WTF?!? That's the same as the 6MT S4!!! That's stock too so who knows what some performance mods will do to that beast!

I'm waiting for your commentary dave :-)

here is a thread if you want to check out the article. I agree w modding , its gonna be a beast

http://www.caranddriver.com/carnews/10753/2007-bmw-335i-coupe-official-photos-and-info.html

an enthusiast forum. performance, and not looks should be the prime measure of a car's worth. everytime some mentions a car that isnt the best looking (sti, evo, new 330), everyone is so quick to dismiss the performance of the car merely because of looks. i suppose its motivated by resentment, wherein one feels the need to invert values - such as the axiom that function > form - in an attempt to disvalue things they cannot attain (such as the performance, stock, of the new 330; once mods are considered, the new s4 will not likely be a performance contender). look at what a tbe and em can do for a 2.0t gti mkv!!! consider what they did for the 2.7tt, although the 330 does have an AL block and will thus, most likely, be compression limited.

reinforce the internals. It appears to not get the fancy magnesium and aluminum block/crankcase.

Obviously they don't want to step on the toes of the 400+hp M3 either.

Apparently coming only in the Coupe and Convertivle for now, and substantially more expensive than the regular normally aspirated cars.

Of course since the convertible is a hard top, it will make for a higher center of gravity.

Why drive a pig if you don't want to or have to? IMO the new 3-series is ugly. With unlimited funds, you can take any car and turn it into a supercar. With $30,000, you could put a supercharger on the RS4 and it would have @550 horsepower. This would blow the other cars away and still look good doing it :).

you could buy an evo and an sti in place on an rs4, but you could also save that money, or rather, invest it in either car and have a trule amazing sports car unrivalved by any car but the most exotic. as for the rs4, do you actually believe you will be able to supercharge the rs4 motor?? if so, your a moron. you honestly think audi left that type of performance in the car; this is an rs model, it has been tuned very closely to the limits of the car. you argue: "With $30,000, you could put a supercharger on the RS4 and it would have @550 horsepower. This would blow the other cars away and still look good doing it." Sure but then you have 100k invest in a depreciating asset. With $10k you can have an sti putting out 600whp and still have $20k left over for a daily driver. the point being, when speaking of performance, looks dont matter.

function > form

merely because it is ugly - which is a most subjective value - does not mean it has an impact on the performance of the car, an objective valuation (lap times, 0-60 times, 1/4 mile, skid pad, etc ...).

Most of us make cosmetic mods to our cars. Looks are important. I have seriously considered an M5 while waiting for my RS4. ONE of my reasons to justify not getting the M5 was that is was so ugly.

I don't have to justify my RS4 purchase decision by putting down other cars. I do think that Audi makes the best looking sedans inside and out. It is just a personal preference.

I think the whole performance comparison between the cars within a segment is a bit ridiculous. I don't street race and don't really car about the my car being incrementally faster than the competition. There is always a faster car out there. So what if an ugly Bangle BMW is a little faster 0-60. Although the Subaru makes great cars, it is a complete joke to compare them to Audi when it comes to build quality. The Audi is much more expensive. It is like comparing the RS4 to the 997 TT -- from a performance and price standpoint there is no comparison.

"The Audi is much more expensive. It is like comparing the RS4 to the 997 TT -- from a performance and price standpoint there is no comparison."

but from a performance standpoint, you CAN compare the STi is every audi!! unless your merely buying a car for conspicious consumption, one ought to value the car that exhbits the same performance at a lesser price point. the reason an audi and an sti ought not be compared is because of interior ammenities (but when talking about track cars, for example, this is a unnecessary condition). perhaps this is merely an ideological issue, but looks have never been a more important factor than performance for me. i track my car, i enjoy driving and while i also enjoy the beauty of automobiles, the best view i have ever had of any car has been from the driver's seat!!!

Is it 0-60? 1/4 mile time? Time around the ring?

The objective measure you choose as your most important is subjective. So is someone's subjective opinion about styling less valid than your opinion of what is important?

How about daily, 365 days per year, drive-ability? How about safety? How about build quality? Are those unimportant too?

