Why does Audi always have to bring up the rear in regards to engine power? I love everything about the car except the relatively weak engines. Nothing is perfect I guess. The sad part is that Audi will probably give the A4 the engine it deserves next year, leaving the first-year folks out in the cold. Two-year lease anyone?
Like all Audis, if there isn't an "s" or an "rs" on the badge then don't expect to win many races.
08-30-2007, 06:12 AM
08-30-2007, 06:15 AM
though we don't know anything about the US market yet...
08-30-2007, 06:30 AM
And besides someone else agrees with me. I like the new A4, it's just that the new A4 will be the weakest performer in its class (Just like the A5). If that rubs you the wrong way then I apologize. But the fact still remains that out of the 335/G35/IS350 and New C -Class, The Audi A4 3.2 has the weakest engine of them all, and significantly weaker than all but the C-Class (which is another underpowered car). Way to go Audi!!!
08-30-2007, 06:59 AM
It's still a pig.
I think world class for 6 cylinders has been raised to around 300hp, with torque in the area of 260-280 ft.lbs. for gas engines. BMW, Cadillac, and Infiniti are there, blown or NA, and I'm probably leaving someone else out.
08-30-2007, 07:07 AM
I'm just going to say at first, check the 0 - 100kmph tests for all the C class range, 3 series range and then the new A4. I checked them last night and the A4 is faster than the competition at all levels and engine sizes. With all the new technology in it, it seems like its going to be a real drivers car too. I really don't think you should be so quick to critisize everything, you've done that extensively with the A5/S5 and its really not necessary or appropriate until you have driven the car for yourself.
Two highlights of the A4 range would be the 3.2L V6 which does 0-100 in 6.2 seconds and the 3.0L TDI which does 0-100 in 6.0 secs.
Find a C class or 3 series that can do that.
Also in relation to previous engines, the power had increased significantly over the previous model while fuel consumption has also decreased.
I think you need to pay more attention to the 3.0L TDI models of the A4 and A5 before making complaints about the engines.
08-30-2007, 07:12 AM
Go and check the 0-100 times, the A4 has the most impressive performance figures of the lot; and remember that the A4 is equiped with quattro at the 3.2L and 3.0L TDI levels.
0-100 in 6.2 secs
3.0L TDI Quattro
0-100 in 6.1 secs
0-100 in 7.0 secs
0-100 in 5.8 secs, (not far ahead of the A4 3.2 however the price is much greater also there is no quattro)
~Mercedes C Class
0-100 in 6.3 secs (slower, not by much but nevertheless still slower)
-C320 CDI 4matic
0-100 in 7.7 secs
From this I really think that the A4 is vastly superior, the same figures apply for the rest of the range, where the A4 is always faster.
08-30-2007, 07:25 AM
The 2.0T FSI engine with a good ECU chip will be just fine!
08-30-2007, 07:28 AM
Check your sources
08-30-2007, 07:28 AM
BMW 335xi, 0-60 is 5.3sec in manual and 5.4sec in auto
Infini G37x sedan will have 330HP
So indeed Audi 3.2 V6 is under power.
But maybe Audi is trying to have more separation to it's S4.
I also find so many engine variation/choices.
Look at the magazines that tested the 335 and recorded the results. They all had the 335 doing 0-60 MPH in the mid 4 second range. The 335 will flat out leave the 3.2 Audi. It wouldn't even be close. Check the 0-100 mph and 1/4 mile time/speeds and compare the two.
08-30-2007, 07:41 AM
08-30-2007, 07:43 AM
I also doubt that the 335 will be significantly more. The current 335 isn't significantly more than the current A4 3.2 (maybe 3 grand?)
08-30-2007, 07:45 AM
The chipped 2.0 route is probably where I'll end up (had a 1.8t :-). Does anyone know if the 2.0 will have the dual exhausts? The pics were a little confusing.
Manufacturer claims are conservative. The link contains the results from C&D when they measured the performance results. BMW's web-site claims are not measured results.<ul><li><a href="http://www.caranddriver.com/shortroadtests/13548/tested-2007-bmw-335i-coupe-automatic-specifications-page5.html">335 performance Automatic. Manuals are faster by a couple tenths</a></li></ul>
08-30-2007, 07:51 AM
saying something like that in Edmunds :-)
But I have to say the G37 looks goood on paper, only time will tell if it's for real.
08-30-2007, 07:54 AM
Now those are a bunch of disillusioned folks.
08-30-2007, 08:00 AM
notoriously slower numbers or the same as what audi advertises. This year R and T tested a 2.0t and a 3.2 with their expensive VBOX logger and they actually came out identical to 60.
08-30-2007, 08:05 AM
which is not comparable to a proper RWD platform. You'd want quattro to compete with that which would put you at $38,400 with no options at all. The base for a 335i is within a grand of that and the 335i is faster than an S4 much less A4. Not to mention the prices for the new A4 will likely be even higher.
08-30-2007, 08:28 AM
anyone have more speculation on which engines will arrive here?
i'm betting we ONLY get the i4 TDi. bastages.
but i bet the 3.0 TDi will be $40k+
08-30-2007, 09:15 AM
by staggering the introduction of new engines with new models, there is less to go wrong in the new car. when new engines are put in the B8 3 years from now, any issues with the new platform will have been worked out. this will also reinvigorate sales of an aging platform right when it needs it.
BMW has been doing this for years.
Audi S5 TC
08-30-2007, 09:34 AM
08-30-2007, 09:49 AM
though i agree that the 3.2 in the B7 A4 also isn't much better than it's 2.0t. However, I believe the version in the B8 platform is a slight improvement (more torque, correct?).
In the rest of the world, Audi's real bread & butter V6 engines are the 2.7TDI and 3.0TDI. The latter is perhaps the best combination of power and economy available.
Srsly, though, get it over with and stick to BMW already. Not sure what you're trying to accomplish here.
08-30-2007, 09:53 AM
08-30-2007, 10:28 AM
08-30-2007, 10:33 AM
I recently did a Euro delivery lease on a 335i sedan with Sport and Premium packages and a couple of other options for a $44,900 MSRP. My lease payment on a 3-year lease at 12K miles per year is $476.41 including tax with zero cap reduction (drive-off was $835) after I put down a refundable security deposit of 4 grand (total of 8 security deposits which reduced my money factor by 0.00049 to 0.00156).
I didn't have to check A4 3.2 lease prices since the residual value was at least 10 points below my 63%. Any MSRP savings you get on an Audi gets wiped out by the much lower residual value.
I still hope to come back to Audi with a Euro delivery B8 A4 in 3 years, but it looks like I would have to purchase the car since lease payments are not likely to be competitive.
08-30-2007, 10:37 AM
Is there something wrong with that?
In the engine department the 3.2 isn't competitive against the IS350/G35 and the 335. That is a fact that seems to rub certain people the wrong way. I'm not sure why?
08-30-2007, 10:39 AM
Too bad the 335's interior is hideous.
08-30-2007, 11:03 AM
08-30-2007, 11:16 AM
But the way you describe it, life is a drag race and you need to be in a car that will smoke the car in the next lane. I may have read you wrong, but the constant reference to 0-60 times gives the impression that that is all that matters to you.
The reality is Audi's strategy, love it or hate it, is to give their base cars decent power, but if you want to go faster, you have to pony up to the S or RS cars. I don't think anything is going to change that strategy, so all we can do is complain to deaf ears.
Take it for what it is and decide to either go with it or not. I've learned to never expect Audi to make their non S or RS cars tops in hp/torque, 0-60, etc. I'd be happy if they surprised me one day, but I think people buy Audis for more than these numbers.
I've had my share of having a car that I knew would smoke the car next to me. Not by bag anymore.
08-30-2007, 11:28 AM
08-30-2007, 11:32 AM
Audi doesn't focus on reducing weight, particularly with their quattro system.
The result is a car that is in between classes in terms of performance.
08-30-2007, 11:37 AM
Overall, they don't say if the B8 will be heavier than the B7, but I am expecting it to be. But, Audi is trying somewhat to save weight.
Additionally, Quattro itself is a power sapping feature, so having it is an automatic handicap when compared to similarly weighed and powered cars.
Either way, if Audi really wanted to be the leader in performance for their cars, they'd need to go with a bit more hp and torque to overcome the weight and Quattro power loss, I think.
08-30-2007, 11:53 AM
I've been driving a chipped 1.8T Passat since 1999!
08-30-2007, 12:00 PM
MSRP start price for A4 3.2Q with 6-speed vs 335xi with 6-speed, the A4 starts at $37,250 and the 335xi starts at $40,800. Just a little over $3,550. So, is the $3,550 worth the faster 0-60? For some, of course. For others, maybe not.
08-30-2007, 12:18 PM
<center><img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/21163/lemon-poplar1.jpg"></center><p>This is not my car (mine is a 6-speed manual), but I have the same exact interior combo of lemon leather and light poplar wood trim. The ergonomics and layout is not as good as my 2006 A4 and the quality of plastics used is a notch below. One thing you have to hand it to BMW is that they give you plenty of choices. On an S-Line A4, you get black interior with aluminum trim. On a 3-Series, you can get one of 5 interior colors (lemon, terra, black, gray or beige) and a choice of 3 trims (light and dark wood plus aluminum).
08-30-2007, 12:46 PM
"8 security deposits"? You didn't put $4K down but instead gave it to them to hold for 3 years?
I must be a leasing newb but I've never heard of stuff like that. Interesting.
08-30-2007, 01:09 PM
the A4 3.2 competes with the 328, NOT the 335. Both engines have almost identical displacement (3.1L vs 3.0L).
But the Audi boasts the stronger, more advanced engine (260hp vs 220hp).
