Looking for the "one eyed man.... I have a 98 Q-A4 w/90k miles that I bought in 10/97. I suddenly have an itch that has taken me to the Web checking out the comparison of the subject with QA4 features. Besides Rentals and my wife's Acura, I have only driven the A4 in the last umpty ump years which I enjoy very much but I'm thinking a change might be in order as this may be my next to last car (67yrs w/ early controlled Parkinson's), as I tend to keep cars 6-10 years.
The BMW comes up high on lists but they seem ubiquitous. From my look see, I lean toward the A4, C320 and G35 in that order.
Get the A4. I did just did the comparison (san C320 though). Snow (when I go skiing) is an issue as is driving in heavy rain. I don't think any other car maker can touch Audi for road feel and safety that you get with quattro. And maybe the AWD will help with you hand jigglies. :-))
I've never liked the C-class and a recent drive of a 2003 model simply re-inforced my dislikes.The 3-series is a great car overall, and I've driven several of them, but it's not quite as powerful in terms of total torque output, and seems to need more revvs to get it's power out. The A4 would lose to a 330i in a flat out drag race but through tight canyon roads it'd be a very cloase race. A 3.0 sport package equipped A4 would be my choice, or a 1.8T with chip.
Both are great cars... so I think it depends a little on what you are looking for.
the 330 has things going for it that the Audi doesnt.. First on that list would have to be reliability. Not that the Audi is NOT reliable.. I just have found the BMW to be a little better. Either is going to be expensive to fix. But the 2000 Audi has had almost $1700.00 worth of work after the warranty expired. It has almost 69k miles... The BMW has
55k - and NOTHING has gone wrong other than a stalling problem (which wasnt bad) which the dealer updated the ECU to fix - I think it was a recall....
If you want to get a Tiptronic. I like the BMW tip WAY better than the Audi.. but my S4 is a manual...
The audi.. I think its got a better interior. nicer seats... And might be a little faster. Not sure about the regular A4, vs the S4. The A4 and
330 are very close in HP.
The BMW sounds better. Something about that BMW exhaust.
Close is probably close... but I suspect the BMW is a little more expensive.
BMW dealers/service tends to be better than Audi dealer/service - on average
I looked at the G35, and hated the interior. I thought it was cheap. And no manual with AWD. forget it.
havent driven a C320, but I do like the way it looks and the inerior. wish it had more power.. I think its only 215HP.. Or somthing like that..
The thing with the MB and all other RWD is that they suck in snow. We get snow here a few times a year so it may not seem like much but having lived in snowy places and now a rainy place, AWD, the quatto version, is superior. We had a three inch 'dump' a few weeks ago and it was bad. Bad. My wife told me she had a short chat with a guy parking his 5 series at the bottom of a steady but longish 3-5 degree hill in our neighbourhood. Tried to get up the hill twice and had to park it. And given that people coming down the hill won't have much control, he left his vehicle in a precarious place. And oh yeah, he couldn't get it home. What a piece of junk. $50K and he has to leave it maybe a mile from his home.
And the G35X which I tried this past weekend has AWD on demand. Which is like uhh, third best compared to 4WD and quattro AWD. The Audi system is the only one with reall AWD all the time. I don't want the car to figure out when I need the extra pull; the G35X is basically RWD 99% of the time and worse, there is the 'Snow' switch you have to toggle. That along with other junk that Infiniti sticks in the cabin in lieu of useful things found in the A4 is enough to make the decision easy.
Well, ask any professional driver and they will tell you RWD is inferiour to FWD in snow/ice. Here we got snow maybe 4 months (or more, depending on the latitude) of the whole year (Finland), and at least based on what I've drove (my dad has a MB, my mom a BMW, and myself an Audi), FWD is much easier to handle in ice/snow conditions. It also won't get stuck so easily on uphills, when there's ice on the ground.
And looking how taxis drive, those with even MB won't say RWD is better.
The Caddy is unbearable for someone used with German fit and finish.
The G35 is something I found better than expected. However there are issues with its brakes. In Canada, Nissan decided to extend coverage for it until
60000km, but this measure looks like a plaster. While being there, did you consider the Acura TL2004. Forget what you used to know about Acura. Big departure from previous version.
