Bada Bing

The 330i trounced the 2.0T qms. They went with the 2.0T since the 3.2 doesn't come in a 6-speed manual. Tests like this are why Audi should have come out with the stick shift version of the 3.2 right away. By the time the 6MT version comes out, it's old news and all these comparsion tests are over with.<ul><li><a href="http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=106052/pageId=64255">6-speed sports sedan comparo</a></li></ul>

Tanner

They either revved it too high and the clutch slipped, or the clutch was already abused, but there is no way it should have only achieved a 7.7s from 0-60mph assuming everything is working and they know how to launch an AWD car.

Audi claims a 7.2s 0-60 which isn't too far from some other tests I've read for the sedan.

jsamans

Actually Audi claims 6.8 seconds 0-60 for the 3.2 Avant so they were way, way off. They say the 2.0T Avant with Tiptronic will even do a 7.6...

Dano_SL

Doh!!!!

audixx

for three months out of the year. That leaves nine months (for those BMW'ers who care to count) the Audi is a better all around car for the majority of the year.

This article only confirms, BMW... So what.

Audi - Keep your eye on the prize, time will show the world who "truely" is the best. And of course - healthy competition will only help "you" and "I" - the consumers of these products.

bostonasphalt2

hence why I ordered a 330i. but to each their own

MB The Body

i say the bmw is uglier ha

AnimaTTor

... They are in completely different segments. The BMW has a range topping 6 cylinder, while the A4 has the base 4 cylinder.

Any respictable car reviewer would have waited a couple of months for the A4 3.2 manual to come out, and then write a proper comparo.

That is precisely what more respectable car magazines such as 'Car and Driver' and Road &amp; Track' are doing.

Lame.

jsamans

I think the 330i is about the same as the 3.2 A4, except IMO uglier inside and out. Comparing it to the 4 cylinder 2.0 A4 isn't really fair...especially since it matches up price-wise more with the 3.2.

I didn't even consider BMW because of the new styling. Matter of taste I guess (i.e. just as many people don't like the new Audi grille).

And the quattro is huge for me here in the pacific NW.

synchronicity_ii

they ALWAYS get the slowest times on acceleration numbers from any site i have ever seen. they tested the subaru sti at 5.8 to 60 (everyone else manages to get well below 5.0), the slk 55 amg at 5.1 to 60 (the 350 can almost do that, the 55 amg is more around 4.6), the rx-8 at 7.0 to 60 (i've seen well below 6.0), the a6 3.2 at 7.9 (audi claims 7.1, which is very believable). all in all edmunds can't get numbers consistant with any other professional car review source, which usuallys vary from one another with +/- .3 seconds for driver, timing device, temp, and altitude differences, as well as engine break in. for some reason they can't drive manual transmissions or automatics.