Why don't we all go out and buy tuned Hondas?

you are evaluating the cars based purely on track performance and others here are not. From a track car standpoint, the STi is a great value. I don't want to drive an ugly, high-performance, track car around town every day. I do see your point. We are just looking at the same issue from two different perspectives.

to the extent that it can be measured. while i might value a car like the s2000 for its track ability, a mustang gt is a better 1/4 mile car. does this mean these performance numbers are subjective: no. that is, within the paradigm positing the axiom that performance is the most important factor in car choice for the enthusiast, what you choose to value as far as performance feel is concerned is up to the consumer.

that is to say, while the original poster decried the 330i as "ugly," he sought to devalue the car's value in responce to a post made by someone extolling its performance. the original poster didnt say the 330i poses an aethetic threat to the b6/b7 s4, but he suggested it poses a performance threat instead. however, there are many people who believe the 330i is a good looking car, though they may be scare on an audi forum; the styling cues and trend of audi v. bmw are most diametrically opposed. if we were on a bmw forum, and someone suggest that the s4 poses a threat to the 330i (opposite situation), and someone wished to detract from the audi in one way or another, they would assert something like the following: (1)yea, but its an vw!! (implying sketchy reliability, and a general lack of prestige within the american market where audi is generally - whether audi owners accept this or not, it is true and easily illustrated in consumer surveys/publications - a second rate german automaker (behind bmw and merc).

my point is that the original poster talked about performance only!! aesthetics came in as a secondary influence so as to attempt to decry the car. why not merely affirm the car as a great performer, and indeed a great value, and suggest that the looks arent your taste (not that it was you who said this)???

Your argument is articulate, but all enthusiasts are necessarily looking for a track car.

Also, my point was that anything you choose as your most important factor is subjective. Yes, performance times are objective. But it is subjective which ones you choose as your most important. There are so many objective measure that we can all say my car is better than that car at (insert objective performance measure). Do 1/4 mile times really matter to most of us? If they do, we should all be buying different cars. I just don't care how my Audi performs against the BMW at the track.

Peace. See my post above - we wasted too much time on this...

We wasted way too much time on this worthless thread. :-)

i actually like, esp when compare to other bangle designs. in person, i think it will look great. that said, i also like the e90 3 series (love the e46 m3), but dont like the new m5/5 series and 7 series.

<img src="http://www.caranddriver.com/assets/image/2006/Q2/042120060756430105.jpg">&lt;/img&gt;

Look what was done to the RS6, they left tuning ability in that car. You could throw a GT kit on that car and it would make more horsepower than stock. Granted the RS4 engine is different, I am just saying that you could tune this FSI engine if you wanted to void the warranty. I am not sure of the tuning ability of this engine since it is so new, but some people have tuned the engine (MTM is making a S/C right now). I was just making a point that there is always tuning that can be done if the price is right. If I was worried about a depreciating asset, I would most certainly not buy a car!

P.S. I am not a moron, I'm just a little slow!

to the extent that perhaps i do err in assuming that aw members are all track oriented drivers. perhaps i have spent too much time on iwsti.com.

Something cheap and fun

All your time seems spent over on the A3 board which I rarely look at these days..haha.

Just read the way people write stuff around here and there are so many comments about how fugly one car is compared to another, etc. etc.

I think, and this is my opinion, that is what makes Audi so great. It's an almost perfect blend of performance and aesthetic beauty.

I think you have stated that but I just want to be sure.

I'll be one of the first people to admit that I'm not particularly fond of the newer generation Bimmers thanks to Bangle! I was simply pointing something out that is a sign that these 3-series vehicles are going to be a force to be reckoned with. The irony of course is BMW's switch to turbo boosted engines as opposed to NA.

is worse or much worse than Audi's reliability according to online reports and reviews from numerous owners of all three brands on forums like these and websites such as msnautos.com, edmunds.com and others (too many to mention here). For BMW, that will most likely be even more true with them bolting twin turbos to their all new magnesium 3L I6. Mercedes used to be the most reliable beunch of vehicles on earth. But yes, BMW and Mercedes still have loads of prestige worldwide despite their horrific quality and reliability and diminishing dealer network and, to a lesser degree, diminishing customer service as of late. Audi, OTOH, only has those same levels of prestige overseas (or, at least in Africa, Europe and now Asia) where their customer service, dealer network, quality and reliability are all first rate according to the surveys they have there (for the most part, anyway, although Audi has slipped a bit on all counts over the past few years in the overseas markets according to their surveys) and is sorely lacking in prestige in North America, where their dealer network, customer service, quality and reliability is spotty as best according to the surveys we have here. But if Audi continues to improve their quality, reliability, customer service and dealer network worldwide (which they are working massively hard to do; it will take quite a while, however, especially in North America), I am very confident that this will all change dramaticlally (for the better, of course).

You talking about your screen saver? :-) I didn't get this one and that popped into mind.

I was arguing that an enthusiast can factor looks into the equation along with performance and whatever else they consider important. I doubt anyone will drop the extra $20K on an RS4 for the very subtle differences in appearance from an S4 - if they do they are idiots. I wanted to make the point that we talk about other issues here beyond track performance.

If we are just talking acceleration and not handling.