ostrich

Yes, our 2010 TL SH-AWD made it!

http://www.autoslug.com/10-best-tech-cars-in-2010.html

Eudreamality

its review is poorly written though. doesn's feel like he/she actually has even touched TL

TechnoCat

And let's not forget the other cars that landed higher on the list. I wrote about the #3 car, the Lincoln around 8 months ago here; it is a great car and I felt at the time that the 2WD not-loaded one I was driving was quite impressive. The tech, comfort and noise level were better than the TL, the TL was sportier.

And I bought the #2 listed car, a 2011 S4 Prestige; it too has fantastic tech. Much better than the TL SH-AWD Tech, but for $15K more, it should.

scv76

I may have missed it, but no where did I see it stated that the list was in any particular order.

YetiTL

QFT! Ding ding we have a winner!

dave_ramkumar

iTrader: (5)

+1 , i never herd of them

winstrolvtec

I don't know about the Lincoln but the A/S4 is not more tech oriented than the TL. Sure it has a few functions and features the TL doesn't but all these cars share in that just the same.

The faster iPod scrolling is a good one but in turn it lacks BT audio, has limited voice functions in comparison, fewer device inputs (that inconveniently links in the glove box), no discrete surround sound, interface screens look dated, no satellite weather, the TL has Acuralink and SH transfers actively to the rear and front as well as side to side. Those are just a few examples and that is a little disappointing for an extra $15k IMO but I don't think it's worse, just no better but it depends.

ostrich

I think it would be fun to have a list of "Best Tech Cars that are RELIABLE" and then see who would make it on the top 10 list! LOL

TechnoCat

I agree with about half of that, but...

• Yes, the Audi MMC has only one, not two, simultaneous aux inputs. But it has internal SD support which the TL lacks. So it too is effectively two. Or three since it has two SD slots.
• Plus the iPod interface works much better.
• The BT audio on my TL was so flakey as to be unusable.
• But the S4 has far more effective voice commands. They just work. (No need to train it a person's name, for example.)
• As someone who has owned both, neither had dated looking screens.
• Never got AcuraLink to work. I wrote about that. Repeatedly. The service advisors at Acura of Bellevue hadn't seen it working either.
• The SH AWD sucks compared to the S4's dynamic one. Both do "vectoring", which the A4 doesn't offer. But the S4's starts from a real full-time AWD system; the Acura TL system clutches as needed, despite their literature. Try it from a stop with your fronts on ice and you'll see.
• The Audi does a better job of tying the trip and nav computers; the TL doesn't even try.
• The Audi does a better job of creating nav destination points from phone book entries; the TL couldn't do that.
• The S4 has both backup camera and audio back/side warnings.

I do agree that those differences aren't worth $15K. The differences between the cars total may not be worth that to most people. To me, the TL just wasn't a comfortable car so the other slight short-comings... things that slowly add towards $15K like quieter sunroof, folding seats, passenger back heater, 6 rather than 2 seat heater settings (and electronic), flat trunk floor, no exposed styrofoam, quieter engine, more low end torque, generally considered better looking, etc. ... those things got me to that differential. I understand you place a much higher value on other aspects, such as the Honda reliability and the extra space in the TL, than I do, and therefore the tech equation is essentially just a side-show for each of us.

winstrolvtec

Not sure how many use SD cards for music and anything that you put on an SD you are more likely to have on a USB flashdrive or could use that just the same but Acura still has the Aux, the USB, and BT audio.

I agree but that is until the MMC where it will get song by voice and the HDD interface. Audi has updated a lot in the 3G MMI, Acura is allowed to do the same.

Never had a problem with it and I don't need to link anything into the glovebox where it's out of reach for things like internet radio, videos, TV, or any cell/device audio playback.

Other than one area of voice tag programming for the phonebook, no. The TL has commands for far more stuff including climate control, HDD, iPod, USB, Aux, and BT audio that the 3G MMI for the A4 does not.

You may be right but it's a matter of difference of opinions.

Well there are functions on the MMI that people can't get to work either but they're still there.

