11-10-2007, 10:25 AM
11-10-2007, 10:25 AM
11-10-2007, 10:30 AM
If that's the case, Audi needs to chop the price too if they drop the V8 and go down in power.
11-10-2007, 10:44 AM
I think I read the torque can move from 90% front to 90% rear....that must be the sport differential. What would be cool is if Audi Drive Select would let a person very their own torque split rates..
11-10-2007, 11:42 AM
About time that Audi got back more into turbo fold with their engines. Unfortunately, what they should do is have the 333hp V6 instead of the 3.2 NA model (to really match up with the 335i/xi) and have a twin-turbo (or SC) v8 as the S engine. That would REALLY give the 3-series a run for their money and blow MB in the dust.
11-10-2007, 11:59 AM
A big improvement over the prior V-8 powered S. The Audi and BMW models in this class have been out of phase, with no one model lining up exactly to the other. A sport sedan shopper will now have a clear choice; getting around the corner quickest, or spinning the rear wheels for thrills.
11-10-2007, 12:02 PM
I wouldn't like a turbo 6 personally to hell with what BMW is doing. I love the V8 sound and power.
11-10-2007, 12:03 PM
It irritates me that people think Audi should match BMW, I prefer the V8 and you'd be suprised so do alot of people.
11-10-2007, 04:03 PM
better mileage, more power. V8 cannot compete.
It's the same reason B5 S4s are still more fun than B6 and B7 S4s (and B7 RS4s)
11-10-2007, 04:04 PM
Compared to a good twin turbo V6.
11-10-2007, 04:16 PM
What's funny is that the new S5, fully loaded without navigation and one other thing, is $65K CDN. The current B7 S4, with the same options, is $70K CDN.
It'll be interesting to see how the new S4 will price out at. It'll either be the same as the S5 or a bit less.
11-10-2007, 05:05 PM
11-10-2007, 06:21 PM
2 you the B5 is more fun, to me I'd take V8, that's me, not you, you are entitled to like what you like.
11-10-2007, 06:23 PM
Yes, the swoosh of the turbo feels good. But the S5 was plenty fun for me.
11-10-2007, 06:50 PM
in the rear...
11-11-2007, 01:30 AM
The V8 in the RS4 is one of the great engine. I wouldn't say about the same with the 2.7T. And yes, in case if you ask, I owned both.
11-11-2007, 10:50 AM
European pricing has the S5 not too much more than the B7 S4. With the B8 S4, I just don't see how they can justify a significant price increase to cost more than the S5. So I expect the B8 S4 to continue to be priced just under the S5.
11-11-2007, 11:23 AM
Seriously thought about buying a close-out '07 but when I drove it I was totally unimpressed. If they go back to forced-induction on the S4, I'll consider one again.
That's not to say that a CPO RS4 isn't on my short list still, though. Very different motor in that car.
11-11-2007, 11:48 AM
i never really liked the way the turbo engine lurched off the line, and the way it's behavior would change dramatically with the weather. OTOH, the V8 is smoother and more predictable, and it sounds like wrath of Thor when you wind it out. Sure, you could chip the 2.7t, but I never did because to me it seemed to run pretty hot stock (try going uphill for 30 minutes at 100+ MPH in the desert in August).
However, the gas mileage issue is what will make V8s obsolete. Hopefully Audi can make a new twin turbo 6 that is as smooth as the one in the 335i.
11-11-2007, 02:45 PM
11-11-2007, 07:08 PM
11-11-2007, 07:58 PM
11-11-2007, 10:12 PM
engine and parts that can handle additional stress. But it is for the sake of this argument the same engine, the point, is it's not the old S4 engine. Conversely, as I suggested go drive the FSI v8 and see if you like it. I know that I like the feel of a V8, the 6 tt sounds like fun, but I at this stage want a larger , breathier, meaty engine. Plus, the sound of V8 isn't going to be matched by a V6.
11-12-2007, 08:14 AM
11-12-2007, 08:16 AM
11-12-2007, 03:09 PM
It sounds rediculous. The V8 S4 is far better than the B5, but the engine has no potential. Its great out of the box, but that is all you can hope for. With a forced induction engine, you can have the same power, but with tunability to attract both modders and stockers.
The S5 was a great car, but I wouldnt trade a B6/B7 S4 for one.
11-12-2007, 09:47 PM
You are right stock, you can't just chip it, and be happy, but I prefer the V8, because I'm not trying to tune it, neccessarily.