So the claims that the 3.2 engine is "weak" just makes me shake my head. That engine is the most powerful and sophisticated naturally aspiring 3 liter engine in the world.
Yes, the A4 and A5 may not have perfect competitive matches to their BMW rivals (e.g. the S5 comptes with the 335 even though it has a V8 instead if an i6 turbo) but these complaints that Audi's engines are somehow weaker than the competition are ridiculous.
If you do appropriate comparisons, you'll find that the Audi's are the ones with the stronger engines.
08-30-2007, 01:22 PM
1) BMW's 3.0 motor in the 328 is the same motor as last year's 330i just missing some tuning and a 3 stage intake manifold. 255hp in the 330. The 328 makes 220 because that's where they decided to market it, not because it can't make the power. But it's pretty obvious it's not making too much more power since they had to go and throw a couple turbos on it. However, in the price point, they're ahead of Audi in the hp wars ... woopie.
2) As the top motor in the model range (excluding S) the 3.2 absolutely DOES compete against the 335i. As well as the is350. But that's okay, the C350 only puts out 268hp. Real world, it's still more than acceptable ... as long as they really do keep the weight down once all the options are on the car.
3) "That engine is the most powerful and sophisticated naturally aspiring 3 liter engine in the world." The blind fan-boyism in that statement just makes me shake my head. Please show me one bit of proof that it's the most powerful, most sophisticated, IN DA WORLD. I'm being snarky, but that just makes you sound like a marketing dept tool.
08-30-2007, 01:31 PM
08-30-2007, 02:15 PM
if you total the car while leasing the MSD is refunded to you, not like down payment.
Both are used to lower money factor (interest rate).
08-30-2007, 02:34 PM
I'm no finance person, but how does a refundable deposit lower your money factor? I can understand a cap reduction or interest buy down, but that's money you don't get back. I didn't realize that there were finance companies willing to cut me a break for just letting them hold on to my money.
Does Audi do this?
08-30-2007, 02:38 PM
I am no finance guy either, but my logic would be that it helps their cash flow since you let them hold your money for the lease period (2-3 years).
I don't think Audi does the multiple security deposit (MSD) deal thing.
08-30-2007, 02:48 PM
Still driving my 1997 A4 1.8T with KO4.
I like tat car so much I am thinking getting Velocity RS4 replica wheels.
Well, got so much sweat and blood (from busted knuckle DIY) invested in it so I can't let it go yet. :-)
08-30-2007, 02:58 PM
It is still a good way of saving some money. I will save about $1250 in total monthly payment ($35 per month x 36). I don't think I could earn that kind of money on my $4K in 3 years in a safe investment like a CD.
08-30-2007, 04:00 PM
US market does not make or break Audi's business so you can't judge this issue from what is available in the US. The "weak" engine argument is an old one but also a false one. Think of it from Audi's perspective... On a worldwide basis, Audi's engine range is very competitive with BMW or Mercedes. Since BMW sells very few 335i (compare to say... 318i+320i+320d etc), the fact that it may be marginally faster than S4 is really irrelevant. Through out the A4 engine range, it is pretty much punch of punch better or equal to BMW 3 series.
318i vs 2.slow = a wash... both car are very slow and underpowered by US standards
320i vs 1.8T = 4 cyclider vs. 1.8T - 1.8T never lose...
325i (323i in Canada) vs 2.0T = 2.5 I6 vs. turbo FSI - Audi wins
328i (US only) vs. 3.1 V6 = Audi wins
330i vs. 3.1 V6 = toss up but I give it to the nice BMW 3.0 I6
335i vs. 4.2 V8 = probably toss up but I prefer V8 (somewhat biased...)
318d vs 1.9 TDI = I think BMW wins here
320d vs. 2.0 TDI = I'd go with Audi here
325d vs. 2.7 TDI = Audi has more power
330d vs. 3.0 TDI = toss up
335d vs. ? = Audi is lacking here
08-30-2007, 05:12 PM
... It's obvious you missed the past half dozen articles directly comparing the S5 to the 335i in some of the most prominent car magazines.
The S5 & 335i are direct competitors. This is a fact, not a point of debate. Audi & BMW already agreed to this when supplying cars for the press. The same can be said for the 3.2 and 328i. You are just plain wrong my friend.
As for Audi's 3.2, it's the most powerful engine in the 3 liter class (remember to factor in the 243 lb-ft of torque). It does outperform BMW's i6 in the 328 (which outputs a mere 200 lb-ft). Again, another fact. Look up the specs.
Listen, I ain't knocking BMW's inline 6. I've driven plenty a 3 series and love that engine in all its recent variants.
But your argument is still fundamentally incorrect. I suppose the confusion stems from the fact that both the 3.2 and upcoming S4 do not perfectly match up with the competition. The S5 for example slits slightly above the 335i. Same goes for the 3.2 in relation to the 328.
But what you're doing is incorrectly shifting the Audi engine class lineup one notch up in class and then complaining they they aren't powerful enough. Your argument is therefore irrelevant.