It's real time vs variable and where one excels the other fails (so to speak), like in your start up example but to counter that look at the percentage of active rear drive and front drive biases for all handling conditions of SH, not just poor weather or surfaces.

AWD in SH is always engaged, it just clutches more or less as needed and there is a degree of momentum and throttle that needs to exist in order for the power to be transfered rearward, because of this there is a lag at start up but for normal driving there is no sensation of engage or disengage. It's also front heavy and a 6MT, lets not forget.

Audi does not prompt all street names by voice and did not appear to be able to display what street I was on.

Acura actually has phone numbers in it's POI database that you can also call as well as navigate, therefore POI and destinations can also be loaded by phone number.

It's a dealer installed option if really you want it.

Just because you don't care for a particular function or characteristic, it is no grounds to dismiss it as less tech. Lets not forget about the full PSI tire pressure monitor vs the ABS piggyback system on the Audi, which is not actually differential based or whatever it was you try to suggest that it is.

I don't think it's worth $15k more objectively but subjectively I can relate. It's more than fair to say the car wasn't well suited for you and things about it got to you but that is also the case for me and others here for cars that you prefer. I just don't think that it makes a strong enough case for anything to be considered so much better or more tech oriented in general, when it's mostly based on preferences on both sides.

cyniclaus

Last generation of both cars I would absolutely agree, but the Germans are catching up, if not passing the Japanese.

I test drove both of the current models and would get the S4 over the TL due not only to the superior AWD, but because I preferred the tech setup in the Audi. The ability to play DVD video in motion on the Audi is a big plus for me as I have many many concert DVDs in surround sound and only a few DVD-A discs. Plus I love how they integrated the iPOD controls into the steering wheel and how you can browse the iPOD not only from the NAV screen, but also from the full color screen between the tach and the speedo. And the 3D NAV topography is just awesome in the S4. I even prefer the NAV in my 3G TL to the one in the 4G as I have grown quite accustomed to using the touch screen.

The problem is the deceptively similar MSRP pricing. On paper, the TL-SHAWD and S4 are both about $44k cars. In reality, we know you can get the TL for $39k or less and a similarly equipped S4 will set you back at least $10k more

winstrolvtec

^ I absolutely agree that they are right there and that is why I believe they are both on the top 10 list for good reasons, I just don't place one as higher than the other unless we get into specific areas of tech.

I do believe that in many poor weather conditions a permanent AWD has some advantages like more consistent start ups, more resistance to hydroplaning and a consistent sense of stability but SH-AWD has it's own, like when it comes to dry handling and hill ascending because of an allowance for a more active rear bias and while maybe not as stable all of the time because of the extent of it’s variable nature, the electronics do a better job of correcting instabilities.

I see only seasonal amounts of snow which is far less than the extremes the car was engineered and tested on but the rest of the time I enjoy the extra handling abilities. Maybe it's just me but I don't see a superior or inferior AWD overall. If we look back to Automobile's S4 and TL SH comparison they noted something I noticed in my time behind the wheel of the Audi, that the active differential was not as fluid as the SH in all situations and the electronic stability systems were not as integrated and not as quick or responsive.

Then again you could argue that they do not need to be because of the permanent nature but we are talking about tech. In that sense, aside from the interior features and functions, most of which vary and trade off or are preference based, the Acura's SH system is more variable by nature and combined with full electric steering, you can make the case that the car has more cutting edge technology in the form of it's drivetrian. In turn, the S4 would have a tech advantage in it's engine.

Sound is a completely subjective area but discrete surround is often recognized as more realistic compared to matrix. The addition of Dolby pro logic II in the TL for basic digital formats is also a plus IMO because it is an industry standard and for a reason, that goes for DTS playback as well. B&O own DSP sounds great but it's not reproducing the sound as the original recorded format intended, not saying that it's better or worse just that it's not consistent with these formats and anytime you have extra processing it usually affects the quality.

Similarly, all digital sound inputs from a device in the Audi AMI are converted back to analog then to digital again since the AMI uses the center console's 3.5 MM jack that you find in models without the AMI. It's not a digital feed throughout like you find in the TL.

