ReedM

Mike:

Yes, for you in Southern California, the 540i would be just fine. I happen to think it is a great car, under the right conditions, but I like most all BMW's, back to a friend's '74 2002tii I wish I'd bought when he got tired of it. They have almost always been great cars (the 1600 could have been better, which got resolved when it evolved to the 2000 and 2002.). However, you said that "anybody" would prefer the 540i over the S4, without qualifying it, either.

I lived in north Texas for many years, where we hardly ever got snow, but got just awful ice storms, which were far worse for driving. When that happened, everybody who could get away with it just stayed home unless they absolutely had to go to work. Like Southern California, we rarely got rain, but when we did, it just made the road "treacherous" until the accumulated oil and dirt got washed off. Particularly with the "La Nina" effect, you never know where bad weather is going to pop up. That is why I made the point.

I now live in Colorado, where RWD car buyers are continually told that traction control is just as good as AWD, even in bad weather, just so the dealers can sell the only product they have to sell. It is true most of the year, but I have seen many BMW 5 & 7 series cars stuck by the side of the road in winter weather I have absolutely no problem with in a quattro. I have also pulled a neighbor's RWD Mercedes out of a snowy ditch with my quattro (backing up using a tow strap). I have driven FWD cars in snow, too. IMHO, they are better than RWD, but still not as good an AWD car, again especially when trying to slow down.

As for braking, I still contend that, when slowing down, the braking action transferred to all of the wheels is safer and easier to control than engine braking transferred to only one set of wheels, whether front or back. Maybe it's just a personal preference, but after driving quattros for over 15 years, I find that I prefer the "feel" of all four wheels driving/braking, even on dry pavement (especially in high cross winds). Yes, ABS levels the playing field somewhat, but I like overkill, especially when it comes to slowing down. I'll take every advantage they can design into the car. I happen to think BMW should be selling an AWD car, especially in the areas that get bad weather. They sell RWD cars with traction control everywhere and contend that it's equivalent, which, IMHO, it is not. There are also many people in Colorado who think all weather tires are as good as snow tires, even on RWD's. They find out just how wrong they are when it snows. I ALWAYS put snow tires on my quattros and I've never gotten stuck yet. If I am looking at it in a "simplistic" way, please educate me and the other readers. I am always interested in learning something new.

Cold air is denser and therefore makes more HP in either case, whether it is being squeezed by a turbo-charged or sucked into an engine. Why else would mfgs. put cold air intake systems on naturally aspirated cars to make more HP, as they have done since the middle 50's? It also helps the turbo to make more power, because it is denser and colder before it is squeezed by the turbo, which heats it up considerably. The cold air also helps make the intercoolers more efficient at getting rid of that heat. The effect is like having a larger intercooler, I have been told, which should allow more boost within parameters, although I do not know how much more. I admit that I am NOT a mechanical engineer, so my statements are based on what I have been told by engineers I know. Any mechanical engineers who can answer that question?

Thanks for the dialog. Perhaps I should have asked the person posing the question to qualify it before responding to your posting. Saying that "anybody" would prefer a 540i over an S4 was too general, IMHO, especially considering the diverse weather conditions many parts of the US and Canada get and that is why I said what I did. The price has absolutely no bearing to me, except that I find the S4 price easier to swallow. For that much more money over an S4, I would personally buy an A8 but, again, I have specific winter driving needs that you use another vehicle for.

You will love your S4 and yes, it is cramped in the back. I will be interested in hearing your opinions of it after owning and living with one. I continue to be impressed with mine, especially with the twin turbos, which really do give you a nice fat torque curve that mimcs a larger, naturally aspirated engine as well as possible. I wish my S4 had the room our A6 has, but I don't use the back seat once in my car but maybe every five years, and when I need to we just take the A6.

Boy, I wish it was 80 degrees here right now, but our ski resorts are suffering enough as it is, as we've had a very mild Fall/early Winter. I still have ice on my driveway from the last snowstorm, though, and it was plowed at the time it snowed. My S4 just laughs at it. (I live at 7,400 feet and get a LOT of snow, although in small amounts.).

Thanks again. Good discussion.

Mike

You are correct about the cold air and all cars. I have always been under the impression that a turbo with an intercooler is able to make better use of the cold ambient air (over a normally aspirated engine) because it uses the air to air intercooler to it's advantage. Maybe I'm wrong.

I'm also looking forward to the S4. I've had my 328i for two years and I love taking it on the track with the BMW Car Club of America (I just did Laguna Seca three weeks ago). I am planning on taking the Audi out as well when I get it. It will be interesting to see how it holds up against the 325i's, 328i's and M3's under track conditions. I am sure I can give my friends some runs for their money.

