This past April, we traded a silver '99 GS400 against a silver 4.2, and I thought I'd comment on how we size up the cars, measured mostly against each other.

First of all, the reason we looked at an alternative to the GS400 was because my bride was having trouble deciding on another SUV to replace her '97 Grand Cherokee Limited (equipped with all the wood and leather so necessary for off-road travel). Sensing an opportunity (I'm not in love with SUVs), I "volunteered" the GS400 against an E430 4Matic. However, when we got to the dealer (Mercedes, Audi, Jaguar and BMW, all in a row), the Audi was more appealing - especially the interior. After a test drive, Sallie announced that she could live with the Audi :-), and couldn't really get excited about the Merc, so we did the deal. It cost us $10K.

The primary reason why I was ready to turn the Lexus in was that even though it's an arguably terrific sports sedan, it was strangely uninviting as a driver's car. More on that later.

The good points on the GS400 are very good indeed:

1) Engine. Really strong above the high 2000s on the tach, with a very nice engine note. At New England Dragway, it went a best of 14.46 at 97.61 mph. On a really good day, it might've gone 14.2s, but I lost interest (as I do with any automatic on the drag strip).

2) Gearbox. Far and away the best automatic I've ever driven. Extremely responsive, with very crisp shifting under any conditions. Quick kickdown, and at full throttle, it would snap a shift off in an instant, with no hesitation at all. Excellent ratio spread, too. First is 3.36, second 2.18, with a 1.48 third, direct fourth, and a .75 overdriven fifth gear - plus a 3.27 final drive. These gearbox ratios bracketed the fat part of the power band on any flat-out shift. On the other hand, just driving around, you'd have to pay really close attention to get any indication at all that it was shifting. Only the driver could tell. All in all, a remarkable five speed gearbox.

3) Low-speed handling. The car would point and shoot with uncommon valor for a sedan. Very responsive. I think it would be a decent autocrosser. Really.

4) Brakes. The car would stop as well as, or maybe even better than my '95 M3, which by-the-way had terrific brakes - especially after I swapped the track-warped front rotors with the "floating" rotors that come on the Euro M3s.

5) Build quality. Absolutely first rate.

6) Stereo. We got the Nakamichi, with CD changer in the glove compartment. Absolutely the finest OEM sound system we've ever heard.

So how does the Audi stack up against these strong points? Not very far off, but not as strong, either.

1) The engine seems to be good, and I expect it to get better as the miles accumulate (4000 miles now, but I know how long it takes Audis to break in.) It has less low-end thrust than the Lexus, however, even though it's got a few more cubes . At New England Dragway with around 2500 miles on the clock, it went 15.33 at 91.81 mph, admittedly under less advantageous conditions than when I ran the Lexus. This Fall, I'll do a repeat performance, and expect a possible 14.99 or so, at perhaps 94 mph. I must say, however, that Audi clearly got the engine control code wrong. At just over five thousand rpm, the high-end intake setting kicks in, and you can feel a palpable surge when this happens. In fact, from around 5200 up past 6500, the car starts running the way you'd expect a 300 HP vehicle to run. Below 5200, it's a bit sluggish. Obviously, the high-end kick should come in at, say, 4500 rpm or so. They need better programmers. This engine cries out for a chip.

2) Gearbox. Good, but no cigar. Here's another item that needs an aftermarket chip. The one-two shift is slo-o-ow at full throttle. It also takes a long time to kick down after you hit it. About the time I'm yelling "YES, I want a kickdown!" is when it actually happens. The Tip is OK. About on par with the Lexus, which has steering wheel buttons instead of a separate shift lever gate. Low speed shifting is good, but not as smooth as the Lexus.

