SSFTSX

what about all German magazines. Every country measured things differntly. once BMW 3 series sales starting to collapse. they will change there measurement criteria.

winstrolvtec

Audi has remained fairly consistant in their approach but the newer BMW 3's have made significant performance upgrades, while it might not appear to be the case the S4 is now needed to compete with the 335i or xi to be fair and the RS4 goes head to head with the latest M3. Think of those Audi's as "maybe" a .5 segment above or in something between.

Sonor Kid 2

Audi builds great cars as do the Germans in general, it shouldn't be a shock that the A4 was favored over the new TL, the TL isn't the world beater everyone had hoped it would be.
Pete, I know you love you new TL but you make it seem like the Audi is a piece of crap by comparison and it's not.

winstrolvtec

With that is Audi also considering dumping the 3.2? That would move the segments to where I mentioned, I guess they see it that way too, and figure they don't need 4 models to compete with 3 since the 3.2 seems to be in between the base engine and upgraded engine group in that segment, it's a good move.

PetesTL

I never said the A4 is crap. Read my posts before you make false accusations like that. I was comparing the A4 to the 3 series. I stated that the new A4 is a beautifully designed car but as far as matching the 3 series performance-wise, it still has a ways to go. It's also way overpriced compared to the competition. The TL is not a 3-series beater either. It's too heavy and too slow. However, it's value, safety, reliability and resale value is unsurpassed in its segment and that's very important.

SSFTSX

You are making same mistake which every one else is making. Based on official data.
335 RWD. 5.6 sec
S4 5.1 sec
M3 4.8 sec

S4 figures are closer to M3 than 335 but thats not the point. S4 has more liner power deliverly and more usable torque than M3. I bet S4 will beat M3 in merging and passing from 45 to 120mph. It is the torque figure that decides real life usable performance. as far as handling goes it has defeated Mitsu Evo in German tests. why should it be any less than M3.
Bottom line is S4 is better looking, more refined, spacious and faster car than M3 in daily driver.

cp3117

LOL....I must of missed something in the last 24hrs.

When did the Camry become the direct competitor to Audi, BMW, MB etc???

You mentioned that the new A4 was to be a 3 Series beater and that it failed. On a track 9 times out of 10 the BMW will have the edge although the new S4 will probably be very close to achieving this goal against the 335Xi.
The new A4 has outsold the 3 series in its home country (which is a tremendous achievement) for the first time and in turn has done anything else but failed.
Just about every comparo between the two manufactures the BMW will win because of its track performance but in summary they almost always say for overall everyday driving, performance and value the Audi's are a winner.

Both manufactures produce great cars for the money and again i dont know why you always over inflate the Audi's pricing.
I just priced out a S5 vs 335ix coupe (No pricing avail for the new S4 yet) on the Audi and BMW websites. The cars equally equipped vary between $500 and $2000 depending on a few variables and not this magical $10K-$14K that you always come up with.
Please....I ask you to actually go to the websites and be honest with yourself and price out the cars.

C'mon..... Do you actually think if the equally equipped cars varied $14k in price that Audi would actually sell any, let alone out sell BMW in Germany.

The value in the Audi's is very good overall and this can be seen in this comparo with the TL vs the A4. Even they final comments are that if you want a premium car you have to pay a premium price and even they can see the value in the extra money spent for the A4.

SSFTSX

It is not walkover from BMW. last generation S4 was M3 beater and it is a from Magazine which says BMW 328 is better than TL SH-AWD.

Frankly putting a gas guzzling V8 in small BMW is a mistake.

dom

Has anyone seen a 335 tested as slow as 5.6 to 60?

The 5.6 is a manufacturer's estimate.

SSFTSX

In absence of comparable data we are only going to use manufacturer numbers.
Or you can use deducting reasoing. C&D has tested 6speed 4100 lbs A6
officially A6 is rated at 5.9 second.
http://www.audiusa.com/audi/us/en2/n...s/Audi_A6.html

Now lighter, more aerodynamic S4 with S tronic has extra 35bhp and 15 ft-lb extra torque.. so you are looking at real life figures of 4.5 to 4.8 second. Pretty similar to M3.

dom

^ Are you retarded?

cp3117

I agree Dom. I havent seen one tested yet that isnt in the high 4's. On the BMW website the 335ix actually posts a quicker time of around 5.3 compared to the 5.6 for the RWD.