Alright, I'm done with this thread.
08-30-2007, 09:33 PM
08-31-2007, 01:29 AM
08-31-2007, 01:36 AM
We can only base the cars off what the manufacturers have provided otherwise the comparison is not accurate. Until the A4 is tested by outside sources we can only compare its manufacturer claim to the BMW manufacturer claim. Otherwise its like comparing apples to oranges.
As well, the 335i is significantly higher in price than a 3.2L V6 A4 or 3.0L TDI; considering that you constantly complained and still do about the S5 costing more than a 335i coupe, I'm surprised you don't prefer the less expenisive A4 3.0L TDI. Its only marginally slower than a 335i when comparing manufacturer claims. Which is all we can base comparisons off until the car is externally tested.
08-31-2007, 01:42 AM
Also, I havn't even heard of the Infiniti brand, so I wouldn't consider it an important enough car to compete with an Audi and Lexus are just an upmarked branch of Toyota, only popular in America as well so they would also be off the list.
The A4 is more orientated with the 3 series and C class.<ul><li><a href="http://www.bmw.com.au/scripts/main.asp?PageID=11768&ModelID=1000002&ModelCategor yID=11&PrimaryModelID=1000007&Screen=ModelSpecs">http://www.bmw.com.au/scripts/main.asp?PageID=11768&ModelID=1000002&ModelCategor
08-31-2007, 01:45 AM
08-31-2007, 01:51 AM
I would call that a significant difference, and if you want X drive it will cost even more.
08-31-2007, 01:54 AM
08-31-2007, 02:04 AM
There are quite a few people who are just absolutely confused about what engine matches up in the different car classes. Then when price is factored in it leads to further confusion. Oh well, we've tried to explain it and offer hard facts from official sites etc so if they want to be ignorant thats their decision.
08-31-2007, 02:10 AM
If you want to start an argument you have to first research the facts, then think before you act, then act. It makes you look like a twit with all the things you are saying, no offense but almost everything you have posted that I've seen is wrong and I've even given facts from web documents etc; others have tried the same approach and you won't accept others opinoins or arguments.
Really think before you act and do your research properly otherwise you will just make yourself seem stupid even if you arn't.
08-31-2007, 04:00 AM
BMW cars have always been a tiny bit more expensive than Audi in the US. They have a better reputation here but to say the 328i competes with the 3.2 A4 is not making sense to me.
The 328i sedan is 32 grand
The 335i sedan is 38 grand.
The B7 (much less B8) A4 2.0t quattro is 32 grand
The B7 A4 3.2 is 38 grand.
So sure, and Audi 3.2 driver could look over at a 335i driver and say, "Your car isnt a direct competitor to mine." but that driver would smile and shake his head knowing he paid the same amount as the 3.2 driver.
This assumes all vehilces with no options, delivery fees or taxes and the Audis with only quattro (which you have to pick as it would be odd to compare a FWD audi to a RWD bmw since who wants a FWD performance sedan?)
And as it has always been, the M3 has always been about 5 grand more than the S4 and will continue to be. It can also compete with the new S5. The M3 CSL will then compete with the RS4 and RS5.
I can see why we wouldnt like that. Currently the 335i toasts even the S4 in acceleration tests (last I saw it do 0-60 in 4.8 and the quarter in 13.4 at 105mph and trap speeds dont lie). I only write this because IMO Audi needs to reduce weight (which they appear to be doing) and add some power to their lineup.
08-31-2007, 10:41 AM
2.0t I-4; 3.2 V6; 4.2V8 (S4); 4.2V8 (RS4)
3.0 I6; 3.0tt I6; 4.whatever V8.
And so you want to tell me that the 2.0t is actually down-range from the na 3.0 BMW motor? And that the S cars, eventhough they're 10k more expensive than the 335 are direct competitors? Well, then by your own arguement, BMW has handily won. More power, less price.
As a consumer, THAT's the comparison I'm going to make. Doesn't matter who/what/why/where the marketing department "facts" are. (and when was the last time marketing used facts?). When I cross shop, I'm compraing engines at price ranges.
Of course they compared the S5 vs 335, the old S 4.2 was meant to compete against the e46 M engine and now it gets squashed.
Look, I have no vested interest in any of this, and really don't care. But, price per price, the 3.2 has to compete with the 335 for buyers. That's how I see it as the guy writing the check, regardless of how much anybody argues differently.
08-31-2007, 11:59 AM
retty weak sauce.
08-31-2007, 02:54 PM
Look at the thread. I'd say that there are strong points from both sides of the fence on this argument. I see plenty of posters on this very thread that seem to agree with me. So I'm not alone.
Nothing is perfect. But by looking at your posts it seems that Audi can do no wrong. I may be a little guilty of stirring the pot, But you seem to be a little guilty of being a fan boy:-)
08-31-2007, 02:55 PM
08-31-2007, 03:18 PM
Apples to oranges? Even though the new A4 hasn't been tested, only a fool would suggest that the new A4 will be as fast as the 335i IMO. Especially when that assumption is based solely on the fact that the new a4 hasn't been tested yet.
