How can Any Sane Person Compare The A4 2.0T To The TL???!!!
04-22-2011, 09:13 AM
#1
I feel strongly both ways
Thread Starter
How can Any Sane Person Compare The A4 2.0T To The TL???!!!
OK it's a nice enough looking car. Having said that it's friggin' tiny inside. And Audi, which is renowned for their opulant interiors really went to sleep at the wheel on the A4. It's stark and spartan inside.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
04-22-2011, 09:42 AM
#2
short answer: they are not sane
04-22-2011, 11:07 AM
#4
Drifting
PsychDoc, I agree with you! While I find the A4 to be a very handsome vehicle, I never understood why the interior was praised to high heaven by the press. It's nice enough, but to me it's very stark (as you said) and austere. I really did not like the hard plastic that they put on the back of the front seats - why is there no padding at the back of the front seat for such a luxury car? (it's the same for the Q5).
Then while the 2.0T is very peppy and fun to drive, it's not very luxurious. I also find the interior a bit noisy (from the engine and the road).
Overall, it's a very, very nice vehicle, but IMHO it's not worth the very high price! If you think it's high in the US, try that in Canada - for a nicely equipped A4, you are looking at somewhere close to $60,000!!! You can get that for the low/mid 40's in the States!!! This is totally insane....
Then while the 2.0T is very peppy and fun to drive, it's not very luxurious. I also find the interior a bit noisy (from the engine and the road).
Overall, it's a very, very nice vehicle, but IMHO it's not worth the very high price! If you think it's high in the US, try that in Canada - for a nicely equipped A4, you are looking at somewhere close to $60,000!!! You can get that for the low/mid 40's in the States!!! This is totally insane....
04-22-2011, 11:16 AM
#5
Senior Moderator
How can any sane person watch American Idol?
04-22-2011, 11:17 AM
#6
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
@ 4G TL owner
04-22-2011, 11:20 AM
#7
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Forgot today was the 4G TL owners field trip day to the car talk 
Trending Topics
04-22-2011, 11:21 AM
#8
My first Avatar....
04-22-2011, 11:23 AM
#9
My first Avatar....
04-22-2011, 11:23 AM
#10
for the same reason someone would pay the same amount for a bmw3 series/BMW 528/BMW 535 /MB C class/infiniti G25.....and the list goes on and on and on..............and when i mention the 3 series and the C class i am not talking about the better models which are still 6-7K more ....smh ...to each is own ......
04-22-2011, 01:39 PM
#12
The sizzle in the Steak
What sane person would buy a 4G TL?!?!?!?!?
Madness!!!!
Madness!!!!
04-22-2011, 01:50 PM
#13
Team Owner
i will take a 2.0T Sline A4 over TL... actually i would take bmw 328, C300, G25, G37, A4, Maxima, IS350, pretty much anything around $40k over TL... call me Sane!!!
04-22-2011, 01:53 PM
#14
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,641
Received 2,329 Likes
on
1,309 Posts
Oooh look, another Audi vs Acura thread.
04-22-2011, 02:20 PM
#17
The sizzle in the Steak
04-22-2011, 02:26 PM
#18
Banned
OK it's a nice enough looking car. Having said that it's friggin' tiny inside. And Audi, which is renowned for their opulant interiors really went to sleep at the wheel on the A4. It's stark and spartan inside.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
04-22-2011, 02:56 PM
#20
Suzuka Master
Where did you get your info from??
Automobile got something like 30mpg or close to it in real world driving. There's so much low end torque that you dont need to rev like crazy to get it moving. This isnt a Si. And it looks good enough to buy it just on that fact.
Automobile got something like 30mpg or close to it in real world driving. There's so much low end torque that you dont need to rev like crazy to get it moving. This isnt a Si. And it looks good enough to buy it just on that fact.
04-22-2011, 03:47 PM
#21
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
Clearly the OP has never driven B8 A4 or seen its dyno chart with torque curve.
If he has, hes even more idiot to not feel that low end torque + quattro.
I have absolutely no problem driving around town under 3K RPM. Dont even have to spool up the turbo at all.
The car has been averaging almost 26mpg in city driving for the past 5k miles.
The beauty of 2.0T is that if you drive soft, it gives you very good fuel mileage. And if you push it, it gets horrible mileage.
If he has, hes even more idiot to not feel that low end torque + quattro.
I have absolutely no problem driving around town under 3K RPM. Dont even have to spool up the turbo at all.
The car has been averaging almost 26mpg in city driving for the past 5k miles.
The beauty of 2.0T is that if you drive soft, it gives you very good fuel mileage. And if you push it, it gets horrible mileage.
04-22-2011, 04:17 PM
#22
The sizzle in the Steak
There is torque EVERYWHERE in the rev band on the 2.0T.
