Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Luxury Performance Sedans
10007 messages, Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 7:40 AM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jan 23, 2009 11:00 am) |
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jan 23, 2009 11:00 am) The new A4 2.0T is definitely a better car than the old A6 3.2. The new 3.0T engine though finally solves the A6's power problem and puts the advantage back in the C6 camp, (though of course it still gives up some sportiness to the A4). The new 3.0T also makes the 4.2 pointless, just as the 2.7T, especially in S-line guise, did to the old 4.2.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lexusguy (Jan 24, 2009 1:30 am) Having said that, the 3.2 sounds better under part throttle than the 2.0T -- although both cars are more isolated from all sounds than my A6 was. There is more tuning that can be done to the 2.0T (factory tuning), too. But it seems there is little interest in improving the 3.2's numbers -- so the thing is, apparently, Audi has decided that a 2.0T and a 3.0T is your best overall value and performance choice. The die hards still can have the naturally aspirated versions and they cost more so, for the time being, it would appear everybody wins. I wish the 3.2 had been goosed in HP and Torque, but super or turbo charging perhaps allows us all to do more with less. Bless anyone who buys the 3.2 -- personally, however, I don't see the merit in getting the new A4 as a 3.2 when the 2.0T has all that torque way down low in the rev range.
|
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jan 24, 2009 9:06 am) I agree. I'm not sure what Audi's plans are in terms of an A4 3.0T, but if they decide not do one because it would hurt the S4, they would probably be better off killing off the 3.2 and offering the 3.0TDi as the middle engine choice.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lexusguy (Jan 24, 2009 10:14 am) Of course the issue that can be legitmately brought up is that it is quite easy to pump up the A4 2.0T's price above $50K -- but due to the way low down torque of the turbo motor, the A4 is still performance competitive with the 328xi (in fact it is able to out perform the 328xi.) So, what does the 3.2 compete with? It is only able to pull well from idle due to a shorter final drive ratio (than the 2.0T -- which of course further decreases its economy.) You can easily equip a 335xi for under $50K, too and in that instance neither the 2.0T or the 3.2 are able to keep up if straight line acceleration means anything to you. Then there is the upcoming 3.0T S4 which if priced closer to the 335xi would make a persuasive argument. But the S4, no doubt, will be a wonderful and superior performer but at thousands more than the 335xi. I remember the old days where there were two or three models in the lines of each of the German maker's cars that were brought to the US. There was a 2.8A6 and up the ladder a 2.7TA6 and a 4.2A6 (and there was even an S6 avant) -- BMW had its comparable 5 series models and things seem so clear. The S4 is no M3, that is saved for the RS4, but then what purpose in the lineup does the 3.2 actually serve. I just config'd a 2009 A6 and once again there are two versions of the 6 the 3.2 and the 3.0T and then there's the apparently redundant (but way more $$$$) 4.2. I don't get it -- why bother with a lineup that doesn't progress in performance as you take the next dollar step up? At least BMW's approach makes sense. Oh, to heck with it, the 2.0T A4 is a great car, better than the 328xi in terms of performance, size, features and lux. But the poor 3.2 seems so out of touch.
|
|
A reporter is looking to talk with consumers who have considered purchasing a luxury car in the past, but would not do so currently because of the economy, or consumers who have traded-in their luxury vehicle. Please send your email address and phone number to ctalati edmunds.com by Friday, February 6, 2008.
|
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jan 25, 2009 8:37 am) I configed an '09 A6... what happened to all the options? It seems like you have your choice of Premium/Premium Plus/Prestige and that's basically it. Where's the sport suspension option and everything else? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (Jan 23, 2009 11:00 am) Last week she had the normal 100,000 mile service done. The car was running well and she just wanted to keep to the factory maintenance schedule. Everything went smoothly except that on an A6 the entire front bumper and front end have to come off to get access to the water pump and the front end idler assemblies and timing chain. A minor oil leak from the one of the four (!) cams necessitated a new cam seal. Naturally, the crank seal was also done. What did this "normal" service cost? $2000!. The mechanics all said to us that they had seen frequent timing component failure as early as 105,000 miles. Does Audi pay for the 100,000 mile service on a CPO vehicle? If Audi wouldn't pay this service under the CPO plan, why buy a CPO Audi? That Audi would install a four cam engine with a fragile timing set-up as their standard duty A6 sedan engine is, frankly, nuts. Apparently the design of the MB and BMW timing components and far fewer camshafts, is much better and allow for up to 300,000 miles of service before the valves hit the head. As a side note, the well regarded indy mechanic who did the work commented that the aftermarket cam and crank seals that he originally ordered from the local imported auto parts store, were far inferior to the OEM dealer seals he eventually used. He commented also that Audi calls for mechanics to set the service interval light to come on at different intervals depending on the type of lube oil (synthetic or dino) installed. I am surprised. In my experience, other manufacturers don't make that distinction.
|
|
|
Replying to: blckislandguy (Feb 15, 2009 12:02 pm) Audi doesn't pay for any scheduled maintenance for a CPO vehicle. They only cover warranty repairs. Anything considered a "wear" item will not be covered. This is the same across the board. If you expect BMW to pay for your services at 100K, you're dreaming. If an Audi is still under Audicare when its purchased, that will be in effect until the normal warranty is up. The last gen C5 A6 was an expensive car to maintain. Sure it's a lot nicer to drive than a Camry, but that's the downside. An E or 5 of similar vintage is likely to be just as pricey to keep running. If you use the top grade synthetic oil, you can go buy when the computer says its time to come in for a change. If you use the normal stuff, you have to come in every 10. |
|
| I LOVE the Mercedes E-class. Bought an '06 E350 and its the best. The Audi A6 is okay, but it should really be rear-wheel drive. I love the daytime running lights on the A6, that really looks cool. The BMW 535i is nice, but ridiculous insurance rates. I'm not a huge Acura RL fan, they're overpriced and really nothing special. I don't care for Volvos so the S80 is just whatever. I REALLY hate Cadillacs, so the STS just sucks. Lexus GS is a pretty nice car, and not a bad price, and same goes for the Infiniti. I would have to say the Mercedes is worth the money, though. Please respond, I'd love to hear everyone's opinions. | |
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2007 Lexus GS 430
2011 Acura RL
2011 BMW 5 Series
2010 Volvo S80
2010 Audi A6
2010 Infiniti M35
2010 Infiniti M45
2011 Mercedes-Benz E-Class
2010 Cadillac STS
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