The information that Audi has released in regards to the new A4 (Hp,torque,Weight,transmission type) is enough for anyone to determine that the A4 will be significantly slower than the 335. This isn't rocket science. Unless Audi is going to do something crazy with the transmission gear ratios and final-drive gear ratios, the A4 will be slower. I haven't heard anything out of the ordinary about the New A4's transmission. Better to accept reality now than to be disappointed later.
The TDI? I'm not too big on diesels but I do love the low-end torque and fuel mileage. I love revs and diesels don't rev enough imo. Maybe the TDI is different, I'll be sure to find out. Later
08-31-2007, 03:58 PM
When I consider a car for purchase, I look to see if there is anything that makes it special.
The A4 is a special vehicle indeed (interior, craftsmanship, Etc...), but its engine isn't special at all IMO. The 335's, IS350's, and even the G37's engine is special IMO. All of those engines, puts out significantly more power than the A4's engine, while getting equal (if not better) fuel mileage. Why couldn't Audi put something similar in the new A4? Believe me, they will eventually.
When it comes down to it I ask myself; Is the A4's lack of a sexy engine enough to put it in the same class and price range of the cars mentioned above? The answer is yes. Because the A4's refinement, interior, and build quality are at a slightly higher standard than the 335, I think it evens everything out with the BMW (almost). Compared to the other cars mentioned above? Even with the A4's power disadvantage, it has big advantages in other areas (already mentioned) that tip the scales heavily in the A4's favor IMO.
I recently had a 335 (loaner vehicle) and found myself not needing all that power. It was nice having all that power for sure, but I would gladly accept less power for a nicer interior. But then I say to myself "Why can't I have both?" Well... There's always the S4, But the S4 will cost much more than the 335, and I'm not sure if the S4's slightly better craftsmanship and much nicer interior is enough to justify the price premium. Look at it this way; if the new S4 is only just as fast as the 335, and not faster, will it be worth $10k more than the 335? The answer is no IMO. I also look at things like fuel mileage, and if the new S4 gets the same gas-guzzling V8 as the S5, then the S4 even starts to look even less appealing IMO.
I could go on forever (thank god he isn't!:) but I'll leave it at this. If the new A4 had the same power and performance as the IS350 (not even the 335), it would be the perfect car imo. I would be doing back flips, and walking around with a big grin on my face. As it stands now, I'm impressed, but not back-flipping impressed. The new A4 is about 55hp short of being the no-holds-barred best car in the class. Audi is so close its killing me.
08-31-2007, 04:21 PM
When the 3 series is equipped with the NAV system it makes the interior look much nicer. I'm still considering the 335xi and that's the only interior config (Nav) that I would get.
The problem I have with the E90's interior is that the gauges are drab and the rest of the interior is illuminated in orange. I mean everything! Some other colors would be nice, and if it weren't for the NAV display breaking up the sea of orange, the E90's interior would be unlivable IMO. I say that because I recently had a 335(non-nav) for a day. I grew tired of the interior after about 4 drives. I'm really not into the minimalist Spartan interiors and that appears to be the direction that BMW is headed. BMW calls it removing clutter, but instead you get more acres of plain, unused, plastic panels. I'll gladly take purposeful panels with illuminated buttons any day.
08-31-2007, 04:45 PM
The 3.2 is a dog. The S4 has a decent power to weight ratio and the 335i, even in stock form, eats it's lunch.
A simple chip and exhaust barely even qualifies as "modded" and it already makes the car more capable than Audi's B-series "halo" model.
08-31-2007, 04:51 PM
08-31-2007, 05:51 PM
They've sold more and more A4's every year with the same tried and true formula, so I don't think anyone at Audi sees a compelling reason to bump up the 3.2 another 55hp.
Think about it. If they did that, they'd have to do the same to the S and the RS cars. And when they do that, what about the A6 and A8 lines? Will they need substantial bumps in power to make them more powerful than their entry-level car? It has a tremendous effect on their overall strategy.
So, as much as we would all love to have their cars perfect, with class-leading power, exterior aesthetics, and interior, I just can't see it happening. Like many Audi owners, I'm not fixated on power as the key to the car. Nice to have? Sure, but must have? No, I don't absolutely need 300hp. I can enjoy the car for all the things that it does well.
08-31-2007, 07:32 PM
08-31-2007, 10:21 PM
But I don't think its right of you to be saying that the engines are weak. Honestly, looking at them on their own they are not. Of course they arn't super fast or anything, but for what they are I think you need to give them a bit more credit. The A6 4.2L V8 does 0-100kpm in 6.1 secs, so comparing the 3.2 and 3.0TDI to that its not too bad. The 3.2 and 3.0TDI are probably well above the average of all cars for their performance.