I'm a technology freak, so even though I love my inline-6, the 5v twin-turbo V6 is calling me.

Thanks for the conversation.

vertigo

Cuz they got spanked by a Volvo Wagon! ;-p nt

Silver S4

I didn't know that you could say it that way an dhave it mean the same thing the 7th time as it did the 1st time. Interesting...

Sorry it's Friday and I am being a sarcastic SOB.

Oh yeah the point, the 540i is superior in it's class and before anybody get their underware all bunged up, you can't compare the two cars, it's not a fair comparison to being with.

ReedM

Yeah, you're right. It was late and I went on way too long. Sorry for wasting the bandwidth.

Vijay

How about a chipped A6 2.7T. All the luxury of the 540i, Quattro, faster, and still a lot less money.

Prom

A buddy of mine owns a 540i six speed. If money wasn't an issue, then the 540 wins. It's faster, looks better IMO and provides tail whipping fun. Although AWD makes sense for better grip, anyone who's ever been karting knows how much fun a rear wheel drive car (with enough power) is. I thought with less weight my S4 can keep up, but 324 lbs of torque is just too much for the S4. Handling and feel are much better and control is outstanding. Of course it costs over $10,000 more and you can probably beat it with a chipped S4 but the fact that it has such a split personality, makes it better. For the price, the S4 makes more sense but if you got the cash, you'll be happier with the 540i. Hell get the M5 and really knock yourself out. If only Audi brought the RS-4 here, then of course the answer to your question would've been a no brainer.

Zster

i don't agree with you about the braking action. in modern engines it is better to brake without the help of the engine since brake wearouts are alot cheaper then engine wearouts . the only time when you would use your engine to slow down would be in long downhill rides where you don't want to heat up your brakes may heat up too much.
in the past when power brakes did not exist, using your engine for braking was important. nowadays it is just a bad habit .

Zster

ReedM

I live in the Colorado foothills, with Denver 1/4 mile BELOW me in elevation. I go up and down big and little hills all the time, so if I didn't use engine braking, I would go through brake pads like you wouldn't believe. I still have to replace them more often than I'd like. We laugh at tourists who are riding their brakes all the way down Mount Vernon canyon into Denver because they have never heard of downshifting, either a stick or an automatic. At least they're just ruining a rental car's brakes usually. That's what living in the flatlands will do to you. I grew up in north Texas and never had to downshift for hills, because there weren't that many! Up here you even have to downshift automatics to prevent premature brake wear.

Granted, an engine may be more expensive to rebuild compared to replacing brake pads, but isn't that a personal decision? Does anybody know how much faster using the engine as a brake wears it out (in miles?). Isn't it all relative anyway? I could have bought a MUCH cheaper (and slower) car than my S4 and still get around just fine, but I felt the added expense is definitely worth the performance difference.

I've always been told that using the engine to slow down occasionally is good for it because it forces oil up past the rings and lubricates the cylinder walls. Is that belief no longer correct either with modern engines?

Since the engine is pumping air as a brake but not really working, I always believed that it helps it cool down faster to use it as a brake. My oil & water temperature gauge readings support this theory. I have to climb that 1/4 mile elevation change to get home from Denver, but I after I get off the freeway I crest a hill and then have a one mile light downhill grade to my house (all paved, thankfully). It's great for cooling a motor down (especially turbos) after making it work extra hard to make that hill at 65+ mph, especially in the summer. Going out, it makes the car work a little, then continue to warm up while going downhill to the entrance ramp. Then I can really accelerate hard to get on the freeway as everything is nice and warmed up. Perfect! The views at that elevation aren't bad, either.

I don't understand why using my engine for braking is a "bad" habit. If I am using (or at least have available) two braking sources (engine + brakes), I consider that a safety factor, especially on snow and ice. Please elaborate.

I just like the feel of the engine slowing down the car, I guess from my days of riding two stroke dirtbikes and using a compression release. It felt much better (more in control?) when going down a steep downhill. Anybody else remember using those? They made the funniest noise when working, kind of like a giant "raspberry". Do two stroke dirt bikes still use them? Do two stroke dirt bikes even exist anymore? I know two stroke street bikes were outlawed for dirty emissions years ago.

Any engineers out there to resolve these questions? I only know what I like to do, and I don't think that my cars wear out any quicker than "normal".

Marcus Frost

I don't think BMW ran a car in 97 when Audi was #1...