rear, Hankook Ventus S1 Evo 2


255/35 R19 front, 275/35 R19 rear, Michelin Pilot Super Sport


255/40 R19 front, 285/35 R20 rear, Michelin Pilot Super Sport












1799kg as tested (1655kg claimed)


1645kg as tested (1585kg claimed)


1847kg as tested (1725kg claimed)




251bhp/ton using test-car weight, (273bhp/ton claimed)


274bhp/ton using test-car weight (285bhp/ton claimed)


277bhp/ton using test-car weight (296bhp/ton claimed)




3.6sec as tested (3.9 to 62 claimed)


4.4sec as tested (4.0 to 62 claimed)


4.3sec as tested (3.9 to 62 claimed)


Top speed


174mph (optional raised limiter)


155mph (limited)


155mph (limited)


evo mpg


19.6 (average over duration of test)


21.2 (average over duration of test)


16.5 (average over duration of test)


Basic price








PCP monthly price


£833 (36 months, £8000 deposit, 10,000 miles per annum limit)


£861 (36 months, £8000 deposit, 10,000 miles per annum limit)


£902 (36 months, £8000 deposit, 10,000 miles per annum limit)



Skip advert
Skip advert

Most Popular

Saab PhoeniX – dead on arrival
Saab PhoeniX

Saab PhoeniX – dead on arrival

The Swedish brand’s failed 2010s revival meant we missed out on a 400bhp hybrid TT rival – and more
11 Jul 2024
BMW M3 CS v Litchfield BMW M2: which makes the better track car?
BMW M3 CS v Litchfield BMW M2 – front
Group tests

BMW M3 CS v Litchfield BMW M2: which makes the better track car?

BMW's latest and greatest M3 takes on Litchfield's 640bhp tuned M2 around Cadwell Park
13 Jul 2024
Mercedes-AMG GT 63 v Porsche 911 Turbo S – car pictures of the week
Mercedes-AMG GT 63 v Porsche 911 Turbo S – front

Mercedes-AMG GT 63 v Porsche 911 Turbo S – car pictures of the week

In the latest issue of evo, we test the Mercedes-AMG GT 63 against Porsche’s 911 Turbo S – these are our favourite shots
14 Jul 2024