[Chaos76]

Hello all,
Has anyone had a chance ot read the recent Road & Track review of the A4 3.0? Don't have the issue, but it's the most current one with the new SL500 on the cover.
I am a long time fan of R&T and the poorly written, extremely disappointing article, painted a less than stellar picture of the A4 - a very inaccurate depiction of the vehicle in my opinion.
I'm a dcurrent BMW driver and in the market for a new vehicle. I drove an A4 3.0 (6spd) this past weekend and absolutely loved the car. After driving and shopping several different makes & models, I decided the Audi is the choice for me, I just can't beat the price, performance, good looks, beautiful interior and awd.
Was wondering if anyone has read the article or can offer insight as what R&T might have been thinking when they published it? They had very few positive comments to make on the car, and seemingly focused only on negatives... negatives that I didn't even notice when I drove the car... they even gave a 6spd 3.0 a zero to 60mph time of 7.7sec?!?! Puzzling.

 

[Richard Picard]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Chaos76)

Haudi!
I too was disappointed with the review. I did like the pictures, though

I also have to wonder about the 0-60 posted time

I haven't driven the new A4 yet (too tempting). I'll stick with my '01 1.8T for the time being. Sure do like the new A4s, though.
Drive safe.
Rich

 

[A4Jetta]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Chaos76)

I have a feeling that R&T has gone downhill since they changed to wide page layout. Their writings and articles didn't seem to match its heyday.

 

[peppeVR6]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (A4Jetta)

It's funny because I was very dissapointed with the review and still went out the next day and leased a new A4. I didn't get the V6 engine because unfortunately it was out of my price range. That article was trash. I drove the BMW 325i and it didn't even compare. The Audi outhandles it and the interior in the BMW is no match for the Audi's. Don't get me wrong I love BMW's but Audi's are SWEET!! The A4 1.8T will do 0-60 in the time the article listed for the V6 engine. I bet the V6 does it in the low 7's and maybe even high 6's. Boo to Road and Track! May my GTI RIP and to the new owner God bless you and good luck because you will need it!

 

[Vintage Racer]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Chaos76)

Hello. Yes I have read the review of the new Audi in Road and Track. I felt it was a good article but the R&T staff was not too thrilled about the car to say the least. I too was very disappointed in the 0-60 time for this new model. Realizing that 0-60 is not the ultimate parameter that should be used for evaluating a car I consider it to be a useful number. I am currently driving a 1991 Mitsubishi Galant VR4 and will soon need a replacement as I have logged 154K miles to date. This car was capable of 0-60 in 6.5 seconds, my car before that was a 16V Scirocco that could do a 7.7, which matches the numbers that Road and Track listed for the new Audi. I would like my next car to at least match the performance that my Mitsubishi offered. When I purchase my next car I want to stay with 4WD so my choices are limited, I really like the A4 but not sure I could live with the lackluster performance. Maybe I just need to look for a used S4. Hopefully some other magazines will be able to get better performance figures from this beautiful new car!

 

[Eric]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Chaos76)

Ok, R&T clearly made a mistake regarding the 0-60 time for the 6-speed. Audi claims a 7.7 second time for the Tip and a 6.9 seccond time for the 6-speed. This 6-speed time was backed up by Car&Driver in their October 2001 review of a 3.0Q 6-speed. Their 0-60 time was 6.8 seconds.
As far as the sporty issue, well consider this. R&T reports a skidpad rating of .84g for the 3.0Q and .80g for the old 2.8Q. C&D reports a skidpad rating of .82g for the 3.0Q and .80 for the 2.8Q. All of these cars were equipped with the sport package. In addition, slalom speeds for the 3.0Q are faster than the 2.8Q and the turning circle figures are equal. Yes, maybe the car does not feel as sporty but the numbers tell a different story.

 

[VR6guy]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Chaos76)

Road & Track's criticisms centered on these issues: vague shift action, fussy HVAC/stereo controls, lack of low end torque, fading brakes and overall vehicle mass. Furthermore, they posit that the new model simply lacks the sportive feel of the old version. Personally, I feel their review is spot-on. When compared to a similarly equipped 2001 2.8, this test car gained a staggering 500 pounds

That'll take the sportive right out of any car in a hurry and is probably largely responsible for the fading binders. That Audi could let the car get so flabby is beyond my comprehension. The engine came in for criticism because for all of it's high-tech wizardry, the torque curve isn't very linear. Again, I agree. The 3.0 is indeed powerful and smooth, but lacks the low-end grunt of, say, a VR6 that makes tooling around town so effortless. Several editors complained about the shifter while at least one gave it positive marks. Certainly when held to the standard of the industry, namely BMW, Audi has a ways to go in this department. Go drive a 330i and A4 back-to-back. You will understand immediately. As for the fussy dash, again I agree. The car simply has too many buttons on the dash and the climate control system is not user-friendly. Two good old fashioned rotary dials would cure that in a hurry. The article really doesn't pan the car, far from it. They complimented the styling and raved about the interior, aside from the fact that the front seat accomodations seemed too narrow. Remember all the criticism the 3-series came in for when it was all-new on '99? Automotive writers everywhere panned the overboosted steering and lack of "edginess" lost in the translation form the e36 platform. Yet that car still continues to win every comparison test I see it in and draws accolades from everywhere. Don't worry, the new A4 is a fine car and will do well in future comparison tests where it will likely find itself trailing the 3-series but not by much. Now if only they could trim 400 pounds or so, that might be a different story.