I notice most of the ratings from BMW, Audi etc are always very conservative and thats why when i see them posting a 5.1s 0-60 for the 2010 S4 we can almost be certain when its tested it should be in the 4.8 range.

winstrolvtec

Sice when is 0-60 a good basis for what's fast or faster, any AWD vehicle has a dynamic advantage in that area. To be fair you must look at the 1/4 mile and trap speed of these vehicles on a consistant basis. You do realize that the more powerfrul a car gets the less power is demonstrated in the 0-60, unless of course it has an AWD or super traction setup, hence the 0 part. Somtimes there is even another completely different outcome beyond the 1/4 mile, but it's not easily determined, and is not generally safe at that point, so to most people it's irrelevant.

winstrolvtec

Audi is cutting out the 3.2 for a reason, they can esily bump the turbo and it already offers a MT, also a great idea for mileage standings. They know better than us how they want their cars to compete in segments, and where they do for that matter, so it is the 335i and the S4, the M3 and the RS4, when the 3.2 is gone. Looking at the specs it makes perfect sense, and the prices fall more in line. The S5 happens to be the best value IMO for an Audi, in terms of a performance based vehicle.

SSFTSX

Thats good point. There still people around here who thinks that they can kick around S4 with RWD inferior aerodynamic V8 car. I am not taking into account subjective things like
10% performance difference due to rough Cd differential at higher speeds.
Any way 4.6 to 4.7 sec will hair splitting difference in 0-60mph.

winstrolvtec

The A4 3.2 in my honest opinion represents the worst value in the Audi lineup and it's a shame becuase it is a really nice car too. I priced it and in all honesty exactly like I could get a TL SH and it is $50k, at $55k I could get an S5 equipped the same, or any 335i with available MT, do you see my point?, Audi sees it too, and I like their plans. They could go one of two ways, offer a 6MT for the 3.2 with power increase or new engine maybe 3.5 and drop the 2.0 or what they are doing, dropping the 3.2 altogether and I already mentioned the rest. This is a new model and we didn't see any real performance boost or change, if they did they could have continued to market the S4 vs the M3 and offer a higher model R as well, but from an econimical and more practical standpoint it makes perfect sense to just to move down, and I believe very strongly this was in their plans from the begining just that they need the 3.2 to hold the fort until the new S arrives. Very much like what Acura is doing with the new TL, TSX, and RL, knowing this it makes perect sense why the TL falls short in the comparo's, it isn't fully intended to compete in this smaller, lighter, faster segment, and there is no reason to try, it's like jamming a round peg into a square hole. Doing your own comparison of the TL to the 5,A6, and E, you can easily see it competes very well and it is the much more appropriate segment.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

lol you mean you just found that out??


winstrolvtec, I agree with you. Obviously, Acura is undergoing this transition phase and the model line up in its current state does look kinda messed up. As I've said before, before, Acura never really competed head-on with other luxury brands, which wasn't such a bad thing in terms of selling more cars, but didn't really help build the brand image. Now, in this transition phase, the model line up is shifting. The TL has obviously become bigger than before, and much bigger than 3, A4, C, IS, and G. So when you want to compare how it feels, how it corners, there's already an disadvantage - how do you make a car that's so much bigger feel as small and as nimble as those cars? Without that extra size, weight will go up inevitably, how can you compare in terms of performance unless you stuff a big/powerful engine in it? On the other hand, the TL isn't quite up there with the 5, A6, E, and GS. Those cars still offer some optional features that the TL doesn't offer. Those cars according to some of you, are simply better built, and/or have better quality, which is important for a car in that class.

So, it's a bit confusing, where does the TL really compete in? I guess there's no definite answer for that.

