2017 A4 vs 2016 Q50 vs 2016 Mercedes C Class
08-04-2016, 03:28 PM
#1
AudiWorld Newcomer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2017 A4 vs 2016 Q50 vs 2016 Mercedes C Class
Has anyone test driven the 2016 Q50 and/or Mercedes C Class and compared with 2017 A4? If so, what are your thoughts on those other cars? I am in the market for a new car and I like the fact that the A4 is loaded with technology and features that I am looking for. However, the exterior/interior design of those other cars are a bit more modern and sporty compared to the A4.
08-04-2016, 04:34 PM
#2
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone test driven the 2016 Q50 and/or Mercedes C Class and compared with 2017 A4? If so, what are your thoughts on those other cars? I am in the market for a new car and I like the fact that the A4 is loaded with technology and features that I am looking for. However, the exterior/interior design of those other cars are a bit more modern and sporty compared to the A4.
08-04-2016, 04:44 PM
#3
AudiWorld Senior Member
Has anyone test driven the 2016 Q50 and/or Mercedes C Class and compared with 2017 A4? If so, what are your thoughts on those other cars? I am in the market for a new car and I like the fact that the A4 is loaded with technology and features that I am looking for. However, the exterior/interior design of those other cars are a bit more modern and sporty compared to the A4.
C300:
- very expensive (in Canada) when you try to option it out like the A4 'Technik' (which is roughly but not exactly identical to the US market 'Prestige'. If you want real leather, navigation, safety gizmos, etc., it adds up big time.
- suspension is not great on rougher roads; I suspect the run-flats are to blame, though the car I drove did have the sport package (apparently almost all Canadian inventory cars do). In the U.S. market there is a softer 'luxury' suspension and smaller rims that comes with the traditional grille; the Canadian equivalent of that package does not include the softer suspension.
The Q50 with the 2.0T would probably have been my runner-up, but I guess it didn't really have any great selling points over the A4. Dealer was ... opaque (the kind where I tell the dude I want a quote on a 48-month lease with $0 down, and he comes back from the manager with a number and a down payment for a 36 month lease scribbled on the piece of paper and asks me how I feel about that payment, as if I was born yesterday and didn't know how to properly assess a Canadian-style lease deal. Sheesh). Light-coloured interior would require a custom order (only black allowed for inventory cars in Canada!). Exterior colour selection was... mediocre.
Funny thing is, in terms of styling, I thought the A4 and its mature, elegant, understated look was by far the best looking car. I loved MB styling in the days of the W203 and W220, but since then, their styling hasn't been great in my view.
A4 won because it had the best technology, the best ride, a nice drivetrain (with a much more gentle start-stop system), and the best looks. No run-flats. And I love bright blue cars - while the scuba blue is not THAT bright, it's a lot brighter than what either Infiniti or MB offer...
08-04-2016, 06:17 PM
#4
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would agree that the interior of the Mercedes C-Class is more elegant, but I don't think it is more sporty. The Audi is the more sporty of the two vehicles, especially in how it drives.
As for the technology, the Mercedes just does not have the same level of tech as the A4. The new E-Class has similar tech to the A4, so I'm sure it will come to the C-Class at some point, but we are not there yet.
Overall, other than interior design, I could not find another reason why the C-Class was better, and yet it is significantly more expensive, around $5k more for equal equipment -- things like leather seats and a sunroof that are standard on the A4 are pricey options on the C-Class.
My A4 First Edition had an MSRP of $50k. Pricing a C300 out with the same equipment that I have comes to $55,800, and you would still be missing the virtual cockpit and parking censors. (Virtual Cockpit is not available, but a heads up display could be substituted for around $900. The Parking censors only come as part of the parking packing for $1200 which also includes parking assist)
As for the technology, the Mercedes just does not have the same level of tech as the A4. The new E-Class has similar tech to the A4, so I'm sure it will come to the C-Class at some point, but we are not there yet.
Overall, other than interior design, I could not find another reason why the C-Class was better, and yet it is significantly more expensive, around $5k more for equal equipment -- things like leather seats and a sunroof that are standard on the A4 are pricey options on the C-Class.
My A4 First Edition had an MSRP of $50k. Pricing a C300 out with the same equipment that I have comes to $55,800, and you would still be missing the virtual cockpit and parking censors. (Virtual Cockpit is not available, but a heads up display could be substituted for around $900. The Parking censors only come as part of the parking packing for $1200 which also includes parking assist)
Last edited by Eric5273; 08-04-2016 at 06:19 PM.
08-04-2016, 06:45 PM
#5
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was considering the C450 AMG sport and not the C300. Obviously the C450 has more power than the A4, but the A4 is faster than the C300 and feels more sporty. Ultimately the technology on the A4 made all the difference for me. The inside of the C class is nicer, but not by much. The tech on the A4 is just leaps ahead (especially with virtual cockpit, Android Auto, Apple CarPlay, and drivers assistance).