 

[Chaos76]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (VR6guy)

Everyone made some great points, thanks for the input!
Just to add to the weight issue mentioned by VR6guy, R&T lists the test weight at 3800lbs(!) while Audi's own brochure has the same vehicle weighing in at 3583, I'm a pretty bright guy, but for the life of me I can't figure out how the car gained over 200lbs - unless they weighed it with driver (jk). Differences like this and the odd 0-60 time, in my opinion, speaks to the over-all credibility of the article.
For someone who is currently on the fence between a 330i and an A4 3.0, the article did little to help me make up my mind. I would assume the general preference here is for Audi's, but no one can deny that BMW makes a great machine as well... if only all of life's decisions were this difficult!

 

[Eric]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Chaos76)

No doubt the 02' weighs more than the 01'. How much is the question. R&T says 500 pounds. Huh, Audi figures suggest that the 6-speed 3.0Q is 199 pounds more than the 5-speed 2.8Q and the Tip 3.0Q is 122 pounds more than the Tip 2.8Q. Who to believe. Considering that the 3.0 engine weighs 44lbs LESS than the 2.8, and the weight reduction of the suspension, I feel the Audi numbers are more realistic. Who knows. All I know is the the 3.0 is fun to drive, the car handles very well for an OEM sport suspension, and that I am not going to buy the next gen S4. That's right, this car is too big for my likes. The same can be said for the 1st gen A4/S4. Having driven and tossed my Jetta around for 5+ years driving a heavier/bigger car like the old and new A4's in too much work.

Again, I love my new 3.0 but it's opened my eyes to another (smaller) Audi. The TT. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

 

[LelloBeetle]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Eric)

quote:[HR][/HR]...I love my new 3.0 but it's opened my eyes to another (smaller) Audi. The TT. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif [HR][/HR]​

I tend to agree. I drove the '02 A4 in 1.8TQM and 3.0QM configurations along with the TT in 1.8T 180hpQM and 225hpQM configurations just a few months ago. I went in to see the A4 but kept coming to the TT because without real world backseat usability (everyone in my family is tall) what's the point? Ultimately you're left with two front seats and why not get the more "tossable" TT?
I was disappointed with the article and agree that the numbers certainly seem suspicious. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif

 

[BosJetta]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (LelloBeetle)

The R&T article is nothing compared to the luxo-car comparison test in this month's Consumer Reports. The Audi 3.0 Tiptronic has a 0-60 time of 8.3, and (of course it would happen to CR) the A4 has SEVERAL electrical problems that leave them STRANDED and with numerous trips back to the dealer.
So much for building a better reputation... how do magazines get their hands on these lemons?


[Modified by BosJetta, 11:14 AM 2-14-2002]

 

[VR6guy]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (BosJetta)

quote:[HR][/HR]
So much for building a better reputation... how do magazines get their hands on these lemons?

[Modified by BosJetta, 11:14 AM 2-14-2002][HR][/HR]​

It ain't just the magazines that get hold of them, I had one, a 99.5 1.8TQST that had problems of every kind. Audi had to buy it back but what a pain in the butt

 

[hotani]

A4 and passat

quote:[HR][/HR]
The R&T article is nothing compared to the luxo-car comparison test in this month's Consumer Reports. The Audi 3.0 Tiptronic has a 0-60 time of 8.3, and (of course it would happen to CR) the A4 has SEVERAL electrical problems that leave them STRANDED and with numerous trips back to the dealer.
[HR][/HR]​

Yeah, I was pretty shocked to read that in CR. They also said that the Passat scored higher than all the cars they tested. Being a passat owner, I think its cool to read that - but at the same time, I am just itching for the day when I can get my hands on a 1.8TQ B6 A4 avant!

 

[Levish]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Eric)

quote:[HR][/HR]No doubt the 02' weighs more than the 01'. How much is the question. R&T says 500 pounds. Huh, Audi figures suggest that the 6-speed 3.0Q is 199 pounds more than the 5-speed 2.8Q and the Tip 3.0Q is 122 pounds more than the Tip 2.8Q.[HR][/HR]​

I went to kbb.com and plugged in the following 2 cars
02 A4 1.8tqm .... 3406 pounds
01 A4 1.8tqm .... 3241 pounds
these numbers are similar to the ones posted on the Audi USA website
the difference in otherwise identical drivetrain cars?!!?! a whopping 164 pounds ... I was expecting more along the lines of 400 pounds
I think people assume the new car is so much heavier only because it is a bigger car volume wise


[Modified by Levish, 2:38 PM 2-18-2002]

 

[Levish]

Re: Recent Road & track Review of A4 3.0 (Levish)

and here are the numbers for the 3.0
02 A4 3.0QM ... 3583 pounds
01 A4 3.0QM ... 3384 pounds
a ~200 pound weight difference