Its also true that Audi won't want to make the A4 engines too powerful because it will clash with the S4 when it comes out. And just imagine how much complaining their would be if the S4 wasn't much more powerful than an A4. Sure an S4 costs more, but I think its more than worth it in the end.
Also who knows how well this new A4 will handle etc, handling is almost more important than acceleration and this new A4 seems like it can do it. Look at the R8 for example, its not as fast as a 911 but it handles so much better that pretty much all the reviews (all the ones I've read) have prefered it.
In the end I think you need to take more interest in the S4, you'll get the performance you want and everything else that makes an Audi special too. I'm going to try and save up for an S4 or S5.
08-31-2007, 10:42 PM
The 335i and the S4 are both priced at odd ends, but for what you are saying, the 335i does not give better performance for less price, a 335i does 0-100 in 5.8 secs while an S4 does 0-100 in 5.6 secs (current model) I expect the new one to be as fast as the S5 (0-100 in 5.1 secs).
I suppose if you are considering the current S4 the difference isn't as great but the new model "should" be a vast improvement.
"Price per price, the 3.2 has to compete with the 335 for buyers. That's how I see it." if thats how you see it, the 335i does 0-100 in 5.8 secs, 3.2A4 0-100 6.2 secs and 3.0TDI 0-100 in 6.1 secs. So is the 335i woth the $19,000 more for 0.3 of a second (compared to the 3.0L TDI model)? The way I see it the 3.0L TDI kills the 335i, 0.3 of a second slower only, better fuel economy, superior quality of materials/build quality and $19,000 less. The 3.2L is also very similar to the 3.0L so same goes for it.
I'm not sure about you, but thers no way I'd get a 335i, apart from its rotten looks and under class quality etc its just not worth it. I'd save up for the new S4. Up to you though, I don't know how you base your price comparisons to performance.
I've based the prices of the Au models, where a 3.2V6 and 3.0TDI are $86,000 and the 335i is $105,000.
08-31-2007, 10:59 PM
Theres you backflips answer engine, its 0.3 of a second slower than the 335i and it has much lower fuel consumption, is that enough of a compromise for you to save $19,000?
And besides, the new S4 should be as fast as the S5 in acceleration i.e 0-100 in 5.1 secs, 335i 0-100 in 5.8 (both official numbers from websites).
I based my prices on Au specs where the 335i is $105,000 and the 3.0L TDI is $86,000.
08-31-2007, 11:05 PM
So first you say that the official figures of the 335i from the BMW website are wrong, however the official website figures of the A4 are right. What a stupid thing to say, if I could I'd slap you over the back of the head.
And besides, the 3.2L v6 is only 0.4 of a sec slower than the 335i while costing far less (FAR LESS). 3.0 TDI 0.3 secs slower and also, FAR LESS expensive.
You will just have to try the diesel, I can't comment on it, I havn't driven it, but I saw in one review of the S5/A5 it was compared with the S5s engine, so it can't be that bad. Besides the performance and econimy figures look really good.
08-31-2007, 11:19 PM
Thats how much faster a standard 335i is to a 3.2 or 3.0TDI. Also, an S4 (0-100 in 5.6) is faster than a 335i in standard form, look at the website; check your sources and think before you say something wrong, just makes you look like an oaf.
Also, if the 3.2 or 3.0TDI had a chip in them I'm sure they would perform better than a 335i so again, thick comments.
Compare things on a same level, otherwise its not accurate. Would you compare 2 people of the same weight in a boxing match etc, or put a big person against a little one (chipped out versus standard cars so you can keep up). Never mind, I probably know your answer already based off how intelligent your last comments were.<ul><li><a href="http://www.bmw.com.au/scripts/main.asp?PageID=11768&ModelID=1000002&ModelCategor yID=11&PrimaryModelID=1000007&Screen=ModelSpecs">http://www.bmw.com.au/scripts/main.asp?PageID=11768&ModelID=1000002&ModelCategor
09-01-2007, 12:22 AM
You're clearly a n00b.
Have you ever heard of a 1/4 mile time? Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeah, you're going to want to look into that. It's pretty much the be all end all of straight line performance.
...as opposed to say the poseur boy-racer 15 year old "can't wait to get my license" douchebag or prospective Soccer-Mom minivan buyer performance standard, AKA the 0-60 time.
Don't forget to check your blinker fluid and muffler bearings.<ul><li><a href="http://www.tornadofuelsaver.com">And this is should be the first mod on ANY car!!!!!!</a></li></ul>
09-01-2007, 02:33 AM
Whats with the sudden change in comparison, you were the one to bring up the 0-100kph tests and be so critical; so who's the fool now.
Now your on to the 1/4 mile test, the A4 hasn't been tested for that yet either from what I've seen so again your not testing eqivelant factors.
For me, I rate a car on how the interior is composed, how the exterior looks, how fast it can travel to 100kph and how well it can handle in the corners and around a track.
