I apologize in advance for the long rant.

My post or gripe relates to the new TV spot for the B8 A4 which has been airing on NBC during the Olympics, among other programs. Let me start by saying that I think the ad is very well done and effective, both in introducing the B8 as a new progressive choice over the same old stale luxury cars (C300 in grandpa metallic gold color), and in showcasing some of the technology (quattro badge on the dash, keyless ignition) and visual highlights of the cars (beautiful interior and LED daytime running lights).

The issue I have is with the statement shown on the screen at the closing of the commercial:

"Biggest, fastest, most fuel efficient car in its class"

What raised the red flag for me was the word 'fastest'. There's a bunch of fine print down below which one cannot possibly read in the 0.2 second time it's flashed on the screen. I am OK with the claims about the new A4 being the biggest and most fuel efficient car in its class since the length of the car does in fact place it at the top among chief luxury sport sedan competitors and the 2.0T model does get better gas mileage compared to AWD automatic rivals (I still maintain that an Audi quattro should not be limited in comparisons to AWD offerings from the competition, but that's besides the point).

I was very skeptical about the claim about the B8 A4 being the fastest car in its class, so I paused the screen and read the fine print. Here's what it says verbatim:

"Audi of America defines the class as Audi 2.0T quattro, BMW 328xi automatic, Mercedes Benz C300 4MATIC automatic and Lexus IS250 AWD automatic."

It goes on to mention that the mileage claim is based on EPA highway rating of 27 mpg for the 2.0T quattro automatic and that the acceleration claim is based on some agency's testing.

I would have been OK with the tag line if they had the 2.0T model next to it. Otherwise, they are making a broad claim about the B8 A4 being the best in its class when in fact the backing data is based on one specific model (2.0T) and one drivetrain (AWD/automatic).

Assuming that this narrow definition of class (AWD and automatic) by AoA is valid, one has to wonder why the Infiniti G35x has been excluded. It's certainly a 4-door luxury sport sedan sold in the same price range as others, and is offered in AWD form with an automatic transmission. I think the explanation is quite easy: The 306-hp G35x blows away the A4 2.0T by at least 1 full second to 60 mph.

Using this methodology, I can come up with the following claim for the Smart ForTwo: "The fastest car in its class*"

In ultra fine print:
* Smart Cars defines class as 2-passenger coupe cars with starting MSRP under $15,000

My other point is that if AoA is defining the 2.0T model as the competitors to the above mentioned competing models, why are they sending in the 3.2 quattro against these cars in the Audi Driving Experience? You say the 2.0T model is not available. I say, then it's only fair that you compare the A4 3.2 against the G35x and BMW 335xi.

I think AoA is trying to have it both ways by comparing the 2.0T on paper to these models in the fuel efficiency area and then sending in the 3.2 to the track events against these same vehicles to show the A4's performance advantage. I am not saying their claims are false but they are using deceptive tactics.

Finally, those folks who keep claiming that AoA has declared the A4 3.2 to be be the direct competitor to lower powered BMW, MB and Lexus models should hopefully get the obvious clue that AoA has now officially declared the 2.0T to be the answer to the IS250, C300 and 328xi. That leaves the 3.2 to go up against the bigger engine variants of these models. In that class (C350, IS350, 335xi), the A4 is indeed the slowest car.

By the way, this has nothing to do with the car itself. I just hate deceptive advertising. Right now, the B8 A4 quattro 6MT in either 2.0T or 3.0 TFSI form is at the top of my list for my next vehicle (hoping that a V6 engine becomes available with 6MT).

The ad is trying to be bold and it is.

Mine sounds like a small diesel tractor :(.

As an Audi Sales Manager, I would expect you to be pleased with it. To an unbiased person, it's deceptive in the claim about it being fastest in its class.

I'm not buying into the hype surrounding the new 2.0T. The gas mileage predictions fell shy of 30+ hwy mpg expectations. Everyone says it will not have the diesel idle or throttle lag of the old 2.0T Tip either. I'll take a wait and see approach.

In the meantime, I am hoping that two things happen: 1) AoA will offer a stick in the V6 sedan and 2) the 3.2 engine will be replaced by the 3.0 TFSI engine within 2 years. I will be content with 290 hp and 310 lb-ft!

I do appreciate your input though.

I saw the fine print too and was wondering who comes up with this "class" definition used in many automobile marketing campaigns.

I had originally thought it used to be EPA size class so Audi, BMW, MB, are define by the EPA as "compact cars" whereas the Infiniti is classified as a "midsize car". However this doesn't explain the Lexus which is EPA classified as a "subcompact car".

The other "class" definition I have seen also seems to indicate that the Audi, MB, BMW, and Lexus are classified as "luxury cars", but the Infiniti only gets "near luxury" status, but again I don't know who defines such things.

I think it boils down to Audi marketing doesn't feel Infiniti is in the same class as them, but if they were the Infiniti would undoubtedly be the performance dominator of the group as you said.

You are right there is some selective marketing going on, but I think there always has been in all automotive advertising.