PetesTL

Before I got my TL, I test drove about half a dozen cars. In my opinion, the one car that comes closest to the new TL in terms of price, features, size and performance is the Cadillac CTS. If you look closely at the CTS and 4G side-by-side, you see so many similarities....similar features, similar price range, similar size, similar radical design theme, and similar performance and ride quality. To me, the 4G is essentially a "Japanese CTS." Like the Caddy, the 4G is just too big and heavy to compete with the smaller, nimble 3 series and the A4. However, they compete very favorably with the 5 series, E-class, Lexus GS, Saab 9-5, and the Volvo S60. Out of all these cars, the 4G in my opinion, definately gives you more for the money and thus a much better value.

dom

Deductive reasoning leads you to comparing the 335 to an A6. Nice reasoning. Or you just use google but of course that would provide results that don't help your cause.

And absence of data? The 335 has been tested by about every publication several times over the last couple of years.

4.8 seconds

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...40_000_feature

Automatic coupe in 4.9

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...m_+page-3.html


A 2006 test at 4.8

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...cs+page-2.html

5.1 for an AT

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...335/specs.html

Another 4.8 from R&T

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=5495

I could go on.

I hate arguing 0-60 since there are far too many factors that go into getting the numbers. But I hate ignorant statements that make absolutely no sense more.

At that deductive reasoning. Wow.

Legend2TL

Gotta love actual tests results
Good searching

SSFTSX

Actual results of S4 tests by US publications are not available. So whats the point of 335 actual test results with Manufacture claim data of S4?
I showed A6 that manufacture is showing 5.9 sec but actual test is 5.5 sec.

Manufacture claim of 335 is 5.6 sec.
Manufacture claim of S4 is 5.1 sec.
It is called apple to apple comparision. so do u think it is ignorant statement.

Legend2TL

Yes, since it's apples to oranges since it's not clear how Audi and BMW run their manufacturer's claims tests. Altitude, track conditions, test weight (full tank of fuel, empty tank) ...

When US auto media run their test, then you can compare. Most of auto media do a fairly good job putting the test conditions into their test data.

dom

I wasn't comparing the 335 to the S4. The issue I have is with you comparing the 335 to the A6, claiming there are no stats for the 335 and then using so called 'deducting reasoning" to prove that the 335 is a 5.6 sec car. You've been proven wrong, admit it and stop making assisnine comparison's.

cornelius

The fastest and cheapest car here is the 335 with Dinans or Procedes.
There is no argument.

SSFTSX

I wasnt comparing A6 to 335 either. and no one else has taken it as such except you.
I was just showing that manufacturer data is usally conservative.
Motortrend acheived 5.4 second for A6. 0.5 second different from Manufacturer estimate. It is very reasonable to conclude that they will achieve something around 4.5 to 4.6 sec with S4.




for BMW M3. It is 4.6 second.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._m3/index.html

Bottom line S4 and M3 are pretty close in straight line performance.

dom

Post 46, you're arguing against the assumption that the 335 is now the performance equivalent of an S4. As far as 0-60 goes anyway.

Then you use the A6 as the barometer to obtain acceleration times for the S4 and 335... WHEN THERE ARE COUNTLESS TIMES FOR THE 335 AND S4 (older one anyway) POSTED ALL OVER THE WEB. Am I the only one who sees the folly in that? You obviously leave out facts to better support your arguments.

fredjones

I can vouch for the qualities of the Audi A4, being a current owner of one. I am not trolling. I owned my last TL, a 2002 type S, for eight years. The new TL is a fine car, I drooled over the interior to be truthful. My 2009 2.0T A4 Prestige costs me around 38,700 USD. It is very easy to option an Audi out of ones price range, just stick with what,s necessary. Believe me when I say the 2.0 liter turbo engine is the superior engine. Audi was smart to discontinue the 3.2 V6.

We can talk about what car magazine got what stats on what performance parameter all day if we want. Just test drive as many cars as you can and go with what you like.

guytdt

According to Car and Driver (June issue), 2.0T A4 has problems with wind noise, road noise, and engine noise.
Just this alone make it not worth looking at. Anyway just my opinion

rhn75

Fredjones - can you confirm that the $38.7k is for the Prestige? Sticker is ~$44k. I didn't think they were being discounted that much. Does that include destination?

