robg

You could argue both ways---and it could go either way. I do have a feeling that a quattro Audi would easily beat an XI BMW in a comparo test. It gets a little trickier if you make performance a bigger criteria-- do you choose a quattro to go against a RWD BMW because it gives the A4 a handling edge-- or should you compare apples to appes and compare 2wd to 2wd. Personally, I'd do it based on price-- so if you can get a 3.0 quattro for the same price as a RWD bimmer, than they should be compared. Perhaps a FWD CVT would actually do better in a comparison test though. No matter what, people on both sides will find a flaw and claim that if the car they like in the test came with this or that option it would've tilted the balance.

THat's the main reason why i don't put much stock in these comparisons. The cars are so close that little changes in deals you can get, options you like, etc.. can make all the difference. The comparisons are almost meaningless unless they're comparing the cars specced exactly they way you would order them.

I agree that its lame that C&D didn't push harder to get an IS300 w/ 17" wheels. It might've won the whole test. For my situation a 325i w/ sp was the best choice- but again, it was very small, specific things that made it right for me as opposed to the IS or the A4. Well- I admit that I find the IS styling hard to stomach too.

EricPA

<img src="http://media7.motorcities.com/01JSA395333247A.jpeg">

Ralphie

Not to take anything away from the 330i - it's an awesome car... but still.

To C&D's credit, they did state that they were testing cars with manual transmissions:

"... a collection of sports sedans all linked by as-tested prices between $33,896 and $40,235; punchy powerplants in the 210-to-231-hp range; and offering five- or six-speed <b><i>manual</i></b> transmissions."


Which begs the question... how come Audi doesn't offer the 3.0 in a FrontTrak Manual? There's a 1.8T FrontTrak Manual.

Ralphie

Even the title of that article was "The Unfair Fight"

bacccc

Hmm, if snow were on those WV roads, well lets just say that the Bimmer would need some body work!

MIS_A4

The comparison was between two $40,000 cars against a $25,000 car. Add up dollar per dollar and the BMW lost hands down.

TV88

In the comparo b/w the S4, 330xi, and the WRX, the S4 was the winner. What's a 330xi? Isn't it basically BMW's awd version of the 330 that placed first, just ahead of the A4 3.0? So my point is if you want all wheel drive then Audi's your car. If you want a slightly sharper driving experience then its BMW.

I do have a bit of a problem with C/D saying there isn't a better $40k sports sedan than the BMW. What about the S4???

NMAudi

As it stands, Audi got written up rather well. From the comments here I thought that the A4 had come in last, not second. Unfortunately, for us to experience the benefits of our Quattro we have to pay the price (heavier car). As far as that IS300 is concerned, I'll bet Lexus had other reasons for not supplying their car with 17" wheels (didn't they do that same thing on another comparo in the recent past with the reviewers tauting the same reasons for why it didn't do even better?).

Frank B

in real life road conditions. C&D said the BMW "seems capable of performing in every form of motorsport--except perhaps the Baja 100 --with only minor modifications,...".

Translated that means the BMW does not perform in real life road conditions such as rain, snow, etc.

Also, I don't see how C&D could rate a car with such light steering number one. Most people will never use their car on the track, but properly weighted steering is important all the time.

I drove the 330 before buying my S4 and in normal driving the BMW felt detached from the road.

Frank B

Oaktree

Thats a TT