11-13-2007, 09:16 AM
I've got a lightly modified 2.0T myself, and I think it's a great motor especially as gas prices go nuts, but any V8 S4 with an exhaust has a completely different level of satisfaction to me.
I'm sure the B8 FI motor will be awesome, but this news actually makes me lean towards the S5 with it's V8 over the four door. That, or wait patiently for the B8 RS4 and save my pennies. I just love having power everywhere and that amazing growl. To each their own..
11-13-2007, 10:27 AM
the feel and the sound of the 4.2, especially as you're climbing in revs, is way more exciting. the 4.2 leaps off the line and easily ROARS to red line. it feels very American muscle-car-like if that's what you're into. the RS4 with full exhaust must be amazing!
now the BIG downside is mpg!
I would assume that the 2.0T is much more exciting than the 3.2 six though....I had a 2.8 12v, which was a real dog, so there's really no comparison there.
11-13-2007, 03:21 PM
11-14-2007, 12:51 AM
I have a fully loaded APR setup w/exhaust and I usually run it on 93 so the torque output is pretty close. I think I just prefer the power delivery of the turbo. Honest to god the S4 felt MARKEDLY slower than my 2.0t from a standstill and when gunning it on a roll in 2nd, like a freeway merge. There just wasn't any punch. And V8 fans will of course call that a feature because it's smooth, but to me there's just no fun in that. I don't race for a living or even stoplight to stoplight, so what's *actually* faster matters less to me than what *feels* faster. And in this case, having driven both back to back, my A4 felt much quicker. So for all that I can't see plunking down a good chunk of extra money for worse gas mileage and better seats. But I'm sure that's just me.
11-14-2007, 06:23 AM
the 335 has always been positioned against the S4 ;)
11-14-2007, 09:03 AM
11-14-2007, 09:05 AM
of torque down low in chipped and upgraded turbo form. The S4 is definitely more boring but a great car too. Love the exhaust note.
11-14-2007, 09:13 AM
4wd (xi) and like options to the Bimmer plus you put some addl value on the interior, V8 rumble, Torsen and the relative exclusitivity of an S-car, you get close enough I say.
11-14-2007, 09:12 PM
of any model. The B5 S4 got positioned against the M3, because, Audi had no R car built for the A4 line. Quattro GMBH = AMG = M, they are all the performance branches of each company. Before, the R cars became more prevelant, as we all know, Audi will likely change the rule of only 1 R car at a time, this had alot more to do with production capability than I think a rule of thumb. As remember the original B5 RS4 was limited and hand built.
But as this has changed, the S4 has moved down market. And the RS 4 has cemented the position of the top of line A4 car.
11-14-2007, 09:16 PM
experienced exponential growth. I think build a better car, and people will pay, much like in the world of CPU's, clock speed doesn't mean everything, no more than horse power and oversteer.
To some it does, but believe it or not, a huge segment takes in account the overall package.
11-15-2007, 04:20 AM
The force you feel down low is torque, but speed is dictated by horsepower. So, a turboed car will feel very fast down in lower rpms, where it makes much of it's torque, but as the engine speed picks up at can't match the V8 HP therefore it will be a slower car.
I agree my turboed A4 seems very fast from the jump, but in no way shape or form is anywhere near as fast due to the HP deficit.
Turbo's are fun to drive, but after driving the V8, S5, I really was impressed with it's driving characteristics.
11-15-2007, 01:55 PM
11-15-2007, 06:05 PM
RS models have been around for years.
11-16-2007, 07:56 AM
11-17-2007, 05:20 AM
Not so much that it didn't come to the states. And If I'm not mistaken it did come to the states didn't it eventually?
11-18-2007, 05:28 AM
11-18-2007, 07:28 AM
Walter's rally car. Now, that would be fun.
11-18-2007, 12:45 PM
11-19-2007, 06:26 AM
11-19-2007, 09:30 PM
11-20-2007, 04:46 AM
11-20-2007, 01:36 PM
none of that drive the back only when the fronts slip garbage....
11-21-2007, 06:04 AM
I'm just being an Audi snob ;)
Trust me, it wouldn't be a deal breaker for me on the Bugatti. The $1.3 million price is a bit of a problem :-/
I do think that Audi is deceiving people when it calls the A3 and TT Haldex set-up a quattro though.
11-21-2007, 06:26 PM
I think of Quattro as a specific means of AWD, not what Audi calls AWD on any 4-ringed car regardless of how it's achieved.
Also, after modifying my center diff to have a biasing ratio of roughly 4:1, I now have a "real" reason to be a true "quattro snob"....