Sonor Kid 2

[QUOTE=PetesTL;10892659]The A4 may have grown bigger from the outside, but the inside, compared to the TL, is still cramped and doesn't come close to looking like a $50K interior even when fully loaded. The ride quality is also worse than the E-class and 5 series. I use to own a '05 545i and that car is still way superior to the new A4 from a performance standpoint and from a luxury standpoint.


Pete,
I did read your post, no need to be so defensive..
These are the comments I was referring to which I disagree with as they are purely subjective.
I disagree that the interior is inferior to the TL and wouldn't say it's cramped to be honest, maybe just not as spacious as the TL by comparison but that's my opinion.
I have a friend with an A4 and think it's a great car in many respects, other than test driving the new TL I haven't spent enough time with either to comment further.
I like the new TL in some respects and not in others, I wish the TL had some of the qualities of the A4 to be honest.

fredjones

Now is a really good time to buy a new car. I just stated the price I paid because all manufacturers are offering huge discounts. It is indeed a Prestige Package A4. I got my car below invoice. I'm sure someone could get a good deal on a TL if they wanted to.

Really don't know what Car and Driver said about the wind noise, as I have not read the article. My personal experience was that the first time I got the car up to above 80mph was that I couldn't believe I was actually going that fast, because the car was too quiet.

I understand this is an Acura forum and I fully respect that. Acura makes great cars as far as I am concerned. Just wanted to provide some input on the A4.

cp3117

What we have been seeing lately from Audi and BMW is that they are going to be moving away from larger drivetrains and developing engines where you get "more from less". The 3.2 did well for Audi lasting almost 20 years. VAG has a 3.6L that is used in the CC etc but i believe there are problems fitting that into the A4. I can see Audi either adding an additional 2.0T to the line up with more HP or a detuned 3.0T with about 260HP. The new A4 has seen a big performance increase from its base 2.0T model and being many different versions of the 2.0T are offered in Europe i could see one coming over here to fill the gap.

I dont think Audi has any intentions of moving the S4 down (if thats what you meant) It still performs ok against the M3 and even Audi marketing shows the S4 as still the competitor to the M3 (even though there is a huge difference in HP).

Acura's situation is much different from Audi's as although many here for some reason think the 4G is on par with 5 series, A6 etc. Acura clearly markets the 4G at its true competition with the 3 series, A4 etc.

It would be hard for Acura to just add a few options over the coming years and all of a sudden proclaim it to be a competitor to the next level. The 4G although a great car doesnt have the combo of interior size and cargo space as the A6 etc not to mention better options, better quality of materials, etc etc etc. This is why its still at entry level status and Acura knows this.

Some people think that because of its size that this is an excuse for it now not competing well with others in its class. Imagine if the 4G was compared to the 2010 A6 3.0T....This car is heavier than the 4G but is almost a full second quicker in the quarter mile and 0-60 tests and is larger in some interior aspects and has mid size level cargo capacity unlike the 4G. We should be thankful that this comparo was done with the A4 and its outdated 3.2 because compared to the 2010 A6 3.0T it would have been disastrous.

The 4G is a great car for what Acura made it to compete against...nothing more and nothing less. When the next RL comes out and it can hopefully compete against a 7 series, A8 etc then expect the 5G to make its move to the next level (and this depends also with what is done with the TSX), but thats probably at least 4-5 years away.