The DVD video playback is a great tech addition but some would trade that function for discrete surround sound and Dolby PLII playback. I did not find the video to work while moving unless modded and a DVD video or concert although formatted with Dolby or DTS does not replay in those formats, instead it's a matrix surround reproduction not the same as what it's recorded in. Again it can't because of the analog source which is simply part of the design. Both of those traits (combined with how everything is viewed in HD today), defeat the purpose IMO.

I found the 3D images to interfere with the on screen navigating for the driver but the TL's larger screen to be more accommodating in that sense. Nonetheless, the 3D graphics are a tech edge but so is the TL's larger VGA screen.

None of this to be confused with better or worse, that's not what I am saying as that depends on the individual and multiple of factors. Even though I own the TL and prefer aspects of it's tech, I still do not see a more tech oriented vehicle between the two overall or anything of greater distinction that says this belongs higher or lower on a list, having nothing to do with price.

winstrolvtec

To add to the above, not be misunderstood, I am talking in the context of models that are comparably or simlarly equipped regardless of the price difference or at the same price, where the A4's tech level is comparable and the S4 probably has less. When it comes to tech availability the A/S4 offers things that Acura doesn't on the TL. If you go for a $60k equipped or fully loaded S4 then naturally it has more tech.

TechnoCat

It probably comes as no surprise that we disagree again! I agree that both cars are high in tech, and that the TL SH-AWD makes more of a focus of it. I consider the S4 (Prestige) has as much tech better (more invisibly) integrated, and for $15K more, it had better! Our perspective difference is that I think the TL SH-AWD uses Tech without integration, in a steriodal sense. So yes, as a percentage of the car's attributes, tech is a larger percentage of the TL's focus. The S4 has (in my eyes), for example, a larger focus on luxury (other parts of that $15K difference) that mitigate the raw application of additional features.

Think of how many reviews commented that the TL SH-AWD had button-overload.

I am fascinated that you think the SH-AWD system manages to, while allowing more such instabilities and despite vectoring and biasing no more than the S4 Sports Diff (which is the competitive model in the comparison), overcome the fact that the S4 didn't need correction at all. Because you did acknowledge that possibly the TL SH-AWD is less effective and requires the tech to compensate, but that the comparison was tech, I guess I sort-of "get it", but I do consider using lots of processors to compensate for a sub-optimal design to still be sub-optimal.

Put another way, the S4 won't get into many of the instabilities the TL does, but you claim the TL compensates sufficiently to overtake it?

Please provide a reference or citation. I have a USB plug for my alternates, and the MMC also controls the iPod (with iPod cord) just fine. And let's not forget my SD-Cards, which I let you skate on with before, but is like seriously cool; how precisely are you claiming these go inside the cord into analog? Also don't forget that the track title (etc) is viewable on both the nav screen and the trip computer (something the TL lacked IIRC, though I may be wrong.) I want what you're smoking!

Don't get me wrong. The TL comes across as more of a tech car. But so does a 1990 Mitsubishi... with the flourescent bar-graph speedometer, etc. Tech isn't just in the graphics and buttons; it's in making the expected happen seamlessly.

winstrolvtec

If you are talking about tech not available on the TL like adaptive cruise and suspension then I agree but if you are talking about the variances of how their similar features and functions operate, that is an opinion and is preference based.

That is just more of a case for being a tech oriented car in the first place and then that goes against your integration point in that the tech is integrated in a number of ways, by voice (some of which the Audi does not integrate), by steering wheel, and others by a simple button or the more popular knob design. Visibly or invisibly has little to do with it.

Sure the S4 has less visible buttons so it might seem that the functions are more integrated yet when you start up the car the the navi does not load by default, or when you go into radio mode or the interface, the presets are not on the first page, you need a few more interactions to get there, or how there is no physical radio preset buttons and the volume controls are on the right side of the steering wheel. Maybe all of this is a preference to you because of the design and just in general but it actually takes away from the integration and effectiveness.

