A4 3.2 trounced by BMW 335d in Road & Track comparison
04-07-2009, 11:30 AM
#11
AudiWorld Super User
Yes, but you would get to the store 4 miles away 3.4 seconds quicker (the traffic lights and 40 mph speed limit account for the reduced difference).
04-07-2009, 11:32 AM
#12
3.0 TDI Anyone?
Perhaps this test will spur Audi to bring their 3.0 TDI across the pond to match up against the 335d. I would welcome having this engine as a choice. More torques and better mpg.
04-07-2009, 06:41 PM
#13
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: NJ/NYC
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to mention Audi's recent sales figures are buoyed by a brand new line (Q5), a brand new model (B8 A4) and a facelifted, rejuvenated A6 (now with the 3.0T engine), etc. There are no changes to the higher-volume BMW models for MY09 (minor facelift for the 3 series sedan, but powerplants remain the same), just the poorly selling, niche X6 and relatively smaller volume 7 series. So it all makes apples-to-apples comparisons a little difficult.
Interesting question, though. I'd like to know how the A4 3.2 is doing vs. its competitors.
04-07-2009, 06:48 PM
#14
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: NJ/NYC
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So which comparison does make sense for the A4 3.2? If not the 335d, should it be compared to the 335i? The 328i?
(Audi itself markets the 2.0T against the 328)
04-07-2009, 07:07 PM
#16
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Audi should just be content with 3 versions of the A4. Why have 4 versions with 4 different engines? Seems like a cost saving measure to use the new 3.0t across all the lines, including the Q5 and Q7. Lose the 3.2 all together, leaving: 2.0t as the base car, 3.0t for mid-range and go with the muscle car S/RS.
04-08-2009, 07:06 AM
#19
New Member
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The A4 did surprisingly well in acceleration (0-60 in 5.9), but the BMW was even quicker at 5.3 seconds. The Bimmer beat the A4 in every performance category. The A4 was judged to have the better automatic transmission and interior design, bigger interior room and trunk space, but the massive torque advantage of the BMW diesel was to much to overcome (425 vs. 243 lb-ft). The article concludes with yet another cry for more power for the V6 A4.
It appears that the 2009 A4 3.2 quattro would have been quite competitive against the 2006 255-hp 330i, but the world has changed a lot in 3 years.
I think Audi should drop the 3.0T engine from the A6 into the A4 ASAP, but obviously that creates a problem with the 2010 S4 essentially having the same engine. In retrospect, Audi should have tried harder to get more horses out of the 3.0T engine for the S4 (350 hp or more) so that a detuned 3.0T in the A4 would not infringe on S4 territory.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....d=7974&cid=145
It appears that the 2009 A4 3.2 quattro would have been quite competitive against the 2006 255-hp 330i, but the world has changed a lot in 3 years.
I think Audi should drop the 3.0T engine from the A6 into the A4 ASAP, but obviously that creates a problem with the 2010 S4 essentially having the same engine. In retrospect, Audi should have tried harder to get more horses out of the 3.0T engine for the S4 (350 hp or more) so that a detuned 3.0T in the A4 would not infringe on S4 territory.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....d=7974&cid=145
As you can imagine, this difference had a significant effect on the Audi's handling manners, as this A4 posted slalom, skidpad and braking numbers below both the BMW and the sport suspension-equipped A4 3.2 Quattro we tested in the October 2008 issue."
04-08-2009, 09:07 AM
#20
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: NJ/NYC
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts