phred

Jon Shafer, a well-known BMW salesman from Santa Barbara who is always on the BMW board (their version of April), has this to say about leasing Audi vs. BMW: "I'm a lessee, and with Audi's weak residual values (relatively speaking) there would be no way for me to acquire a fully-loaded model for $297.50/mo. (including tax) with no down payment... Sure I get a "special" deal, but apples-to-apples you can lease a $35K Bimmer for what it costs to lease a $29K Audi. Audi may represent a substantial value (in terms of "bang-for-the-buck") for the "cash buyer", but not for those of us who choose to lease our vehicles..."

Points to ponder, unless you are taking advantage of a subsidizied AoA lease.

xristy

I thought typical Audis have a somewhat better residual than equivalent BMWs?

pablo1

The BMW is much more expensive to lease than an A6 4.2. Apples to apples, the Bimmer is significantly more expensive, has a much higher interest rate, and does not provide the same level of eqhipment (at a higher price). This turns out to over $100/month more for the Bimmer. I love BMW's but this is the truth.

Jerry K

Here are some values from one website:

CAR: 323BMW 1.8TA4

2 YR 65 67/64
3 YR 57 58/56
4 YR 49 51/48
5 YR 43 45/42
The first number of the A4 is with/without quattro.

Therefore you may get the car for less with quattro in a lease.

With the Audi being less (An A4 for about 28k and a 323 for 32k) and with a higher residual the A4 has to be cheaper unless BMW is subsidizing the lease.

rickster42

I too faced the same dilemma. Do I go with the 540 at $200/month more or with a 4.2? The 540 (6-speed) had a better suspension setup compared to a non-psl'd 4.2 and better geared. I found smoother power delivery and suprising passing power even in 5th gear. In the end it was no contest. The unique styling of the 4.2,a superior interior, quattro and the exhilirating sound of the 4.2 at speed at a lower monthly made it the only choice for me.

Frank C@work

BMW subsidizes their leases too.

I shopped a comparably equipped 2.7T and 528. Yes the residual was somewhat higher for the BMW, but it was still $70 more per month, still slower and no Quattro compared to the Audi. Frankly I'm tiring of all these BMW comparisons. I imagine most people on this board are of above average intelligence and considered all of their chouces carefully before purchasing/leasing Audi.
BMW's are fine cars - had one just before the Audi. Can't we get past this (not directed at you phred)?

Mikes' 4.2

From a leasing stand point with corporate monies...BMW's like the 540i do bring a better residual as far as buy out in the NY Metro area.
But with AofA's lower interest rate and my unwillingness to drive the kin of my fathers 740i
leasing the A6 4.2 packed with goodies was a "no brainer"! Let people think what they want about the prestege of driving a Bimmer or Mercedes as they stare at my rear license plate! By the way...
T minus 7 hours and 45 minutes until I pick mine up at Anchor Audi in the Five Towns!!!!
I CAN NOT WAIT ANY LONGER!

Audiablo

In talking with AoA I was told that the residual value on a 1 year lease of a 2.8 was 75%, but a 2.7T was 73%. That seemed rather odd to me. Would it make sense for me to buy the 2.7T at the end of the 1 year lease and sell it? Would I get more than 73% of the original cost doing this?