I frankly don't fully understand why the BMW 540i has a better performing gearbox than the A6 4.2. You remember the DA in "My Cousin Vinny"? Well, the BMW and Audi gearboxes are "ah-DENTical". Two things: As mentioned, Audi needs to hire better programmers. I also suspect that, if the Audi had, say, a 3.15 or 3.23 final drive, it would improve overall feel dramatically. 76 mph in second and 113 mph in third are just way too high - especially with the delayed intake switchover.

3) Low speed handling. A little ponderous compared to the Lexus, but dead steady and predictable. Of course, it's an Audi, which means it leans enough that you think you may need to put roller skates on the door handles :-)

On the other hand, Quattro lets you do throttle stuff that would involve dry cleaning if you tried it in the Lexus. Overall, they're both entertaining, but in different ways.

4) Brakes. VERY good brakes, especially after the dealer replaced all four rotors after I bitched about a rumble when you touched them at around 45 mph or so. They said they were rusted. Pedal feel is better (for me) than in the Lexus. On the other hand, this car will NOT stop as quickly as the GS400. Maybe it's the additional tonnage.

5) Build quality. As good as the Lexus, with nicer touches here and there. On the other hand, the brakes did rumble, the rear seat heaters didn't work, and I've still got a rattle way back there (turning into a loud buzz under fairly hard acceleration with a load) that the dealer hasn't been able to track down.

6) Stereo. Really good. Not as good as the Nakamichi.

OK, so far this reads like we made a mistake. Not so. I was hoping for a tie, but we both like the Audi better than the Lexus. Here's why, in no particular order:

The steering feel on the Audi is better. It has that German feel out on the road that the Lexus can't quite match.

It has a nicer and more comfortable interior. Slightly more comfortable in front, and significantly more so in back. Driver ergonomics are superior, too. Gauge lighting and readability are also better, even though Audi caved in to the color-sight-impaired in 2000. All red was better, but the current stuff is still better than the Lexus.

Bigger trunk. Fold-down seats. Better underhood and trunk finishing.

More honest handling. This Audi with the 255/40 9000s is a nearly relentless understeerer, but it plays no tricks on you, and handles in a linear way. It also can be just a bit of a point-and-shoot car if you come in hot, get it keeled over, and let off abruptly for a half-second as you begin aiming for the apex. You can get pretty neutral under those conditions, 'though I haven't persuaded the thing to actually kick the tail out yet. Give me time :-).

HID for HID, better headlights, which I would not have believed possible.

Better paint. (More on that below.)

NO stupid little detail items that can screw up even a good package. None.

That said, here are five things about the GS400 that turn me off, as opposed to no such items on the Audi. In ascending order, they are:

1) Paint chipping as if it were an '82 Corolla. Nice paint, but up here in New England (where the glaciers melted away and left all their rocks), we need something durable for paint, and the damned thing needed work about one out of every two weekends.

2) A foot-operated parking brake(!), with a pedal placed adroitly enough (by the kick panel) so that if you didn't pay attention, it would put a terrific scrape on your shoe top as you got out of the car. This is Toyota thinking.

3) Speaking of Toyota thinking, the cruise control was straight out of my '83 Cressida. First hit the button on the end of the stalk (and get a "Cruise" display on the dash, as if I didn't know), then engage cruise by moving a stalk. Don't come to a stop, though, because the thing will lose track of where you were, and you can't resume your cruise speed. You have to reset it. Excellent!

4) Hot-damn 235/45ZR17 Bridgestone sneakers that couldn't seem to cope very well with hard cornering at speed, but made up for that by being amazingly noisy (after around 3 or 4,000 miles) and delivering more shock over small bumps than the Pilot MXX3s on my last M3.

5) Uncomfortably non-linear handling. At speed, the car would feel very athletic up to, say, seven tenths. Get closer to eight tenths, though, and suddenly the thing is going all weak-kneed and flabby on you, with uncommunicative steering. Very disconcerting. This good-good-good OMIGOD! type of handling at speed is nearly unforgiveable, in my opinion.

