Ask the Car People.SM


Audi A4 2005+

1366 messages,  Last post on Mar 10, 2011 at 1:05 PM

You are in the Audi A4 Forum.

What is this discussion about? Audi A4, Sedan

Messages Page 119 of 137

#1177 of 1366 Re: 2007 A4's [jburleig] by socala4

Feb 08, 2006 (4:49 pm)

Replying to: jburleig (Feb 08, 2006 2:29 pm)
With the redesigned 3-series and Lexus IS already on the streets, and with the A4 full redesign still years away, I was thinking Audi might try sweetening the pot with their 07 A4 to maintain competitiveness.
 
The current model (code: B7) was debuted in March 2005 as a facelist to the prior model. The engines are all-new and the exterior body style has been modified from the previous car. Audi claims that the car is about 60% new from the prior model, which was introduced in 2002.
 
The B8 sketches photo renderings are already out, and the new car is expected to be released for 2008 (which I presume means autumn 2007). There is also an A5 planned, which will be a two-door coupe built on the A4 platform meant to compete with the 2-door 3-series and Mercedes CLK.
 
In other words, the Audi, BMW and Lexus aren't quite on the same design cycles. There will be a new 3-series coupe coming for this next model year. (As was the case with the last 3, BMW released the coupe one year after the sedan version.)
 
Take a look around the net, you can see what the B8 is expected to look like. (From what I've seen, it looks very promising -- aggressive and arguably more interesting than the Bangle-styled 3-series.)

#1178 of 1366 Anyone by dhamilton

Feb 08, 2006 (9:48 pm)

find it interesting the huge disparity in performance {for the A4} between the Edmunds A4 vs 330 comparo, and the Road & Track comparo between the various all wheel drive sedans?
 I guess it just goes to show the following
1. Don't get to hung up on comparisons.
2. Tires, and track conditions vary, and impact largely.
3. Do your own research.
 
 Also, huge difference in slalom speeds. Road & Track uses a 700 foot slalom, with 100 foot spacing. Does anyone know what the numbers are for Edmunds slalom tests? {Maybe those numbers are a benchmark? If so please forgive my ignorance}
 Different sets of tires for sure. I guess I didn't mention that up top.
 Discuss, Road & Track magazine is neither a road, or a track

#1179 of 1366 Re: Anyone [dhamilton] by socala4

Feb 08, 2006 (11:16 pm)

Replying to: dhamilton (Feb 08, 2006 9:48 pm)
Anyone find it interesting the huge disparity in performance {for the A4} between the Edmunds A4 vs 330 comparo
 
Based upon what I've been reading, I believe that many of the early press coverage and road tests of the current A4 were based upon pre-production models that weren't quite up to snuff.
 
I'm noticing that 0-60 times for the 2.0 liter have fallen from the low 7's to the high 6's, which makes sense, given that Audi's reported figures are in the low 7's (the manufacturer has historically tended to be conservative in its claimed times), and that tests of the 2.0 liter turbo A3's and Golf GTI's have also been running in the high 6's.
 
That being said, the enthusiast publications tend to like the sort of controlled oversteer that can only come from RWD, and the 3-series is concerned to be the benchmark car in its class for performance handling. In contrast, the FWD A4 has a tendency to understeer, something which the mags don't tend to care for as much...but how relevant are oversteer characteristics during the average owner's daily drive?

#1180 of 1366 Re: Anyone [socala4] by markcincinnati

Feb 09, 2006 (6:32 am)

Replying to: socala4 (Feb 08, 2006 11:16 pm)
Some of the early tests of the A4 3.2 were made on models that, due to the way the 2005.5 A4 was introduced were equipped with automatic transmissions, no sport set ups, etc.
 
None of these reasons excuse the early test results of what was to be a refreshed and more powerful car.
 
The A4 2.0T S-line when pitted against the 325xi perhaps demonstrated Audis experience and tenacity in AWD more than any real failing on BMW's part.
 
BMW's IMHO are about balance. BMW's x-drive sedan offerings in the US seem to have been deliberately tuned to be more un-sporty -- and I find this somewhat of a corporate contradiction.
 
Audi, apparently knowing it has nose heavy cars that tend to understeer far more than BMW's continues to work on performing engineering miracles with respect to their suspensions and "going for every trick" they can gin up to shift weight rearward (well, every not radically expensive trick, that is.)
 
A data point: I have been to the Audi driving school in Seefeld Austria four times -- every single time we have been schooled in "power sliding" or steering with the throttle -- always in stick shift A4 quattros that are off the assembly line, not special versions.
 
I would misrepresent the facts if I claimed the Audi was prone to wagging its tail. However, it is amazing -- once you get the tail out there, how the quattro system induced to oversteer (with the ESP off) can almost literally perform figure 8's with judicious application of the throttle.
 
Then, when you are offered the chance to drive a RWD BMW 3 in a circle (on ice with 4 studded snow tires) and drive it faster and faster and faster until it breaks loose, then do the exact same thing in the A4 Q, you realize that the A4 can drive in a circle on ice much faster than an otherwise identically powered and tired BMW RWD 3.
 
Other amazing feats include driving up a snow covered hill with the quattro system versus the x-drive system. The quattro shows the x-drive its tail lights pretty early on the climb.
 
In real life, however, the point is well taken -- a 325xi will probably be "as fine as wine" on the highways we all frequent, as will the Subaru and the A4.
 
This one time, the A4 came out on top.
 
Don't count BMW out, just a little bit down this time.
 
Don't cry for me Argentina.

