New Audi S4 saloon Starting at $45,900 in USA...(updated)
08-14-09, 08:51 AM
#31
Racer
The thing I like about Audi is that they always seem to do something unique but not over the top. Plus I love their interior.
I agree that the C/A4/3 series look better than IS but the IS has a better overall package than theC and A4. The 3 series is the king in this category. The coupe is downright sexy. But the 6/CL series is more my style. Baller
I agree that the C/A4/3 series look better than IS but the IS has a better overall package than theC and A4. The 3 series is the king in this category. The coupe is downright sexy. But the 6/CL series is more my style. Baller
Last edited by rogers2; 08-14-09 at 11:52 AM.
08-14-09, 09:20 AM
#32
Lexus Champion
I am thinking that these will probably be going for $54K or so when appropriately optioned, which puts them just short of IS F and M3 territory. That makes me wonder if the new RS 4 will be priced as high as the old one was...?
To be honest, I don't know that I would spend an extra $10K on an S4 over an IS 350 or 335i. IS 350/335i with M/F upgrades would still not close the price gap and could probably outperform the Audi.
Still...the A4 is a very odd car to me, so this is not necessarily surprising. It's a good bit larger than the competition (almost midsize) and they dropped the 3.2L V6 version. Effectively, that leaves the A4 2.0T to compete against the upper and lower end models from competitors because the S4 is priced significantly more than the C350, IS 350, or 335i. The S4 is priced between the C350, IS 350, and 335i, and the C63, IS F, and M3 which makes me wonder if buyers will either fork over the extra cash for the high performance versions, save some and go for the top end 6 cyl models, or actually spring for the Audi.
It remains to be seen.
To be honest, I don't know that I would spend an extra $10K on an S4 over an IS 350 or 335i. IS 350/335i with M/F upgrades would still not close the price gap and could probably outperform the Audi.
Still...the A4 is a very odd car to me, so this is not necessarily surprising. It's a good bit larger than the competition (almost midsize) and they dropped the 3.2L V6 version. Effectively, that leaves the A4 2.0T to compete against the upper and lower end models from competitors because the S4 is priced significantly more than the C350, IS 350, or 335i. The S4 is priced between the C350, IS 350, and 335i, and the C63, IS F, and M3 which makes me wonder if buyers will either fork over the extra cash for the high performance versions, save some and go for the top end 6 cyl models, or actually spring for the Audi.
It remains to be seen.
08-14-09, 09:25 AM
#33
Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I completely agree with you. I drove it on an A3 2.0T and thought it was the best transmission I've ever driven. Super quick, smooth and excellent pairing with the 2.0T. Too bad Audi feels that it would not be a good fit for the American market due to their feel that Americans don't want a transmission that shifts quickly/harshly. Pairing the DSG with the 3.0T would be a killer combo for us lazy bums who don't want to fuss with a manual.
08-14-09, 09:33 AM
#34
Lexus Test Driver
The BMW xDrive system uses a set of computerized wet clutch packs to route power. Although BMW calls the X-drive permenent AWD, it is essentially still a "reactive" system, it transfers power faster than the Audi system sue to the wet clutch packs. BMW uses this system to preserve the RWD-like driving dynamic of their vehicles in dry conditions.
The Audi quattro IV system uses a Torsen center differential, which is a mechanical gear set that normally sends power 50-50 front and rear but can "sense" slippage and re-route power to the other end. This is entirely mechanical and happens in real time, so there is no computer feedback loop involved as with the BMW system.
The 50-50 normal split and instant action of the torsen mean that the quattro system will generally offer superior traction in bad weather. This comes at the expense of a slight front-wheel-drive-like driving experience.
Bottom line is, X-drive is better in dry weather and Quattro is better in wet or snow conditions.
The Audi quattro IV system uses a Torsen center differential, which is a mechanical gear set that normally sends power 50-50 front and rear but can "sense" slippage and re-route power to the other end. This is entirely mechanical and happens in real time, so there is no computer feedback loop involved as with the BMW system.
The 50-50 normal split and instant action of the torsen mean that the quattro system will generally offer superior traction in bad weather. This comes at the expense of a slight front-wheel-drive-like driving experience.
Bottom line is, X-drive is better in dry weather and Quattro is better in wet or snow conditions.
08-14-09, 09:48 AM
#35
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stuttgart
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand why some of you hold 0-60 times and the number of gears in the gearbox as some sort of all-end means to quantifying if a car is great or not. The driving experience is more than just a 0.2-0.3 neglible difference in the sprint to 60. Get out behind your computer screens and go drive the beasts!