OK, if you've stuck with me this far, the net of it is, the GS400 is, overall, a better sports sedan, but the Audi is a better sedan, and, overall, a better car, with more thoughtful enginering touches, and no real foibles that I can see.

The Lexus is maybe an 8.0 on our one-to-ten scale, while the Audi is maybe an 8.5 or a bit better. With chips and a more aggressive final drive, it would be even better than that. I'll be checking the ads :-).

Thanks for your time.

Bruce Augenstein

 

PES makes a tip chip for the 4.2 (Pablo has one) And I think they may also have an ECU. Ask Pablo about it, and you might want to check PES' website. Let us know how you make out.

 

...matches my test drive feelings about the Lexus 300. I wish more people would do reviews, especially if they write as well as you have!

 

From your comments, about roll, I think that your 4.2 does not have the sport suspension. I think this makes the car more fun with very little penalty in ride. I agree about the chipping (I have both PES chips for tip and engine and they do improve performance, esp. the tip chip.) and would love to have a lower final drive. The gears are way too long. Finally, isn't the Audi the better sport sedan if it handles better at the limit? While I would have a few things different I think that as a package, the A6 is excellent. 4.2, Ming Blue/Melange, Spt. Pkg., etc.

 

ECU programing is probably related to the fact that Audi V8's are not accessed a Gas Guzzeler Tax .

If you notice on all BMW V8's and I also believe the Lexus 400 V8 window stickers there is a line item for the Gas Guzzeler Tax for not meeting the minimum MPG.

Please note that Audi's meet the CAFE MPG standard therefore, there is no extra tax.

The way Audi gets around this is to program the engine and transmission ECU to be a little less responsive thus give a higher MPG.

I think that is why the 1st-2nd shift happens so quickly on my 4.2. Because of the quick shift to 2nd I lose some performance but get better milage.

I think Audi should think about making the Sport Package a real "Sport Package" instead of some minor upgrades like they have now.

Sport Package should include a tighter shifting engine and transmission and should come with 18" rims and tires and with the lower Eibach springs and dampers. It should also include lower final gearing (higher numercialy), along with the current seats. And, they could tighten the steering by 25% and add stronger brakes.

They could charge more but it would be worth it.

I'd pay an extra 3k for that type of package.

These are probably some of the changes we'll see on the S6. I just hope they have a Tip trans available.

Audi could think of it the same way they do with Porsche and the Turbo option without the Turbo.

Just my thought.

rmg
A6 4.2
Black / Van. Onx.

 

BTW, I forgot to mention thanks for the comparison. Nice review.

 

I too would like to see a more agressive sport pack. If it had a lower final drive I would be very happy. I have to admit that I do love it as is. It's an excellent car. In 2000 the 540i did not incur the gas guzzler tax if it did not have the sport package with the lower final drive. The only 5 series to incur it, if I remeber correctly is the 540i with sport package.

 

What is the URL?

 

Great review! Better than many reviews I've seen in the car mags.

I, too, have an A6 4.2 and a BMW 540i (which is being replaced in two days by an A8L -- can't wait to get it!), and I've found that since getting the A6, I've enjoyed driving the 540 less and less. As you have found, I think the "other" car is perhaps just a bit more sporty, and perhaps has just a little more suppleness in its ride. But, in terms of the entire package, the A6 just works better for me. (Although I do prefer the seats in the 540 -- probably one of the biggest differences that I really like in the 540.)

As for acceleration, it may simply be an illusion, but it seems as though the A6 is just a bit faster than the 540 -- but, on paper at least, that isn't so. There's also grip and sort of a sense of flying in the A6 that simply isn't there in the 540, which feels a bit heavy by comparison.

Then, if you compare the two cars on a value proposition basis, there is no comparison -- the A6 is the hands down winner for more bang for the buck.

Audi-X2

'00 A6 4.2 black/vanilla
'01 A8L black/black (coming Thursday night!!)

 

www.pes-tuning.com