Then that brings us to the different build processes. Acura is simple with tech package or no tech package so everything is easily integrated. With Audi, it's possible to have one of three versions of MMI's even for the same model year. You can get one of three different stereos, some have navi, while some don't, some have the AMI with navi, while some just have the AMI and all of this variation linked to of one of two or three different stereos. Having all these different configurations makes it nearly impossible to integrate all these functions and flawlessly, not that the TL is without fault but I don't see as much better or worse integration.

What exactly didn't need correction? I am talking hypothetically. You’re saying sub optimal but you are not keeping it in context of what regard. Sub optimal for poor weather extremes or rally racing maybe but not for tech which includes power and fuel efficiency of the system, dry handling and active front and rear transfer abilities, and a larger percentage of rear bias for those conditions. We can't forget which active differential based system played a big part in what was determined to be a better handling car. So when I look at all the areas overall yet people still say one is simply a better or superior AWD system, I am saying how or in what regard?

I am saying it is entirely possible for a variable AWD system to display those poor weather characteristics but not necessarily exclusively, as permanent systems can do the same. Perhaps it's more prone to them but makes up for it in dry handling and the other advantages of front and rear active biases while that type of active and variable nature of the system is more tech oriented along with the more advanced integration of the stability system.

Also against your superior integration assessment which I guess the badge and premium convinced you of, SH is largely a single design and concept. The active transfers front to rear and active differential's side to side are the same basic function and principle on all the SH models while Audi outsourcers it's active differential from ZF and is an add on for select models. That is precisely why it is not as fluid and the stability is not as well integrated as noted.

I would have expected you to know this, you must not have visited any Audi forums but conveniently you can still learn about it on Acurazine. It's very simple my friend, your car has no Aux jack in center console but versions without the AMI do and if you look you will see a hole for where it used to be.

Having checked out the S4 a while back, I asked the dealer about it since the TL has both a USB and Aux in that location, I got my explanation, the AMI uses the jack connected to the pre amp. Even showed me that there was no sound difference between an Aux linked device (non AMI) and an AMI linked device both with the same stereo system for that very reason. In the TL the sound is very different from the USB and Aux jack because it actually has both and they are two different sources, in the Audi it's always one.

Going back to the above part of various builds and configurations, it should start to make sense. Since the AMI versions use the stereo's own digital signal processing, it doesn't matter that the source in downgraded to analog before it gets mixed but we all know extra processing affects quality. Your feed into the AMI in the glove box is digital so it reads and processes with no problem but the sound is converted to analog through the jack before getting reprocessed and then making it's way to your speakers.

And it's nice that you have the MMI and trip display, I am not knocking that but that only exist because of the non MMI and AMI models which ironically represents itself as both further integration and a lack thereof.

With all these examples, it just seems to me that the TL is designed top to bottom meaning the focus is the SH tech first then the build trickles down to FWD base. With Audi it likes base A4 (probably Quattro) first then, how can we get all this additional stuff added?

I agree but tech is also more than just a price tag and a higher or lower price doesn't necessarily have to include more or less.

TechnoCat

I don't understand your primary point. I think you're saying that since the TL Tech package is a drop-in, it's better integrated than the S4 which has options?

My experience was that the TL's tech was (1) incomplete (see past posts) and (2) not well integrated, compared to the S4. For not well integrated, again note that the phone and nav don't really interface in the TL, the trip and nav screens don't really interface, etc. As you say, this can be a matter of perception, but it's likely reasonably widely held.

FWIW, the Audi does annoy me with always starting up on the audio, rather than the Nav. It has an even more annoying feature: the radio turns on when you start the car (after it's been off for ~1 hour.) But that's not tech or integration; it's a bizarre (and annoying) design decision, but not tech/integration, just user antagonism. The TL has plenty of user-antagonistic features too.

