Last post on Feb 08, 2012 at 8:57 AM
You are in the Volvo S60
What is this discussion about?
BMW 3 Series, Audi A4, Volvo S60 R, Subaru Legacy, Audi S4, Mazda MAZDASPEED MAZDA6, Sedan
#1 of 855 AWD MT Sedans - Subaru GT vs Others
Dec 04, 2004 (12:23 pm)
I currently drive a 2003.5 Infiniti G35 6MT sedan that I love. Since I am in the snowbelt, I have a winter tire/wheel package for December to March. This package works really well. However, I keep wondering whether I should go for an AWD sedan the next time around. [BTW, My wife drives a 2002 Subaru Outback wagon and we have owned three other Subarus in the past.]
I was looking at the 2005 Audi A4 Quattro and the 2005 Subaru GT Limited. I have driven the GT and the 2004 A4 Quattro (V6). I enjoyed the GT and could live with that even though it lacks a few amenities I got used to. The A4 was tamer by comparison (which was not a fatal flaw) but was a little too small in the rear passenger area. I am not 100% sure but I thought the 2005 Audi A4 was a little bigger in this regard. So, it may be in the running. In addition, at a slightly higher price point, there are the BMW 330xi and the Volvo S60R sedans.
I would appreciate your views on the merits of the four vehicles I mentioned. Also, would you please indicate if leasing or purchasing may be the wiser choice for the sedan you suggest. Thanks!
#2 of 855 by pat
Dec 04, 2004 (3:59 pm)
I am assuming you mean Subaru Legacy GT and I've adjusted the title and categories to reflect that ...
#3 of 855 Re: [pat]
Dec 05, 2004 (12:15 pm)
Yes, I did mean the 2005 Subaru Legacy GT. Thanks!
Dec 12, 2004 (12:45 pm)
Audi invented AWD and has years ahead of the rest. My Uncle in law works for Ford developing transmission. It's actually a company contracted by them. They also test drive train, basically everything dealing with traction, well the wheels spinning. He's worked there since he was 22 out of engineering school. He seen my car and the first thing he say, "they have the best awd in the business". Goes on to tell me he has driven every AWD & 4WD vehicle, which he has, and Audi is the best. They invented and perfected taking one wheel that's slipping and putting the power to the wheels that aren't. He says, "there unbelivable in the rain and snow". Up in Michigan where he works several of his coworkers drive Audi's and get alot of heat,because there contracted by Ford.
My mom has a '01 AWD Outback and I've driven it many of time and it drives nice. Once to test it in the snow I slammed on the brakes and it didn't stop nearly as fast of my Quattro. The Quattro takes over with the brakes and the slip differental (ESC). I would put up a link but your not allowed here.
Dec 12, 2004 (6:55 pm)
If you are comparing AWD systems braking isn't really part of the system. That has a lot to do with the tires and the braking system, especially in the snow. I have owned an outback ('99 and now an '05 XT) for the last six years. I went to college in Maine and on numerous occasions I was able to drive when othe cars with AWD and 4WD could not (this included Audi's). Audi's also are lower to the ground than Subaru's, which can inhibit their ability to drive when there is 5+ inches of snow on the ground. In term's of performance, the GT is well ahead of the Audi, especially if outfitted with some decent tires (the tires that Subaru puts on their cars, the Bridgestone RE92, are pretty horrible). The GT can reach 60 in around 5.6 and the Audi 3.0 needs around 7 seconds. The new engine in the upcoming A4 will make the car a bit faster, but still not as sprightly as the GT. The handling aspects of the two cars are probably pretty comparable but the price is definately in favor of the GT, which, when both cars are loaded, will run about $10,000 less than the A4.
#6 of 855 The Audi Dilemma
Dec 13, 2004 (2:40 am)
Thank you premiumdetail and natethomas for your detailed opinions. I wanted to point out another issue that poses problems if I choose the Audi.
I have always admired Audis for their level of fit and finish and, genrally, for their looks. I also don't deny that its AWD system has been around a long time and has proven itself. My problem is that the resale value of Audis is abysmal, making them unsuitable for leasing. At the same time, the reliability of Audis is also very much in question, making an outright purchase not a bright idea!
I am certainly not trying to bash Audis, I genuinely wish it made sense to go with the Audi. [I must admit that my brother owns a 2002 Audi S4 Avant and it has been trouble free so far.]
#8 of 855 Consumer Reports lists A4 on "most reliable"
Jan 07, 2005 (7:33 pm)
"At the same time, the reliability of Audis is also very much in question,"
Consumer Reports recently put the Audi A4 on its list of most reliable cars, so their surveys apparently don't agree with this impression.
natethomas- perhaps your superior snow handling in the Subi was due to tires or your driving skill. I find our A4 (with Blizzaks) to be an incredible car driving and stopping in poor traction conditions; almost feels like dry pavement. The dual zone automatic temperature control and heated seats are also appreciated in bad weather. You are correct that the low clearance can be a hindrance in deep snow (then I take the SUV), and the Subi GT, I am sure, has more acceleration.
The Audi and Subaru are both good cars; just depends what features appeal to you most.
#9 of 855 AWD Dilemma
Jan 08, 2005 (2:58 am)
buddhabman: Since the as per the claims of the respective companies (as found in brochures) Subaru introduced AWD wagons in 1971 and Audi in 1980, I guess Subaru was first to market at least!
waygrabow: I get the Consumer Reports (along with Automobile and AutoWeek). The 2005 Buying Guide does give the A4 an average reliability rating (therby it is not precluded from being recommended). The Subaru Outback gets an above average rating on reliability. Generally AWD vehicles are higher-maintenance items, even Subaru, but the costs (including inconvenience) are significantly higher with the VW group!
Notwithstanding my rationale above, I would have leased an S4 last week if I could have done so. Unfortunately, I am 15-18 months away from a purchase. The dealership had two 2004 S4's (V8) with stick shifts. It had all of the do-dads I like (e.g., premium sound) and none I dislike (I don't care for navigation systems, for example). The MSRP was over 53k but was marked down to 44k! It was VERY attractive for a lease! Maintenance is free for 4 years, 50 k miles!
All this proves that when the product is great, the heart rules the head!
#10 of 855 Re: Audi #1 ? [natethomas]
Jan 09, 2005 (7:38 pm)
The GT I looked loaded as close as I could come to my A4 1.8 Quattro 2004 was only a few grand less than the Audi. I paid 30k for a list price of 34,165. It had 300 miles and was certified and free maintanence for 45k. Yes the GT is quicker, 250 hp vs 170 hp but that isn't the whole story. Subs are good but fit, finish, detail, looks, the feel of the car, interio design...need I say more? BEsides in Sept the GT were new and dealers weren't giving much off, so sometimes you go with the better "value."