But its a company aggresively selling a product. And how do you really define fastest? Who knows, maybe they have some strange criteria like 0-10 times where the vehicle beats all others. I'm sure you could go to any other manurfacturer and find misleading statements. I really don't care either way and I think consumers should be as inquisitive as you. However, you are naive to think any company wouldn't or shouldn't do anything to sell its product even employing deception. Its called Capitalism!

If AOA defines the class as, Audi 2.0T quattro, BMW 328xi automatic, Mercedes Benz C300 4MATIC. Then what does the A4 3.2 compare against? The same BMW 328? LOL!

I was correct after all. Oh it feels good.

To add about your MPG rant if i can. You noticed these days the majority of car advertising deals with MPG crap.
Example: I like how Chevy claims the Full size pick-up truck delivers the best MPG on highway at 20. The fine print shows 2wd and sigle cab. Now, to me thats not realistic. People want 4x4 and at least an extend cab(that drops mpg down to 17-just like any other truck in the market<deceptive tactics>)Also, chevy uses the tiny 5.3L engine. When these days to have a truck that tows and hauls worth anything, you need engines like 5.7L or larger..

At end of the day, thats why we have internet/vehicle forums......
The truth comes out here, what ever that might be!

Audi has threaded the needle on this one superbly, whoever had the stats on the "most effective marketing" which showed Audi at the top of the game was absolutely on target.

"The car's structure weighs 10% less."

"No significant increase in base price."

Both statements are entirely, totally and unequivocally true, but the enthusiasts took them and ran with it to some erroneous, but favorable, conclusions. We were told the truth, but heard what we wanted. Brilliant!

but their advertising department is ignoring that.

The A4's #1 selling point is the aesthetics. The car is damn sexy, and you'd think an advertising company would notice that, but 4/5ths of that commercial doesn't even have the car in it. They got too carried away with the special effects. I think I came away more interested in renovating my house than the car.

When advertising is unable to gauge what a product's selling points are, you get things like this commercial.

The ad goes from stuffy to new, light and airy. It establishes that mood and then slides the A4 in front of you. This is just foreplay. No need for close up penetration shots at this point. The Gyno-Detail adds will come up soon enough.

I think the 2.0T vs. C300/328/IS250 is a reasonable comparison, so I agree with the commercial.

Lining up the aforementioned competition against the 3.2 at the driving events...that's another story.

'08 base price quattro tip 32300
'09 32700 and includes leather standard

'08 Prem Plus equivalent 36775
'09 Prem Plus 36700

Audi's statement was true regarding the base price

A Premium 2009 B8 isn't much more expensive than a 2008 B7 with all the stuff that's included in the 2009 Premium package tacked on to the 2008 B7 with an automatic, etc.

But the Avant upcharge almost doubled.

And of course the new shiny stuff raises the price considerably. Oh and you've lost a lot of configuration options due to the packaging so depending on what you want in each package you may be spending a significant amount more to cover all the other stuff that's coming along for the ride.

But the comparably equipped base price remains unchanged. The stuff you want? Oh yeah... now *that's* going to cost you :-)

with respect to a particular perspective that you can pick to make your truth more attractive. Not saying that I like it, because I hate deceptive marketing, but everyone does this.

As for the A4 3.2 being the slowest car, I thought that someone already posted that it is just as fast through Hockenheim as the 335i. Or did I misread that? So, it may not win a drag race, but it sounds like it's pretty fast enough.

With the 2.0T, V6, S, and RS versions, what do you compare each to? Better yet, what is the official Audi word on what cars each version competes against?

If 2.0T is against the entry level, and S against the likes of the 335i and the RS against the M-class cars, where does that leave the 3.2?

As you pointed out, the 2.0T was probably selected because they wanted to have their cake, eat it, and sh!t it out too. If they had chosen the 3.2 in the "class", it would have definitely been faster than the others, but not the most fuel efficient. IMHO, this "class" was created out of a marketing need rather than anything else. Trying to extrapolate from that that Audi then must be pointing the 3.2 up against the 335i and the like is an exercise in futility.

that certain individual here will complain. Just a matter of time as the V6 is sooooooooo underpower that it can't even move my little finger. Amen.

"Chrysler: If you find a better car, buy it!"
"This is not your father's Oldsmobile."

Ad slogans = meaningless words

the competition.

By the way, I don't think this type of slogan is the same as the old Chrysler or Oldsmobile tag lines. It's stating something factual about the entire A4 product line. When you peel the onion, it turns out to be only true for one configuration of one model when compared against an arbitrarily selected competition class.

I stand by my opinion that it's deceptive advertising.

Last I checked, they still sell 330i's in Germany. Both engines are now 265 HP (they both used to be 255 HP). Audi isn't making much money in the US with the current exchange rates, so they haven't prioritized a US 335i competitor yet.

I still think they'll put the 3.0 TFSI into the A4 after they ship a few A6s with the engine. Audi rarely has more than 3 different longitudinal engines available in the US in their non-S sedans. There's no real reason to change this strategy.

BMW frequently changes engines a year or two into a model line, and I can't say Audi hasn't done it before. Further, given the price of a fully loaded A4 3.2, an S4 can't cost much more, so it won't need _that_ much more power than an A4 3.0T to justify it's cost premium.

Especially if it's the only way to get a 6 cylinder engine with a stick.