Two of my neighbors have a 2001 C-Class. They seem to appreciate it, even if I heard horror stories about this car. It is very comfy for such a small car. The A4 is as much desirable. Somehow more discreet. Slightly better interior. If you want to try something new, I would get the M-B (or the TL).
Huh? I thought the 3 series was staying around this year.. and even if a new model is coming out, the 'old one' is still a great car.. I think a much better car than the G35 - I really didnt like the interior of that car. I think Car and driver rated the G35 slightly over the 330 - BUT the only thing that made the G35 score higher was the price. The 330 was better in every other way. Which personally, I think is silly.... Cuz they are all in the same class... why give something that is inferior a better score just cuz its cheaper... YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR!
Also, with the new TL. I think it looks great. And the specs sound great too.. but I have read from a few places that it really shouldnt be a front drive car. The 270HP is just too much for it, and the torque steer is horrible.
Obviously there are a lot of stupid people in the U.S. that still by RWD vehicles.
The facts have been documented for almost 40 years. When GM came out with their first FWD cars in the late 60s (like Olds Tornado), they documented with driver testing that FWD vehicles could safely be driven at over twice the speed of a comparable RWD vehicle on ice.
so all the people who buy SUVs and trucks are stupid, what about luxury cars. if your concerned about ice get snow tires. last time I check Germany gets snow and ice and there two biggest companies for making cars only make RWD, (minus the British Mini and DC Smart Cars).
Trucks and SUVs are usually equipped with some form of AWD/4WD to help cope with ice/snow/rain/etc...conditions.
Actually MB and BMW both make cars with AWD. The 3-series is avaliable in Xi trim (AWD equipped), the C-Class is avaliable with 4Matic AWD, as is the E Class and S Class. Audi sells more cars equipped with Quattro than with FronTrac, Porsche makes the C4 and the Cayenne SUV. Infiniti just introduced an AWD version of the G35. Tests have proven that with standard road tires FWD cars behave in a superior manner to RWD cars in many winter conditions. That doesn't mean that people can't make RWD work in ice/snow/rain/etc...but it isn't *ideal*.
First off, I want to address the RWD truck arguement. It would be assanine to make one FWD. The whole idea behind a truck is to carry stuff in the bed. If someone over loaded the truck there would be very little weight over the drive wheels. THAT is why they are RWD. AND by the way, they SUCK in the snow because there is very little weight over the drive wheels when the bed is empty. Most people with RWD trucks carry weight in the back during snow season (buckets of sand, stacked logs, etc.) to improve the traction. You are missing the point when talking about luxury cars as well. It's not the fact that they are luxury cars, but it's that they are sports sedans or performance oriented vehichles. RWD is preferred over FWD in competitive driving. AWD is better, but it costs more. Some people prefer not to pay for it. Doesn't make them stupid. Their priorities are just in different places.
Last time I checked, Germany doesn't really have ice and snow ;). They don't even allow you to use real snow tires, or should I say winter tires we use here in Finland (with little metallic spikes on the tyre). Ouh, guess what: Even they won't make it summer.
*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeed.com ***
With a FWD car, a loss of traction under acceleration results in a loss of steering control. With a RWD car, not only can you retain steering control when traction is lost under acceleration, but you can use the throttle at the limit to control the attitude of the car through the corner. (And "at the limit" can be as slow as 20 or 30 mph in snowy conditions, so the benefits aren't just for road racers.) Why do you suppose that *all* race cars and purpose-built high-performance street cars are either RWD or AWD? The only performance-oriented cars with FWD that I can think of off the top of my head are souped-up versions of plebian commuter cars -- not car that were designe from the ground up to have excellent performance characteristics. A well-designed car that gives its driver performance benefits in high-speed driving on dry roads also gives its driver performance benefits in slow-speed driving on slippery roads.
FWD isn't popular because of its handling characteristics. FWD is popular because unibody construction is a cheap way to build a car, and FWD is a much easier layout to implement in unibody construction than RWD.
When a FWD car wears a Porsche or Corvette badge, come talk to me about the performance superiority of FWD.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.