11-21-2007, 08:34 PM
11-22-2007, 04:38 AM
This obviously won't be a project for everybody, so a friend and I are looking into providing this service for those who aren't the DIY type of folks at a lower cost than the "usual" source of the 4:1 diff right now. Because we don't have the resources that Stasis does, we're currently limited to the pre-'99 2-piece housing Torsen Diff. I did attempt to take mine apart from my 2001, but...I gave up for the time being until we can find a few core units to play with.
11-22-2007, 05:29 PM
even over in europe and in europe the limited production BMW M series CSL competed with the RS series cars.
11-22-2007, 05:37 PM
IMO, these cars compete money wise. I'm not trying to dog Audi. I've owned a crapload of them and likely will continue to in some way or another but they have always offered value for the complete lack of name presence they have compared to other euro brands and now they are not only not offering value but expecting a premium.
11-27-2007, 11:27 AM
base price to base price, the BMW is favorable. There are other tangible and intangible aspects to the Audi vs. BMW decision that I choose to take into account (beyond xenons). I'm thinking the B8 will offer more "value for the buck" than the B7 for those who can easily substitute BMW's for Audi's.
I'm looking forward to a road test comparison between the B8 3.2 and 328xi and someday one between the B8 S4 and 335xi. The closest I've been able to find are comparisons between the S5 and the 335i though the Audi has the awd for better or for worse in this test.
Really, if I were very sensitive to price I'd say the G35x is a better value than either. Unfortunately the interior is of lower grade and that new exterior..? The M35x is the one to have but then "nicely optioned" at around $45K; oh there goes my insensitivity to price again....if they only had it in a wagon? ;)
12-12-2007, 07:15 PM
how oculd they historically, it was only 2 models that competed with M3.
12-13-2007, 07:09 AM
e46 M3. The RS stuff competed with the M series CSL lineups, both of which were not available in the USA. When did the old e46 BMW 330i models that the e92 335i replaces ever compete with an S series Audi in history?
12-13-2007, 09:17 AM
the idea that you could fairly compare a nose heavy awd (fwd bias) 4 door sedan with a rwd coupe. No matter how hard you guys try, it's still apples and oranges. Brand loyalty asside, if you needed awd and 4 doors, why would you consider an M3 and vise versa? The best comparison out there is the S5 vs. 335(xi) and the soon to come RS5 vs. M3.
12-16-2007, 03:32 PM
B5 and B6, 2001 and 2004, did compete with the e36 and e46 M3. However, as I stated the strategy for RS cars changed, the RS cars are slotted now in the top spot and are produced in much greater numbers now, and go across all models. Again this evidenced by e92 M3 vs B7 RS 4, where the M3 was originally slated to only have 400HP ,it was upped to match the B7 RS 4's 420HP.
As for CSL variants, of which I only know 1, the M3, the CSL I don't see as produced in quantities enough or variation enough to be different from M-family as a whole, it's the same car, with lighter body paneling, stripped down for and ready for track. And BMW produced less than 100 of these cars, if that many. The RS even when it was limited production, was still far more mainstream than that and now it is produced as part of regular lifecycle of all audi cars, except for the A8, and it is released 2 years after intro of a model, as opposed to a special edition at the end of the life cycle of a model as it was before.
The RS cars are definitely the M car competitors, and it made alot more sense for Audi to do it that way, than continue pushing the S4 to compete against the M3, especially in terms of cost. In short, you are right, in the past that was the case, but this is no longer the case, the RS 4 is intended to compete against the M3, and RS is meant to go against M as whole, M3 vs RS4/RS5 , M5 vs RS6, etc ...
up coming RS models, TT-RS, v10 version or R8, RS 5, B8 RS 4, RS 7, etc ...
12-17-2007, 05:58 AM
it leaves an odd price structure now that needs to be worked out. The old S cars always performed "almost" as good as the M cars but with much nicer interiors and more luxury, AWD and were always just an easier to drive car for most folks although less fun for the more experienced driver. The S cars were always a few grand less than the M cars too. Now, unfortunately we have the RS cars competing and they perform similar to how the S cars used to perform. It is not as though their testing numbers are killing the M cars. They're not at all. They compete with the M like the S cars of before did. Unfortunately they do it at a price premium now too. Which now has the S cars performing against a regular model 3-series and our top model A4 as a joke. I've seen much nicer powertrains in 21K dollar cars. This I am hoping they may address but with their sales going well on several platforms I dont see why they would.