#1181 of 1366 Re: Anyone [markcincinnati] by socala4

Feb 09, 2006 (7:08 am)

Replying to: markcincinnati (Feb 09, 2006 6:32 am)
Some of the early tests of the A4 3.2 were made on models that, due to the way the 2005.5 A4 was introduced were equipped with automatic transmissions, no sport set ups, etc.
  
None of these reasons excuse the early test results of what was to be a refreshed and more powerful car.
 
Very good point. And to add to that, the magazine comparo tests pitted this automatic car against 6MT versions of the 330i. I won't claim that the BMW isn't a worthy drive, but comparing a manual version of one to the automatic version of the other is going to create an obvious disparity during a comparison test.
 
IMO, it was a serious PR mistake for Audi to release the early 3.2 liter B7's without a manual transmission. (It is now being offered for 2006.) Even if the average US driver generally prefers automatics and the average A4 3.2 buyer in the US will opt for the tiptronic, the fact is that the US enthusiast press and the enthusiast tastemakers often do want an MT, meaning that the early reviews were bound to be less positive than they could have been.
 
Not quite on point, but one thing I've noticed with BMW is that finding a 3-series on a dealer's lot with a manual transmission is next to impossible -- it is basically a special-order item that few customers want, aside from people like me.
 
Yet the magazines always review the MT versions, and cast their judgments on a car that most 3-series buyers in the US will never drive. And the same magazines never mention that in the real world, this MT-equipped car is an elusive animal (perhaps because they are handed the car by the manufacturer, and never need to bother with shopping in order to get one.)
 
The point is that BMW clearly makes an effort to address the tastes of the media when providing cars to be tested, equipping them as the magazine testers would prefer to have them. Audi should be learning from this, offering MT cars to the market from the onset so that the press can make apples-to-apples comparisons.
 
Incidentally, as did BMW, Infiniti also provided MT versions of the G35 sedan to the magazines for testing. While I shopping for cars, not once did I ever find a MT-equipped sedan version of the car on a dealer's lot. Again, why the magazines don't seem to see that the cars they test are often not available to the average buyer, I don't know...

#1182 of 1366 so true by dhamilton

Feb 09, 2006 (2:59 pm)

I have been trying to test drive a manual 330. This seams to be a car that doesn't exist in the great state of Texas.
 It smacks of a little bias when Edmunds wouldn't test a 3.2 against the 330 due to lack of a manual, but gladly ran an automatic only Lexus IS 350 out to be slain by the almighty Bimmer. All that to say, Edmunds is still a great website {if any polizi are listening }

#1183 of 1366 Re: so true [dhamilton] by markcincinnati

Feb 10, 2006 (9:50 pm)

Replying to: dhamilton (Feb 09, 2006 2:59 pm)
Here in River City, the home of the largest volume dealer for BMW in the state, it is easier to find a stick shift Audi than a stick BMW, even though BMW technically offers both its 3 and 5 series in stick. Audi offers the A4 in stick but not the A6.
 
I am certain I could actually test drive an A4 2.0T, 3.2 and S4 4.2 with stick shifts, but not any A6's (DOH!)
 
Drive over to the BMW store and try to find a 3 or 5 in any flavor with a stick shift. Not possible despite the logos and posters and other art suggesting you will have cleaner teeth, more friends, a better sex life and probably will go to heaven if you drive a stick shift BMW that the dealership has plastered all over its walls.
 
Why is this?
 
You (my fellow posters -- bloggers) may disagree, but I think the customer has driven this. And more's the pity and confusion. Most folks, no, check that, virtually all folks do not take test drives of stick shift version (if offered) of their faves. They don't know what they're missing.
 
Shifting step and tip tronics reminds me of the famous song, "Making Love Alone," by Bernadette Peters -- what is the point since they still shift when THEY want to, regardless of what you do, especially if you are not near engine redline.
 
Yet you need not think this transmission is terrible -- it is a matter of degrees. If a stick shift is a 10 then the tip can rise to a 6.5 or 7 once it has trained you to behave the way that it requires you to behave to achieve OK results.
 
Of course if you can get a stick version don't even worry about the tip training you. . . .

#1184 of 1366 Re: so true [dhamilton] by dl7265

Feb 10, 2006 (10:41 pm)

Replying to: dhamilton (Feb 09, 2006 2:59 pm)
Did some one call the Polizei ? In any case Ive seen (2) in stock Manual 3ers at my Center in Dallas in the last year. Conversely The Audi dealer that admittedly has about 50% less stock (and sales too Id bet) usually has a fair number of manuals. Go figure
 
DL

#1185 of 1366 Re: Advice [shipo] by dl7265

Feb 10, 2006 (10:42 pm)

Replying to: shipo (Feb 06, 2006 8:55 am)
Wow, I allways thought you did your own Mid-term oil changes on your own dime ?
 
DL

#1186 of 1366 Re: Advice [dl7265] by shipo

Feb 11, 2006 (8:28 am)

Replying to: dl7265 (Feb 10, 2006 10:42 pm)
I did, but not for the reasons that you might suspect. Back when I had my 1999 328i my nose told me that the oil that my dealership was using was NOT the recommended BMW/Castrol (German) Syntech. With that in mind I then read an article in the New York Times (I think) that outlined a class action law suit against a number of BMW dealers because they weren't using the perscribed oil but were still allowing owners to drive the full 15K miles. "That ain't right", I thought to myself, and that's when I started doing my 7,500 mile oil changes. Had I kept either car beyone the free maintenance period, I would most certainly have gone to the full 15K OCI, because I would then have the confidence of knowing what was sitting in my oil pan.
 
Best Regards,
Shipo

Messages Page 119 of 137

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement