A 639-horsepower plug-in hybrid system gives the new RS5 spectacular numbers on paper, yet the first acceleration tests immediately expose the central compromise. Despite 825 Nm of torque, repeated launches produce 0–60 mph runs of 3.7 seconds and a quarter-mile time of 11.9 seconds, while the less powerful BMW M3 Competition manages 3.2 seconds to 60 and 11.2 seconds over the quarter mile. The comparison is especially effective because it connects those results to the Audi's enormous claimed 2,355-kilogram weight rather than simply declaring one car faster.
That weight becomes the organizing theme of the review, but the Audi earns some meaningful victories along the way. Its standard steel brakes deliver surprisingly short measured stopping distances, and the sophisticated rear differential makes the RS Torque Rear mode capable of sustained slides despite the four-wheel-drive layout. The BMW's ability to disconnect its front axle ultimately feels easier and more natural to the presenter, yet demonstrating both systems rather than merely describing them gives the handling comparison considerably more substance.
There is also a thorough examination of what buyers actually live with. The RS5's wider body, pronounced rear haunches, functional-looking aggression and attractive side profile receive praise, while the oversized grille divides opinion. Inside, the sports seats and RS-specific trim fare better than the infotainment interface, air-conditioning controls and passenger display. Rear-seat accommodation remains useful, but the hybrid battery reduces the quoted luggage capacity to 330 litres, eliminates meaningful underfloor storage and contributes to a smaller 48-litre fuel tank.
The plug-in system itself gets a more balanced assessment than the presenter's frequent anti-hybrid jokes initially suggest. The claimed 52 miles of electric range from a 22 kWh battery allows the RS5 to travel at motorway speeds without starting the engine, potentially making short everyday journeys possible without heat-cycling the petrol engine. More significantly, the presenter gives an example in which company-car taxation over three years is quoted at £14,000 for the Audi versus £39,000 for the non-hybrid BMW. Those figures are presented as specific comparisons rather than universal ownership costs, but they help explain why the engineering compromise may make financial sense for some buyers.
On the road, however, the extra mass repeatedly undermines what made the previous RS4 memorable for the presenter. Comfort mode is described as firmer than before, while harder cornering eventually produces noticeable understeer and a less fluid, playful response. Audi's stiffer body, revised axles, springs, bushings, links and two-valve dampers demonstrate substantial engineering effort, but the review's argument is that those measures can manage the mass rather than conceal it. Moving directly into the M3 makes the contrast persuasive: the BMW feels lighter, more agile and more naturally eager despite having less power and occasional turbo lag.
The presentation is energetic, detailed and unusually broad, combining measured acceleration and braking tests with drifting, road driving, practicality checks and pricing. Humor keeps a technically dense comparison accessible, although tangents about hybrid start-up confusion, floor mats, removable trim and family preferences occasionally dilute the sharper engineering critique. The used-RS6 alternative and sponsored history-check promotion also pull attention away from the main comparison near the end, but the ultimate verdict remains nuanced: the RS5 is portrayed as a capable, practical and potentially tax-efficient performance car whose hybridization has weakened rather than destroyed its appeal.
Pros
- Back-to-back acceleration, braking and handling demonstrations make the weight-related argument tangible rather than purely subjective.
- The review balances performance criticism with genuine RS5 strengths, including braking, rear-drive behavior, EV capability and everyday practicality.
- Detailed coverage of the hybrid system, cabin, boot, suspension and company-car tax implications gives buyers a broader picture than performance figures alone.
- Direct comparison with the BMW M3 clearly illustrates how additional power does not necessarily translate into a more engaging performance car.
Cons
- Repeated anti-hybrid jokes occasionally overwhelm the more useful technical discussion of the system's genuine advantages and disadvantages.
- Some pricing, tax and fuel-economy discussion is highly situation-dependent and receives limited qualification beyond the examples presented.
- Tangents involving minor trim issues, controls and comedy occasionally interrupt the otherwise focused examination of weight and driving dynamics.
- The sponsored used-car diversion near the conclusion weakens the momentum of the final RS5-versus-M3 verdict.
Audi has produced an impressively capable performance hybrid, but the review makes a convincing case that its additional power cannot completely compensate for the weight required to achieve it. Strong testing, practical detail and a revealing M3 comparison turn that compromise into something viewers can actually see and understand, even if the presentation occasionally becomes distracted by jokes and promotional material.