winstrolvtec

Entry Level would define the TSX so no it's not at entry level like the A4. Better quality doesn't always equal more functionality. What is the point of paying for more when it can't be used and doesn't produce anything better than someone's subjective opinion. Honda/Acura = value without the lose of functionality, sometimes more, for example, recent crash test ratings and resale value, without a doubt making it the best financial car purchase one can make. Don't confuse competing as being at the same level, for what your views are, I can compete in the NYC marathon, it doesn't mean I am going to win, but did I not compete?, does that help the thought process? The A4 is often looked at as being last in class as far as German make, but it's a nice car just for different reasons, does that mean it doesn't compete there? If I bought an E/5/A6 bone stock, base price, I mean with nothing vs TL SH loaded, which is now the better overall car? Until Audi does add a replacement for the A4 3.2 than the segments would likely be moving down, where than in turn would be very successful, or they could continue to market above and charge similar prices if not more, up there, for less product and not be very effective, but we can't predict the future so. I would like an answer to this question, if the new RL comes out and is aimed at the higher segment but for less money, are those the grounds to descredit it and move it back down? Where they will be aimed is completely different than where people feel it should compete, or in other words it's not of the same "quality", if it is worst in class by many opinions, those people don't have to buy one, but that is where it is going to compete. I understand that may piss off a few people, maybe those who own a 7, S,or S8 that have had to pay the gold price of admission for years, to now have Honda being allowed to let poeple in the door with the bronze membership instead, but too bad, it was only a matter of time. When those type of vehicles first came out did they charge for it having the badge or did they charge becuase they were the only thing like it, you know size, luxury, features, and comfort, etc, et. So if a company now can make the same type of car for less, does it not compete becuase of brand or becuase of vehicle type?

One last very important qeustion Cp, one man to another, are you actually going to buy that entry level Audi or just brag about it pointlessly here in the Acura forum?

PetesTL

Cp and SSFTSX must be related......neither owns an Audi but they sure bend-over for one, don't they?

SSFTSX

I stated based on manufacturer data. the gap between S4 & 335i is larger than gap between M3 & S4.
I showed A6 because it is the car tested with similar engine to S4.and performance is on positive side compared to manufacturer claim.

You can see most of Audi products are beating the manufacturer figures on positive side. infact A5 is as heavy as A4 but still managing half second quicker. so vehicle dynamics plays a part in performance figures.

they achieved 4.1 sec with M3 but Noise levels of 72 dba at 70mph and 15mpg. the car is not suitable for every day living.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d..._datapanel.pdf








S4 is surely more dynamic than M3 so figures will be very close.
Acura never publishes those figures.

PetesTL

WTF?! So you expect sports cars to be as quiet as a Buick?! You think people who buy cars like the M3 complain about the noise? Have you driven anything sportier than a TSX? The S4 does not even belong in the same class as the M3! Look.....M3: 414hp V8, curb weight: 3700 lbs.....S4: 333 hp V6, curb weight: 3900+ lbs........it doesn't take a genius to figure out which car is the better performer. The only Audi that competes in the same segment as the M3 is the RS4, but that car costs $20K more than the M3. Many BMW dealers are actually selling M3's now below MSRP, so the S4 will be at an even bigger disadvantage when it finally shows up.

iforyou

iTrader: (1)

I agree with most of what you said, except for a few things.

I think Audi DOES want to make the S4 compete against the M3. But the difference between seems to be too big. I don't think the new S4 out yet, but looking at the S5 performance numbers, they are more comparable to the 335i. Of course, the S5 has a 4.2L V8, while I believe the next S4 will have the 3.0T engine. The V8 is more powerful by about 20hp, while torque output is about the same, perhaps the 3.0T has more low end torque, and perhaps it's going to be slightly lighter. So, the S4 might be ever so slightly faster than the 335i, and corner a little bit faster, but is that really enough to justify the increase in price? I mean, the base price of a 335i sedan and S4 is over $10k ($40.3k vs $51.4k), I'd imagine a loaded 335i is as expensive as a base S4. On other hand, if you pay another 6k or so over the base price of a S4, you can get the M3 that's much faster.

Same thing with Acura, they might be marketing the TL against the 3 series and the likes, but does it really compete with those head-on anymore? Acura does want it to compete with the 5-series and others in that class, but like you have said, there are areas that Acura has to work on before it's at that level. In other words, the TL doesn't "pretend" to be a car that's above it, in reality, it's somewhere in the middle, but if what you said is true (Acura clearly markets the 4G at its true competition with the 3 series, A4 etc), then Acura is simply being humble for this moment, until the next gen arrives.

