You are here: Forums Sedans Ultimate AWD Sports Sedans

Ultimate AWD Sports Sedans

828 messages,  Last post on Oct 03, 2009 at 9:40 PM

You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? BMW 3 Series, Audi A4, Volvo S60 R, Subaru Legacy, Audi S4, Mazda MAZDASPEED MAZDA6, Sedan

#303 of 828 Sport vs. AWD by redsoxgirl May 11, 2006 (8:31 am)
By the title of this forum, I must be in the minority that thinks that AWD and "sport" do not coexist in the price range ($35k to $60k+/-) that I am looking at.   After test driving quite a few sedans and coupes over the past 3-4 weeks, most fall well short of my "sport" desires, given that I will be giving up a Boxster S come September. But NONE of the AWD models I've driven impress me.   I realize that I can't expect sports car handling and performance out of a sedan or coupe - no lessons needed there. But in the case of BMW, Audi, Mercedes and a couple of others, the AWD versions carry considerably more weight and body roll than their sport tuned RWD counterparts. Perhaps with the exception of Audi, where it is a nose heavy FWD counterpart. But still, anyone that has driven an M3 next to an S4 can't possibly claim that the S4 handles or feels anywhere near as tight and responsive on the dry pavement (which I will be driving 90%-95%+ of the time).   BMW's 3 and 5 series "x" versions are serious dissapointments compared to their RWD cousins, IMO. What am I missing here? Do posters here actually think heavy AWD is preferable to lighter, better handling RWD? Or is it just that they are willing to accept that significant compromise to have more stability and bragging rights for 5-10% of the time? I have relocated from North Carolina to Boston and want something that is a little more all season versitile, but I don't want to handicap a car with a non-sporty heavy demeaner and higher gas mileage for the privaledge.   P.S. I can even make the same case for the Porsche 911S C2 vs. C4. Sure, when you get up to 450+ hp, the 911 TT doesn't suffer too much from the extra AWD weight, but I know of may enthusiasts who much prefer the handling feel of the RWD GT3. Replies to this message: ateixeira (May 11, 2006 9:28 am) redsoxgirl (May 11, 2006 1:53 pm) rsholland (May 11, 2006 2:47 pm) esf (May 20, 2006 10:37 am) and 1 more... dhanley (Sep 18, 2006 1:51 pm) circlew (Jun 30, 2006 4:27 am) habitat1 (Jul 12, 2006 5:31 am) circlew (Jul 13, 2006 7:17 am)
#304 of 828 AWD vs. RWD by ateixeira May 11, 2006 (9:16 am)
I have both. A Miata and a Forester.   The Miata is more fun in the dry, but it's downright scary when it's wet, and I refuse to drive in the snow at all. Seriously, I'll park it and take the subway home, and have my wife pick me up in her Subaru Legacy.   Also, driving on the edge, it's a sharp edge, and you're more likely to exceed it. Lift the throttle in the middle of turn and the Miata will spin quicker than you can say "oops".   That's why they now tune RWD vehicles to understeer, that plus the electronic nannies like stability control jump in early and spoil the fun. And when you turn that off, well, you still have understeer, and you can still lose it driving at the limit.   Bottom line - over the limit you lose control.   With AWD, you still have control, even beyond the limit. You can control a slide, AWD will actually help you pull out of it.   Now, my Forester isn't a little roadster, but when it does snow, I can drift it and *CATCH* the slide, and control it. The Miata just cannot do this.   So basically I can exceed the limits and have more fun, all in a controllable manner. With RWD I risk spinning out and damaging something.   I realize every car is different, but I've owned both for several years and I have (surprise) gotten the Forester sideways a lot more often.   -juice
#305 of 828 Re: Sport vs. AWD [redsoxgirl] by ateixeira May 11, 2006 (9:28 am)
Replying to: redsoxgirl (May 11, 2006 8:31 am) Now, to try and answer your question, the two closest vehicles I can think of are the Subaru Impreza WRX STI ($33,620) and the EVO MR ($35,764). The EVO actually meets all the criteria.   The Subie is under your price range but an STI Limited arrives for 2007.   Now, are you gonna tell me an EVO is not more fun than a BMW 325i, even with RWD?   An M3, OK, I'll give you that, but that's almost twice the money. Plus it's not available any more (or yet).   -juice Replies to this message: redsoxgirl (May 11, 2006 1:53 pm) rsholland (May 11, 2006 2:47 pm) esf (May 20, 2006 10:37 am) redsoxgirl (May 20, 2006 11:29 am) dhanley (Sep 18, 2006 1:51 pm)