I would also like to add that there are many variables that affect acceleration times - which are all too often overlooked by the majority. Weight, testing conditions, tires and traction, the driver, fuel quality etc.
Furthermore, in general I get the feeling that European manufacturers seem to underrate their performance figures for legal reasons. If the stated acceleration time cannot be achieved then the manufacturer could be faulted and it can get ugly. If Audi states 5.1 seconds as the time it takes for the vehicle to reach 60 mph, then perhaps it is even quicker and they're just covering their backs.
Anyway, the car looks nice. I'm really digging that "Audi red".
08-14-09, 09:56 AM
#36
Lexus Test Driver
That is so true, I alway found that given a similar German and a Japanese with similar horse power, the German car feels faster most of the time. I found that is also true for the MPG rating as well. German cars always gets a little better gas mileage than the rated MPG and the Japanese always a bit lower.
08-14-09, 09:59 AM
#37
[QUOTE=DustinV;4765067]I would also like to add that there are many variables that affect acceleration times - which are all too often overlooked by the majority. Weight, testing conditions, tires and traction, the driver, fuel quality etc.[QUOTE] Quite true.
+1. For intance, stock 335 dyno numbers (whp) are not consistent with a car churning 300hp @ the crank. It is more consistent with a car making 340-350hp @ the crank but I am not complaining
Furthermore, in general I get the feeling that European manufacturers seem to underrate their performance figures for legal reasons. If the stated acceleration time cannot be achieved then the manufacturer could be faulted and it can get ugly. If Audi states 5.1 seconds as the time it takes for the vehicle to reach 60 mph, then perhaps it is even quicker and they're just covering their backs.
08-14-09, 10:03 AM
#38
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stuttgart
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is so true, I alway found that given a similar German and a Japanese with similar horse power, the German car feels faster most of the time. I found that is also true for the MPG rating as well. German cars always gets a little better gas mileage than the rated MPG and the Japanese always a bit lower.
One thing I also found interesting is that sometimes a car destined for America might receive different gear- or final-drive ratios biased towards performance at the expensive of fuel economy. Sometimes this explains why the European version of a car that is sold in the US is a little slower but gets better mileage. I heard about this from a colleague at work.
08-14-09, 10:17 AM
#40
Pole Position
I think it is safe to say that every manufacturer covers their back in this way.
One thing I also found interesting is that sometimes a car destined for America might receive different gear- or final-drive ratios biased towards performance at the expensive of fuel economy. Sometimes this explains why the European version of a car that is sold in the US is a little slower but gets better mileage. I heard about this from a colleague at work.
One thing I also found interesting is that sometimes a car destined for America might receive different gear- or final-drive ratios biased towards performance at the expensive of fuel economy. Sometimes this explains why the European version of a car that is sold in the US is a little slower but gets better mileage. I heard about this from a colleague at work.
08-14-09, 10:37 AM
#42
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stuttgart
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That answers the question. I've always wondered why the LS600h is so "slow" here.
08-14-09, 12:24 PM
#43
Lexus Champion
The BMW xDrive system uses a set of computerized wet clutch packs to route power. Although BMW calls the X-drive permenent AWD, it is essentially still a "reactive" system, it transfers power faster than the Audi system sue to the wet clutch packs. BMW uses this system to preserve the RWD-like driving dynamic of their vehicles in dry conditions.
The Audi quattro IV system uses a Torsen center differential, which is a mechanical gear set that normally sends power 50-50 front and rear but can "sense" slippage and re-route power to the other end. This is entirely mechanical and happens in real time, so there is no computer feedback loop involved as with the BMW system.
The 50-50 normal split and instant action of the torsen mean that the quattro system will generally offer superior traction in bad weather. This comes at the expense of a slight front-wheel-drive-like driving experience.
Bottom line is, X-drive is better in dry weather and Quattro is better in wet or snow conditions.
The Audi quattro IV system uses a Torsen center differential, which is a mechanical gear set that normally sends power 50-50 front and rear but can "sense" slippage and re-route power to the other end. This is entirely mechanical and happens in real time, so there is no computer feedback loop involved as with the BMW system.
The 50-50 normal split and instant action of the torsen mean that the quattro system will generally offer superior traction in bad weather. This comes at the expense of a slight front-wheel-drive-like driving experience.
Bottom line is, X-drive is better in dry weather and Quattro is better in wet or snow conditions.
08-14-09, 01:35 PM
#45
That being said I do like how Audi and BMW got themselves these signature looks, with angel eyes and LED strips, you can identify them in your rearview mirror miles away. Lexus used to have a signature look with HID/Yellow fog combo, but they gave it up.