You mentioned how the TL will compare with the A6 3.0T. Depending on what sources you are looking at, the acceleration results vary by quite a bit, and I'm sure you know it. So I'm not going to talk about it. How come you didn't mention about handling, where in terms of numbers, the TL demolishes the A6?

I had a quick look at SSFTSX's link, and found the following numbers for the A6.

Braking, 60–0 mph: 126 ft
Braking, 80–0 mph: 227 ft
Lateral accel (200-ft skidpad): 0.85g
Speed thru 700-ft slalom: 64.1 mph

For the TL (also from Road and Track):

Braking, 60–0 mph: 117 ft (Motortrend even got 108ft)
Braking, 80–0 mph: 204 ft
Lateral accel (200-ft skidpad): 0.91g
Speed thru 700-ft slalom: 67.4 mph

So is it really "disastrous"?

winstrolvtec

I always wanted to play this game, so by your logic the new E class doesn't belong in the segment either becuase even though it's bad ass looking it won't compete performance wise with just the 3.5 or how about the A6 3.2 FWD, I wouldn't be surprised if the TL FWD already outdoes that. We already know that the TL SH owns the braking and handling department and will easily compete with any version A6, but flat out dominates the 3.2, which of course will be what is fair to use considering the price point but even if you want to go down that road the 6MT version will be more than capable to compete with any engine. Even the TL auto is capable of a 0-60 of 5.9 and a 1/4 mile of 14.3-14.5, some of these guys even ran 5.5 seconds, and that's not the MT either. Audi has the 3.0 and v8 A6 at 0-60 in 5.9. I will even say that Audi's #'s are a bit naturally conservative, so you're gonna tell me it's not competitive and why does everyone insist the new TL is slow becuase the rags don't know how to launch it, do people honestly think it is no where near the level of performance the last gen TLS 5AT had, trap speeds are pretty much in line, that should say it all.


"The acceleration times of the V6- and V8-powered cars to 100 km/h are identical, yet the V8 uses substantially more fuel The new supercharged V6 also trounces the Mercedes-Benz E350's 3.5-liter V6 with its 268 hp and 258 lb-ft of torque, and can stand toe-to-toe with the BMW 535i's twin-turbo 3.0-liter inline-6 with its 300 hp and 300 lb-ft of torque." -- Edmunds
"A V6 quattro sedan timed a brisk 7.6 seconds 0-60 mph in our evaluation. It showed good highway passing reserve but annoyed at town speeds with sometimes tardy transmission response...A V8 sedan took just 6.5 seconds 0-60 and furnished ample power at all speeds, though some testers complained of imprecise low-speed throttle action." -- Consumer Guide
"With the V8, the A6 "claws it's way to a very impressive 0-60 mph time of about 6 seconds." -- Automobile.com

Don't these #'s seem a bit off, even as Acura owners we know that, biased or not, we give the credit where it's due, unfortunately we are not getting it in return.

winstrolvtec

I believe this car is setup to make some serious moves in this generation if necessary, if it does well and competition doesn't get too far than maybe not this time around, we know Acura, they will hold off. I like that Acura reserved the S label as in the past. I am not saying they pull it off but we have had nice upgrades come mmc in the 2nd and 3rd gen, even on the FWD paltfroms, so I am not ruling anything out, obviously it needed to be able to compete in between two segments for a reason, and it has been posted before about the ACC and CMBS already being hard wired into the TL's system display on the instrument panel. A rear sun shade, AFS, cooled seating and a good mmc and there you go, it's the current RL, add a bump in hp, with the new RL already out, there will be no marketing reason to hold back on the #'s. There's a good product for the new segment, no, not as good as it could have been, but under the circumstances, it's a good way to get their foot in the door.

Legend2TL

Acura's official press release for the 3G TL showed it's size and dimensions to the 5 series and made comparison's to it in the paragraphs. I have to look at the 4G and see what that used. So "many here" includes Acura Marketing, so your statement of "Acura clearly markets" is only your opinion.