I spent a few weeks with a Q50 loaner from Infiniti while my G37 Coupe was getting work done. The Q50 feels much bigger than the C or the A4, so that's good. But the tech is way behind. Their smartphone integration is pretty useless. Their navigation is no where near Audi or BMW. They have the dual screen setup, which is kind of cool but there is not much use from both screens. The Audi virtual + traditional screen is much better. The V6 has more power than the A4 and sounds much nicer, but I feel the A4 is sportier. And I did drive the sh** out of that Q50 while I had it
I spent a few weeks with a Q50 loaner from Infiniti while my G37 Coupe was getting work done. The Q50 feels much bigger than the C or the A4, so that's good. But the tech is way behind. Their smartphone integration is pretty useless. Their navigation is no where near Audi or BMW. They have the dual screen setup, which is kind of cool but there is not much use from both screens. The Audi virtual + traditional screen is much better. The V6 has more power than the A4 and sounds much nicer, but I feel the A4 is sportier. And I did drive the sh** out of that Q50 while I had it
08-04-2016, 07:23 PM
#6
AudiWorld Member
I posted in one of the other threads, but... my thoughts, having looked at both.
C300:
- very expensive (in Canada) when you try to option it out like the A4 'Technik' (which is roughly but not exactly identical to the US market 'Prestige'. If you want real leather, navigation, safety gizmos, etc., it adds up big time.
- suspension is not great on rougher roads; I suspect the run-flats are to blame, though the car I drove did have the sport package (apparently almost all Canadian inventory cars do). In the U.S. market there is a softer 'luxury' suspension and smaller rims that comes with the traditional grille; the Canadian equivalent of that package does not include the softer suspension.
The Q50 with the 2.0T would probably have been my runner-up, but I guess it didn't really have any great selling points over the A4. Dealer was ... opaque (the kind where I tell the dude I want a quote on a 48-month lease with $0 down, and he comes back from the manager with a number and a down payment for a 36 month lease scribbled on the piece of paper and asks me how I feel about that payment, as if I was born yesterday and didn't know how to properly assess a Canadian-style lease deal. Sheesh). Light-coloured interior would require a custom order (only black allowed for inventory cars in Canada!). Exterior colour selection was... mediocre.
Funny thing is, in terms of styling, I thought the A4 and its mature, elegant, understated look was by far the best looking car. I loved MB styling in the days of the W203 and W220, but since then, their styling hasn't been great in my view.
A4 won because it had the best technology, the best ride, a nice drivetrain (with a much more gentle start-stop system), and the best looks. No run-flats. And I love bright blue cars - while the scuba blue is not THAT bright, it's a lot brighter than what either Infiniti or MB offer...
C300:
- very expensive (in Canada) when you try to option it out like the A4 'Technik' (which is roughly but not exactly identical to the US market 'Prestige'. If you want real leather, navigation, safety gizmos, etc., it adds up big time.
- suspension is not great on rougher roads; I suspect the run-flats are to blame, though the car I drove did have the sport package (apparently almost all Canadian inventory cars do). In the U.S. market there is a softer 'luxury' suspension and smaller rims that comes with the traditional grille; the Canadian equivalent of that package does not include the softer suspension.
The Q50 with the 2.0T would probably have been my runner-up, but I guess it didn't really have any great selling points over the A4. Dealer was ... opaque (the kind where I tell the dude I want a quote on a 48-month lease with $0 down, and he comes back from the manager with a number and a down payment for a 36 month lease scribbled on the piece of paper and asks me how I feel about that payment, as if I was born yesterday and didn't know how to properly assess a Canadian-style lease deal. Sheesh). Light-coloured interior would require a custom order (only black allowed for inventory cars in Canada!). Exterior colour selection was... mediocre.
Funny thing is, in terms of styling, I thought the A4 and its mature, elegant, understated look was by far the best looking car. I loved MB styling in the days of the W203 and W220, but since then, their styling hasn't been great in my view.
A4 won because it had the best technology, the best ride, a nice drivetrain (with a much more gentle start-stop system), and the best looks. No run-flats. And I love bright blue cars - while the scuba blue is not THAT bright, it's a lot brighter than what either Infiniti or MB offer...
08-04-2016, 09:02 PM
#7
They are all good choices, you can't go wrong with any of them. At that point, I just think it comes down to what styling you like. That of course is subjective, so your call.
Personally, I'd rank them like this: A4- a shade boring, elegant, modern, somewhat sporty, clean. MBZ: dumpy, soft, rounded, elegant, luxurious. Infiniti: Dated, conservative, unexciting.
Personally, I'd rank them like this: A4- a shade boring, elegant, modern, somewhat sporty, clean. MBZ: dumpy, soft, rounded, elegant, luxurious. Infiniti: Dated, conservative, unexciting.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post