The OP is a clown of epic proportions.
The OP is a clown of epic proportions.
04-22-2011, 04:54 PM
#24
Needs more blue.
Terry
Terry
04-22-2011, 05:42 PM
#26
Three Wheelin'
My cousin owns an A4. the back seat are cramp up, not comfortable sitting at the back seat on long trips.
04-22-2011, 07:00 PM
#27
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
^ Okay, so TL is a clear winner, correct? 
Just to dick around for fun because it seems like a lot of people say TL has a HUGE rear legroom than all the other competitors, the 2010 A4's front/rear legroom is 41.3/35.2, and the 2010 TL's front/rear legroom is 42.5/36.2. What a huge difference. damn.
Maybe your cousin is just too tall??
Man, the size issue can be pretty subjective. Think bigger.
Just to dick around for fun because it seems like a lot of people say TL has a HUGE rear legroom than all the other competitors, the 2010 A4's front/rear legroom is 41.3/35.2, and the 2010 TL's front/rear legroom is 42.5/36.2. What a huge difference. damn.
Maybe your cousin is just too tall??
Man, the size issue can be pretty subjective. Think bigger.
04-22-2011, 07:19 PM
#28
Senior Moderator
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Better Neighborhood, Arizona
Posts: 45,641
Received 2,329 Likes
on
1,309 Posts
^ Okay, so TL is a clear winner, correct?
Just to dick around for fun because it seems like a lot of people say TL has a HUGE rear legroom than all the other competitors, the 2010 A4's front/rear legroom is 41.3/35.2, and the 2010 TL's front/rear legroom is 42.5/36.2. What a huge difference. damn.
Maybe your cousin is just too tall??
Man, the size issue can be pretty subjective. Think bigger.
Just to dick around for fun because it seems like a lot of people say TL has a HUGE rear legroom than all the other competitors, the 2010 A4's front/rear legroom is 41.3/35.2, and the 2010 TL's front/rear legroom is 42.5/36.2. What a huge difference. damn.
Maybe your cousin is just too tall??
Man, the size issue can be pretty subjective. Think bigger.
So yes, statistics can be misleading.
04-22-2011, 07:29 PM
#29
Senior Moderator
OK it's a nice enough looking car. Having said that it's friggin' tiny inside. And Audi, which is renowned for their opulant interiors really went to sleep at the wheel on the A4. It's stark and spartan inside.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
That said, the A4 is as sexy looking as the 09-11 TL is fugly. (I do agree that it's overpriced but, a chunk of the consideration here has to be given to the $/Euro exchange rate which does NOT favor the USD well.)
04-22-2011, 07:48 PM
#30
CL in lawnmower status
OK it's a nice enough looking car. Having said that it's friggin' tiny inside. And Audi, which is renowned for their opulant interiors really went to sleep at the wheel on the A4. It's stark and spartan inside.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
i've had a 2.2l cl and a 2.5l turbocharged wrx... got about the same highway mileage... how do you like that?
the thing about turbocharged engines is that if they don't get into the rpms where they spool then you're fine. And when you need the power and get into the revs then you shouldn't be complaining about the extra gas that is used.
i hate these threads, but i always seem to comment, it's like a car accident, i just can't turn away
04-22-2011, 07:53 PM
#31
Safety Car
OK it's a nice enough looking car. Having said that it's friggin' tiny inside. And Audi, which is renowned for their opulant interiors really went to sleep at the wheel on the A4. It's stark and spartan inside.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
But the main (!!!) issue is the 2.0 4-banger. It's not even in the same league as the Acura 6 cylinder in terms of refinement and silky smoothness. And I've never been a fan of turbos. As someone else pointed out in another thread, they never, ever, seem to get anything close to their EPA mpg numbers out there in the real world. In the past I've owned a Volvo 850 turbo that was absolutely awful in the mpg department. And when you try to get respectable power from a little 4-banger with turbos you have to keep the revs way, way up which further exacerbates the roughness of this type of engine.
Why in the world anyone would pay TL (+) prices for a car like the A4 is a true mystery.
04-22-2011, 09:44 PM
#33
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
did you miss my post #7?
04-23-2011, 03:47 AM
#34
Three Wheelin'
^ Okay, so TL is a clear winner, correct?
Just to dick around for fun because it seems like a lot of people say TL has a HUGE rear legroom than all the other competitors, the 2010 A4's front/rear legroom is 41.3/35.2, and the 2010 TL's front/rear legroom is 42.5/36.2. What a huge difference. damn.
Maybe your cousin is just too tall??
Man, the size issue can be pretty subjective. Think bigger.