Although the A4 isn't a track car it would still be fun to take it out now and then and it gives an indication of how the driving dynamics are.
Your initial post was the one that looked like all that matters is the 0-100kph and seriously "LOL The 335i is fast than an S4 dude. With a chip and exhaust it will destroy an RS4"; thats what a wannabe boy racer would say.
09-01-2007, 07:49 AM
09-01-2007, 08:11 AM
09-01-2007, 08:12 AM
I was using Australian prices, thats where I am. Thats a huge variation in price difference for the different countries. I suppose that the 335i might be a better choice in the US, but certainly not for me here costing so much more, I'd be better to go for an S4/S5. Our dollar is weaker, but I didnt think it would make such a huge difference in the price of cars.
09-01-2007, 08:12 AM
Well you can see why I'm in favor of the A4 3.2 and 3.0TDI now, I never realised that the price gap was so low in the US, but its massive here.
Do Audis cost more in the US, or is it that the Au BMWs are charging more?
Cause in comparison to BMWs and Mercedes Audi's usually cost less here. Really confusing.
09-01-2007, 08:20 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you just said that "the 3.2L v6 is only 0.4 of a sec slower than the 335i"? Since the 335 is faster than the S4 by about.03-.04 seconds you are basically saying that the 3.2l is as fast as the S4. No matter how you spin it (with wildly inaccurate manufacturers claims), the 3.2l Audi A4 will get its ass handed to it by the 335. Reality is harsh sometimes, and for some people reality is hard to accept.
09-01-2007, 08:29 AM
It's more than just the faster 0-60 times. Its more like faster to 0-whatever, better balanced handling, better fuel economy, better resale, faster 30-50, faster 50-70, much faster 1/4 mile. Also, free maintenance is also included in the price difference. IF the 335 had a nicer interior, I would gladly spend the extra $3.5k. BMW gives you more bang-for-the-buck than Audi. There really isn't any denying of that fact.
09-01-2007, 08:46 AM
I've yet to hear you say anything about Audi other than 100% unadulterated praise. We all know that nothing is perfect(especially cars). So for a person to pretend that a complete brand of cars is perfect, worries me a little bit about that person.
09-01-2007, 08:58 AM
Only things about Audi that I don't like are, the A3, the S3 looks good though; thats pretty much it. I wouldn't like the brand unless they did everything that I expected them too, if they don't do that for you then they arn't perfect for you. Everyones different and likes different things. If there is something about the cars that I don't like e.g if I thought that the A4 engines wern't powerful enough, I don't get fussed, just simply go up a step to the S4 or RS4. You can't expect to get bargain prices for these cars. I've accepted that.
I pretty much do however like everything about the cars they make. Of course, my favorite models are the S and RS models and I'll always strive to get one. Theres just such a huge choice that if you arn't happy with one thing, you can easily look at another. I usually don't bother to make a fuss about something if I don't like it anyway (unless its shocking, and nothing that I've seen Audi make has been shocking), theres nothing worse than someone who complains all the time and there are quite a few people that I know who do that.
09-01-2007, 09:07 AM
If they were to base their comparisons based on price, the Audi's wouldn't be competitive. So instead folks here are comparing Audis that cost $8k+ more than the competing BMW just so the Audi can compete. It's really sad if you ask me.
Anyway, I really don't care anymore, if you don't like the cars thats fine, but I do.
09-01-2007, 11:29 PM
A 335i isn't faster than an S4, I havn't seen external tests for it but based on manufacturer claims (so that its all the same) an S4 is faster.
I've already posted the websites of the cars so you can check but you still don't believe me. The thing thats so stupid is you say that a 335i is faster than the manufacturer claims, then why wouldn't the 3.2L; 3.0TDI or S4 be faster than the manufacturer claims as well.
If we had external tests for the new A4s then we could compare them with the external tests for the 3 series, but we don't so we can only compare the manufacturer claims.
I've put this data out in a scientific manner to eliminate variability between the factors (factors being the cars), thats how anything is compared in a scientific way but I guess its just too much for some people to follow.
09-02-2007, 08:40 AM
"I've already posted the websites of the cars so you can check but you still don't believe me. The thing thats so stupid is you say that a 335i is faster than the manufacturer claims, then why wouldn't the 3.2L; 3.0TDI or S4 be faster than the manufacturer claims as well."
- I'm going to answer this, and then I'm going to leave you alone.
Why wouldn't the 3.2L;3.0TDI or S4 be faster than the manufacturer claims as well?
Answer: Because some manufactures are conservative with their numbers, while other manufactures are more spot on. There is no set rule, and the manufactures are not required to be accurate. That is why it behooves me that you would even attempt to introduce manufactures numbers in a logical argument.
The reason why car mags strap on test equipment, and record the actual performance results is to see if the vehicle lives up to the manufacturer's claims. Sane people use actual recorded test results to justify their position. Only a delusional FanBoy would use wildly inaccurate manufacturer numbers to defend their postion.