#306 of 828 Anyone else feel we need pics? by ateixeira May 11, 2006 (9:29 am)
#307 of 828 Does this look boring? by ateixeira May 11, 2006 (9:31 am)
#308 of 828 Re: Sport vs. AWD [ateixeira] by redsoxgirl May 11, 2006 (1:53 pm)
Replying to: ateixeira (May 11, 2006 9:28 am) Don't get me wrong, I am sure that the Mitsubishi and Subaru are fun cars to drive in an off-road rally.   But I need something for 12,000+/- miles a year of on-road driving that I can occassionally use to ferry around a client (i.e. senior corporate executives, Wall Street analysts, etc.). Being the youngest female partner in the firm already presents some challenges. Showing up to a business function in a an aerodynamically-eccentric testosterone-laced "boy racer" car would be professionally unadviseable. And frankly, I doubt it would be my cup of tea regardless of the professional image implications.   Yesterday, one of our clients offered me his 2003 M5 with only 19,000 miles, pristine condition for $50,000. It includes an extended (7/75) warranty that covers another 4 years and 56,000 miles of all maintenance. I happen to like the previous (i.e. smaller proportioned, pre-i-drive, real 6-speed manual) M5 better than the new one which feels absolutely enormous to me. I have never purchased a used car, but I'm going to check this one out.   Thanks for your suggestion. I would concede that the EVO is definitely not "boring", even if it's not for me. Replies to this message: rsholland (May 11, 2006 2:47 pm) esf (May 20, 2006 10:37 am) redsoxgirl (May 20, 2006 11:29 am)
#309 of 828 looks like fun but... by kurtamaxxxguy May 11, 2006 (2:19 pm)
ahh, the joys of what looks like desert race/drifting. That is __one__ place you can drift and slide all day in without burning up a zillion tires! I assume there are Heavy Duty dust filters for engine and driver?   Unfortunately, all the dirt in my areas's covered by rotting asphalt and concrete, thoroughly flooded in rains and sprouting potholes by the dozens (including the "free" ways).   AWD would be of help for that, but the extra weight and MPH hit are no fun.
#310 of 828 Re: Sport vs. AWD [redsoxgirl] by rsholland May 11, 2006 (2:47 pm)
Replying to: redsoxgirl (May 11, 2006 1:53 pm) But I need something for 12,000+/- miles a year of on-road driving that I can occassionally use to ferry around a client (i.e. senior corporate executives, Wall Street analysts, etc.). Being the youngest female partner in the firm already presents some challenges. Showing up to a business function in a an aerodynamically-eccentric testosterone-laced "boy racer" car would be professionally unadviseable. And frankly, I doubt it would be my cup of tea regardless of the professional image implications.   Don't have to. Check out the soon to be released '07 Legacy 2.5 GT spec.B. It's not a boy-racer by any means, but a very sporty "GT" with AWD (of course), a powerful 2.5L turbo, a standard 6-speed, navigation, etc. It's the top-of-the-line Legacy and only comes in Diamond Gray Metallic, a charcoal gray. There's nothing about this vehicle that would be considered a bad "career move" on your part. If anything, you just might impress your bosses and clients by making such an intelligent decision.   Follow the links here to the '07 spec.B for info and pics.   Bob
#311 of 828 I think by dhamilton May 11, 2006 (3:19 pm)
The S4 feels way more solid than the current M3 IMO. The M3 is probably faster around the track but I think the Audi would be right on it's butt. The Audi is supremely better on a day-to-day basis IMO. Not to mention the buzzy sound of that inline 6 cylinder in the bimmer is enough to make me hunt for a rope and a shower rod.
#312 of 828 Re: Sport vs. AWD [redsoxgirl] by themugster May 11, 2006 (3:43 pm)
Not a lot of chatter pro or con about it here, but my Volvo S60 R has met all the specs (including the clients) and overcome all the objections voiced above for me, and I live in a Boston-like climate (Albany, NY). If you're committed to using real summer tires (ultra) and switching to real winter tires (like Blizzaks), you probably won't be disappointed. It's a 6-speed 300hp, turbo, twin-intercooled, with 295 ft.-lbs. torque and AWD roughly $40K w/all packages except ground fx and stereo upgrade. Turning circle with the 18" wheels is a minor sore spot, not to mention a design flaw, but then I haven't run gymkhanas since my Big Healey days of yore...and the four-piston 13" Brembos are what you get as a trade-off.

You are here: Forums Sedans Ultimate AWD Sports Sedans