FAIL! You lose. You should know by now that this is my fourth Audi and I was almost instantly annoyed by the amazing inferiority of the SH-AWD system. I wrote less than a month (about a year ago) after buying it of this. You think it's a "single concept", but it's a complex one and not tuned correctly. And if you were to be honet about it, you would acknowledge that I frequently stated the shortcomings could be fixed with a software update... I don't think it has to be bad, but rather that they tuned it that way for mileage (presumably.)

That you "know" it and your friend claims it doesn't make it true. I do hang out on three Audi fora; haven't seen this issue. Possibly you're a few years out-of-date.

Audi uses the MOST interface (Media Oriented System Transport) for their devices. It's mostly digital, using two DSPs which, among other things, decode the MP3s. (ADI BlalckFins, specifically. I know the chips well.) You can even interface to the CAN via the MMI aux in theory; I haven't tried.

That's why I asked you for a citation. Not some dealer theory; we can scan these pages for massive misinformation from Acura dealers, and Audi ones are just as confused.

But as long as you're using that as a sign of integration of tech, tell me...

Using ODBC, can you change the brightness of your DRLs? Look up VAG-COM and all the items Audi (and other associated models) have supported for a decade on the car network can configure, and how tech-oriented the TL seems that way? (It's an unpleasant UI, and shared down to Skoda, but it is at least a sign of deep tech. )

winstrolvtec

Yes.

But you speak as if the lack of integration examples against the S4 don' t mean anything that it only applies to the TL and all said and done because it costs more it has to be better and the majority of this forum is proof that it doesn't have to be and what you think is only your opinion yet you act as if it serves as more.

I assume the 1 hour cut off has to do with aux power (which is better in the TL) and that is tech and integration, another example of how when it doesn't look good for Audi, it's not tech, or it's not integration, or it's not luxury, etc, etc, you can't always make this up as you go along.

I don't post to be right or worng or that this is some game in which there is a winner in the end. My stance in neutral unlike yours, I am not claiming better or worse in this discussion and a few of our others as well while in the end you keep bringing up the fact that this costs $15k more and keep trying to justify it. I have given you examples of what qualifies as more tech objectively IMO, you want to cite examples of what you prefer and deem it as more tech or in other cases more luxury when it's not the case because it's subjective. If you stuck to the objective we might have an honest discussion.

None of the traits of SH or Quattro make it a better AWD, how can it when everyone is looking for something different or might not need the same thing? They both excel and fail in areas in general and in comparison but you never acknowledge this.

You're completely missing the whole idea of what I am saying. It's in the sound reproduction not the interface or initial feed of AMI. All the stereos on Audi only support a 2 channel feed which happens to be anolog whether it's first digital then converted or not. That's why you only have the one input, no mistake or misinformation about it, you are in denial.

Sure but most VAG-COM features need a mod nontheless, one could mod the TL. The fact is most of those functions are not present in the car as is for a reason, like how you can't roll down your windows with the fob unless modded.

Again with exception, I am not painting a picture of more or less tech where you are. My argument is that when excluding a few higher end features like adaptive cruise or suspension and when mostly similarly equipped the TL and A/S4 are on the same tech level.

Your price argument is meaningless. For the same $60k as a loaded S4, I can get a comprably 535 similarly equipped, you would probably assume it has the same level of tech and luxury because it costs the same but in reality one could argue that it has more tech and it certainly has more luxury.

cyniclaus

There is a simple MMI hack to access a hidden menu and allow video in motion.

I am mortified that the S4 can't play surround and DTS tracks from DVD-V. I scoured the Audi forums thinking you must be mistaken, but alas it seems you are correct. Can't believe the friggin Lacrosse, CTS and Genesis have these features and not Audi Maybe I need to get a CTS-V next instead of an S-4 or TL.

Of course, the TL can't play DVD-V at all.

winstrolvtec

^It sucks but I don't think you can go wrong with any of those cars just do your due diligence and pick the right one for you. Many cars even in the same segment range will mostly vary and trade when it comes to different forms of tech, features and functions but as a whole they are pretty similar. The B&O 7.1 matrix is still pretty good.

Of course, you should be able to mod the TL to play DVD-V, and maybe even incorporate the sound source through the ELS.