09-02-2007, 09:45 AM
09-02-2007, 10:38 AM
09-03-2007, 05:53 AM
09-03-2007, 05:59 AM
You still can't grasp that the A4 hasn't been externally tested, having the performance reading equipment stuck on it yet etc. To think that BMW gives wrong estimates in the manufacturer claims and Audi doesn't is just rediculous. I'm sure the Audi is faster than they say but it hasn't been tested yet. You have to realise as well that external tests are extreamly variable because of contributing factors such as wind, humidity, temperature, altitude, weight of the driver etc. Manufacturer claims give a better average score. If you look at a few different external tests they will all achieve variable rates for performance because of these contributing factors that throw out the standard deviation from the mean.
Anyway believe what you want, if you want to be ignorant then thats your choice.
09-03-2007, 08:41 AM
How can "Manufacturer claims give a better average score" when they are not actual measurements? If you are comparing manufacturer numbers against each other, then you are assuming that all manufactures obtain their performance numbers in the exact same way.
Do you know how Audi obtains their numbers compared to BMW? Can you show me what procedures they both use to get their numbers? If Audi and BMW doesn't both use the exact same method to obtain their performance numbers, then any comparisons between those numbers is useless.
Show me exactly what method is used by the manufacturers. Until then I'll take their numbers with a grain of salt. You'd also be better served by not comparing Manufacturer numbers against each other. Believe Me.
While we're talking about the method that's used. Wind, humidity, temperature, altitude, and driver weight can effect measurements but what happens when the cars are tested at the same time, same place, by the same driver, and using the same test-equipment? You know like the comparison tests? Would you still put more weight in the manufactures numbers (without knowing the method used) rather than an actual comparison test were everything is out in the open?
Anyone who takes what the Manufacture says over independent test results is either a fool or a Flag-Waving Super-Fanboy.
Dude, You are the one that's ignorant. Some one else said that you are Obtuse. They Couldn't have been more correct.
Oh yeah.. Hasn't the 3.2L A5 been tested. The A5 has the same engine transmission and approx weight of the B8 S4? Guess what? I didn't come no where near the 335's performance (as expected).
09-03-2007, 11:48 AM
09-03-2007, 07:44 PM
We need the same external tests to be carried out by the same car magazine (or tv show etc) for both the BMW and Audi before we can compare results. When its done it will be interesting to see the outcome but it hasn't been done yet.
09-03-2007, 07:52 PM
I wouldn't consider myself a full Australian anyway, my family is originally from Europe; with relatives in America. And as for Australian cars, I don't like them, not at all, some do have powerful engines but they still don't impress me. Thats why I like Audis, they are special cars, they do everything in such a way they make most other cars seem obsolete in my opinion.
09-04-2007, 11:20 AM
That $hit don't fly here in North America.
09-05-2007, 02:27 AM
"They sell A4s in AUS with normally aspirated 2.0L 4 bangers."
Are you talking about the A4 2.0L Turbo model? They only have the 2.0L with turbo, and they get all of the models and engines that are available in Europe as well, even the TDI ones.
09-05-2007, 05:39 AM
Comparing a 335 to an Audi V8? Comparable Performance doesn't make them competitors, price does. And in this case, the car with the Audi "V8" is going to cost about $10,000 more than the 335.
The 3.2l A4 is the car that will compete against the 335. Reason? Because they will be priced within a couple hundred dollars of each other. These S4/S5 335 comparisons make Audi look bad because the only way that Audi can compete, is the put a car which is $10,000 more expensive against the 335.
You also say that I cannot judge this issue from what's available in the US. Why compare the Audi Against cars that I cannot get? I can only judge what's available to me and the choices that Audi has given its US customers. Knowing about an engine that I cannot get does nothing for me. My choices are 335/A4. The 330 isn't being shipped to the US anymore so therefore any comparisons made against it is moot for US costumers. We can only compare what we have available.
09-05-2007, 05:41 AM
09-05-2007, 09:09 PM
It makes a ground-pounding 127hp (95kw)!<ul><li><a href="http://www.audi.com.au/content/Model.aspx?s=1694">Check the WEBSITE.</a></li></ul>
09-06-2007, 01:56 AM
I've been down to the Audi dealer near me several times and I have never seen a non turbo 2.0, but I wasn't really looking at the 2.0 ones anyway so it may exist. On the brochure the 2.0L TFSI is a turbo model though. Seems weird they would offer the non turbo engine here while they don't anywhere else, that I know of.
I'm not really interested in those variants anyway, the 3.2L V6 and 3.0L TDI ones are better, in my opinion. If I was going to get an A4/A5 I would get one of those engines in it. But I'm more interested in the S4 and S5 to be honest.
09-06-2007, 07:58 AM
09-07-2007, 06:38 AM
09-07-2007, 08:51 AM
09-08-2007, 04:21 AM
11-16-2007, 06:37 AM
Lexus IS and G35 don't come in FWD unlike the "rebadged VW"