Deutschdan

Happy New Year everyone.

My brother and I live in different parts of the country. When we get together, we test drive cars. Last weekend was no exception. (BTW, I posted this in the A4 forum as well, but I hang out with you guys and thought that we might enjoy discussing this.)

We test drove the A4 3.0 CVT and the Jaguar X-type 3.0. Both are excellent cars. Both are about the same size, cost, engine displacement. The A4 is FWD, the Jag is AWD. (Hmm, that's ironic.) The new A4 is roomy and I prefer it to the current A6. (I like the C4 platform better than the C5.)

The CVT takes some getting used to - it propels the car well, but sounds "different." My brother said that it sounded like the transmission was slipping. Well, when I floored it, the RPM's soared to 5,000 and then came back down to 3 or 4K. I actually thought that it worked well when manually shifted. Unlike the tiptronic/shiftronic/multitronics of the past where shifts were sluggish, this was CRISP. In fact, I would suggest that Audi offer different programs: full CVT, shift like an automatic transmission. I really liked how the car handled.

The Jag is a beautiful car. I think the Audi has it beat in terms of interior design, but ... I think that the Jag is probably a better driving car. These cars are VERY closely matched. The A4 has some torque steer, whereas the Jag with the all wheel drive has none. In fact, Jag set the X-type up with a 40/60 split, so the car feels like a rear wheel drive. And the cat gets up and scoots. The A4 does have better low-end power. I looked at the torque curves and the A4 has more torque at 1000 RPMs and it peaks at about 3K, whereas the Jag peaks at 4500 RPM.

Both cars are excellent. I couldn't tell you which is a better car. It might just be the Jag. I never thought I'd say that. I'm an Audi fan, and I've always thought of Jags, as a ladies car, or an old persons car.

audimotion

I've driven the jag also, and had a similar response...great car, good value, and nice looks...the only problem is the car rides on a ford contour chassis...after years of use, one may wonder if this chassis is strong enough to hold up "vault tight" like an audi...
I have not driven the new A-4 though, but if it's better than the old..I'm sure it would be the superior car over the years.

Kevin(100csq)

a few auto journalists have pointed out how the quality and to a lesser degree performance are more like that of a ford then what one should expect from jaguar...<ul><li><a href="http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/roadtests/roadtest/48463/article.html">x-type roadtest</a></li></ul>

Deutschdan

Well, that was an excellent article. However, the sample I drove was tight, not a single rattle. It did have the problem with lacking low-end torque. The dash was not as good as the Audi, but the fit and finish were excellent. The brakes were excellent. And over 25 mph, the engine response was excellent. Also, the transmission problems which Edmunds noted, which bug the heck out of me, were totally absent.

Maybe I would have noted the same problems they did if I could have kept it a week. I'm curious what the sports suspension would be like, because the car didn't seem to need it.

Decolliber

Take one Ford Contour, add AWD, beefed up engine and suspension, leather interior, and you have an X type Jag. A good scam if you can get away with it ... But wait a minute, aren't Audis just rebadged Passats?

Kevin(100csq)

Id probably take a fully loaded passat 4motion over an x-type

audimotion

Look at it this way..Passat and an A-4 are similar cars, and people who buy them could probably afford either one, and maint. either one.. now look at the Contour and the new jag...New contour loaded is probably around 16,000..and a fully loaded AWD jag is probably 35-40,000....there is a SLIGHT difference between audi & VW compared to Ford & Jag....

Vitor

<center><img src="http://www.cvt.com.sapo.pt/index_images/V_belt.gif"></center><p>Hello all,
As we all agree, the CVT is advantagous compared to the MT, -but how much? -Is CVT 50% better than MT? or -is it just 10%

better? Is is it possible to estimate it? How much energy dissipation (inherent to friction drives) is allowable? Well, in

order try to answer some of these questions, I did some calculations.
I concluded that, (theoretically), the CVT may be 35% more performant than the MT.
I placed these calculations on a new page of www.cvt.com.sapo.pt . If you have time please visit it. I hope that this may me

a usefull argument to point out against the most CVT opponents, such as some transmission manufacturers.
Regards,
Vitor<ul><li><a href="http://www.cvt.com.sapo.pt">http://www.cvt.com.sapo.pt</a></li></ul>