Just to dick around for fun because it seems like a lot of people say TL has a HUGE rear legroom than all the other competitors, the 2010 A4's front/rear legroom is 41.3/35.2, and the 2010 TL's front/rear legroom is 42.5/36.2. What a huge difference. damn.
Maybe your cousin is just too tall??
Man, the size issue can be pretty subjective. Think bigger.
04-23-2011, 08:23 AM
#36
Racer
And A4 > TL in:
- Quality of fixtures
- Ride Noise
- Front Seat Comfort (see the TL 4G forum looking for how many of us griped about the head restraints in the TL)
- Space Usability - Folding rear seat, flat trunk, etc.
- Logical Controls. The TL Tech interior reminds me of 1980s Buck Rogers, done by Mitsubishi.
- Raw Performance - when pushed hard.
- Cavernous (though not necessarily usably-so) interior
- Feature Count. ("Bang for the Buck", as you succinctly put, but without good integration or finishing.)
- Reliability. (But Acura beats most brands on that.)
- Front seats painful to both my (now) wife and I.
- No hauling capability - seats didn't fold, trunk floor was an exercise in metallic origami.
- The high-revving engine seemed lifeless down low (coming from years in torque-monster Audis), and the suspension more sports-car than sports-sedan, so we had...
- High-strung (high-revving) city driving
- Jittery freeway driving
- Constant rattles due to jittering and no soft surfaces in the cubbies.
- But the thing was FAST.
04-23-2011, 10:32 AM
#37
My first Avatar....
And A4 > TL in:
- Quality of fixtures
- Ride Noise
- Front Seat Comfort (see the TL 4G forum looking for how many of us griped about the head restraints in the TL)
- Space Usability - Folding rear seat, flat trunk, etc.
- Logical Controls. The TL Tech interior reminds me of 1980s Buck Rogers, done by Mitsubishi.
- Raw Performance - when pushed hard.
- Cavernous (though not necessarily usably-so) interior
- Feature Count. ("Bang for the Buck", as you succinctly put, but without good integration or finishing.)
- Reliability. (But Acura beats most brands on that.)
- Front seats painful to both my (now) wife and I.
- No hauling capability - seats didn't fold, trunk floor was an exercise in metallic origami.
- The high-revving engine seemed lifeless down low (coming from years in torque-monster Audis), and the suspension more sports-car than sports-sedan, so we had...
- High-strung (high-revving) city driving
- Jittery freeway driving
- Constant rattles due to jittering and no soft surfaces in the cubbies.
- But the thing was FAST.
Price and reliability = why Acura survives.
04-23-2011, 11:12 AM
#38
אני עומד עם ישראל
This really is beating a dead horse. If the TL wasn't so big, styling so polarizing, I would be in an SH-AWD 6MT.
04-23-2011, 11:18 AM
#39
And A4 > TL in:
- Quality of fixtures
- Ride Noise
- Front Seat Comfort (see the TL 4G forum looking for how many of us griped about the head restraints in the TL)
- Space Usability - Folding rear seat, flat trunk, etc.
- Logical Controls. The TL Tech interior reminds me of 1980s Buck Rogers, done by Mitsubishi.
- Raw Performance - when pushed hard.
- Cavernous (though not necessarily usably-so) interior
- Feature Count. ("Bang for the Buck", as you succinctly put, but without good integration or finishing.)
- Reliability. (But Acura beats most brands on that.)
- Front seats painful to both my (now) wife and I.
- No hauling capability - seats didn't fold, trunk floor was an exercise in metallic origami.
- The high-revving engine seemed lifeless down low (coming from years in torque-monster Audis), and the suspension more sports-car than sports-sedan, so we had...
- High-strung (high-revving) city driving
- Jittery freeway driving
- Constant rattles due to jittering and no soft surfaces in the cubbies.
- But the thing was FAST.
I'd take the 6MT shawd any day.
04-23-2011, 11:57 AM
#40
The Third Ball
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Age: 45
Posts: 49,429
Received 5,087 Likes
on
2,700 Posts
Have you guys figured it out already?
based on this dipshit's posting pattern he is nothing more than a shit starter. He starts a thread meant for debate and run aways to watch the chaos.
Why? Dont know, probably because he has no balls and cant afford prostitutes to talk dirty to him while he fingers his asshole...so, he comes on AZ and does this shit.
ignore him and like all dickless trolls, he'll go away.
based on this dipshit's posting pattern he is nothing more than a shit starter. He starts a thread meant for debate and run aways to watch the chaos.
Why? Dont know, probably because he has no balls and cant afford prostitutes to talk dirty to him while he fingers his asshole...so, he comes on AZ and does this shit.
ignore him and like all dickless trolls, he'll go away.
Last edited by Sarlacc; 04-23-2011 at 12:03 PM.