......and a 323i have IDENTICAL 0-60 times of 7.1?<p>The A4 has 207 ft-lbs of torque at 3200 RPM and the 323 has 181 ft-lbs at 3500, and they are almost exactly the same weight (FWD A4). Where is the A4 losing it's power??? I'm totally mystified by this. Help me!<p>Oh, and Car and Driver actually timed the 323is (coupe - 200 lbs lighter) at 6.6 seconds. So BMW's claim of 7.1 is pretty accurate.

I don't really trust all those 0-60 numbers. Everyone gives different numbers. Here is an example. According to the German magazine, Auto Motor und Sport, Audi A4 FWD did 7.1 (0-62 mph) and BMW 328 did 7.6 (0-62 mph), and they weren't favoring A4 either, they ranked A4 after 328, MB C280, then followed by Alfa Romeo 156 2.5. <p>I just test drove A4 Q/M/S against 323 S/M a couple days ago and I really thought A4 was faster even with Quattro.

Perhaps the BMW has rearend gears that are better at off-the-line launching.<p>Example: my other car is a 1971 Olds Cutlass with a 350 V8. Every Olds that year had a V8. But, my rearend is a 2.56:1 which is known as "highway gears". It's not the quickest off the line, but it will cruise down the highway at relatively low RPMs. Some other cars which are drag racing oriented have gear ratios that are 3.42:1 or 3.73:1 or 3.91:1. These cars spin tires easily and zip off the line, but they hate long highway drives because they are turning high RPMs at even 60 MPH. Long highway drives can cause these cars to overheat (no overdrive gear).<p>So, there are many gear choices and I'm suggesting that BMW has chosen gears that will let it's 2.5L engine give good performance. So why doesn't Audi? Tough question. Maybe Audi is better on the high end.<br>

Yeah, I saw your other post on bimmer.org, and like you, I'm torn. The A4 is clearly more powerful, and is so fun to drive. But the BMW with the 50/50 weight balance and stiffer sport suspension is a blast. I've been driving myself nuts with this.

1) Gearing is likely to be different. BMW's have a pretty lively 1st gear which helps it accelerate out of the gate. <p>2) Even though PEAK torque tells you one story, a dyno graph could tell another. For example, the 323's torque curve could be flatter than the 30v. In which case, even though the BMW makes less peak torque, it could potentially be making close to peak torque for a longer period of time compared with the Audi.

when I looked at the torque curves, the A4 is much flatter, except for that little dip between 3500 and 4500. The A4 engine feels much better in normal driving. The 323 feels more powerful over 4000. Even though it has double VANOS, it feels more like double VTEC. I like the handling and appearance of the 323 better, but without the low end torque that the A4 has, who knows what I'll get. I'm going nuts. The 328 would be an obvious answer if money was no object.

The Audi 2.8 Quattro has a 3.89 rear end... much lower than the BMW's. I'm not sure of theirs, but the best I remember it was somewhere around 2.79 or so... I know it was under 3:00. However, 1st and 2nd gears in the BMW were geared much lower than the A4's. So how the rear-end gearing and the actual tranny gearing combine for off the line performance, I don't know, but obviously BMW has done something right. Now if they could only build a car that is as nice looking, has as good quality parts, and bring back the AWD (enhanced of course), they could compete better with the A4.... with me at least. But, a few tenth's of a second off the accelerations times will not suffice.... especially when I can spend the money saved on the A4 on a PES Supercharger that will leave a similar costing 328i in the rear-view.

I don't remember the exact numbers but Audi's gear goes into overdrive starting with the 3rd gear(by overdrive, I mean less than 1:1 ratio). BMW's <u>5th</u> gear is 1:1 ratio and never goes into over drive ratio. With bigger gears, BMW (323) will take off faster eventhough it has less torque.<p>Why on earth Audi made the gearratio that way? I don't know, but I know that you cannot just pick a ratio and go. The ratio is closely matched to the engine performance to give the best performance(whether it is smooth ride or fast take off or whatever).<br>

Haven't seen the torque curve on the A4 2.8, but when I did a comparison test drive on the 323i, the thing that was most remarkable on the A4 was how SLOW it felt off the line, compared to the 323i. In fact, it felt slow off the line compared to the 1.8T!<p>I'm sure it's a combination of factors, but gearing is probably the culprit most responsible.<p>I disagree completely with the VTEC comparison. I owned a VTEC and drove it for 50,000 miles. BMW's engines are noted for their torquey feel, and VTEC's are pretty ho-hum until you really get the revs up.

I really don't understand all this agonizing over tenths of seconds on 0-60 acceleration times. For the vast, vast majority of drivers who don't derive some childish jolt from drag racing flat out away from stop lights this spec means very little if anything.<p>If acceleration is what you crave, why not buy a Maxima for around $22,000 + rebate, special financing, etc.) and you will leave A4's and E46's in the dust at your local drag strip?<p>How a car drives in normal driving situations is what is important. In other words, USEABLE power--for passing, merging smoothly onto freeway ramps, etc., is what makes a difference to me in acceleration. At least equal to that is how the car handles in a variety of situations (not just in hazardous driving situations). I chose not to waste $5000 to get only a marginal improvement in that type of driving made no sense to me, and probably makes no sense to the other E46 purchasers who are buying 323i's over 328i's at a ratio of 3 to 1.<p>The the BMW's edge over the A4 (IMHO) is that it is a better balanced car--and I'm not just talking about 50/50 weight distribution. This is not to say the A4 is not a great car, and lots of fun to drive. But what do you think the relative sales numbers E46 to A4 would be if BMW dropped their prices to A4 levels?<p>Please, no flames. Just one BMW driver's opinion (one who's wife drives an A4!) I don't claim to be a better person because of my choice in vehicles.

I DO live in Minnesota--for over 50 years. I make my buying decision on the type of driving I intend to do. I use my car mostly for transportation in and around the Twin Cities. As you know, if you live in Minnesota, there are very few days a year when Quattro would make any real difference driving under these conditions.<p>If you like to drive up to the UP of Michigan for skiing, then I might agree. My own opinion, after having driven my wife's Quattro (her decision, not mine) is that I still prefer to drive my Bimmer in the snow. Got to use the traction control tonite, and easily pulled away from an SUV on an incline.<p>Not as good as Quattro, but good enough. You do understand that Quattro doesn't help you stop, and that's what you need more than anything on icy roads.

Audi A4<br>1st - 3.50<br>2nd - 1.94<br>3rd - 1.30<br>4th - 0.94<br>5th - 0.79<br>Final - 3.89<p>BMW 328i<br>1st - 4.21<br>2nd - 2.49<br>3rd - 1.66<br>4th - 1.24<br>5th - 1.00<br>Final -2.93<p>

...that's another issue.<p>In the winter, besides stopping, car control and stability when moving are very important, too. So is the ability to get out of snow drifts, and that stuff that they plow around your car if you park on the street. <p>I guess a lot of other people feel the same way, because Audi outsells BMW, M-B, Lexus, Acura, and Infiniti in Minnesota.<p>Don't get me wrong, I think BMW's are great cars; just no comparison in the winter to Quattros.<p>Rich D.