well im sure you guys get a lot of threads like mine. i just cant seem to find em. anyways.............


hi just signed up the other night. i saw this forum and decided i'd ask a few questions about audi;specifically the a4. i know very little of audi outside of " vw is to audi, as toyota is to lexus"

is the a4 rwd,fwd?

hows the build quality compared to a bmw?

is the 2005 a4 any bigger/wider than the 2003 a4?

is there a maintence program like the one offered at bmw?


any help would be appreciated.

 

for your first question 95% of Audi's are AWD and the other 5% are FWD

how are they compared to BMW's well BMW's are **** in my opinion and I would never get one

2003 2005 same car B6 bodystyle very few changes

audi offers free maintance to 80kilometers 50 miles or 4 years

 

I wouldn't be so harsh on BMW. A 3 costs about $3K more than an A4 with similar equipment. Audi has nicer interiors and style.

 

bmw's are nice.

many people here made a choice between a bmw and an audi.

audis do some things better than bmws that are generally agreed upon...

audis have nicer interiors and have better traction versatility; audis are significantly better in bad conditions, especially snow. most bmws in the snow can't go anywhere, x or not.

bmw beats audi on tight turning ability by a little bit, however if you consider that audi does not designate just two wheels to turning, since most have quattro, the fact that audis are heavier (i think more solidly also) than bmws, this slight handicap in turning ability is hardly surprising. As far as i am concerned, it isn't even enough of a difference to be considered a "trade-off," considering the turning ability of an audi is significnatly better than nearly any other car on the road to begin with.

Also, it's pretty easy to spot a bmw driver; they'll generally be wearing sunglasses 24/7, have hair with enough gel in it for 5 normal people, and be pretty obnoxious...of course i'm joking, but you'd be surprised how many bmw drivers i've seen that fit this stereotype. I will say, that i have spotted people and thought to myself, "i bet that guy drives a bimmer, then, a few moments later i'd notice the bmw key in their hands.

audi is all the performance and more of bmws, without the attitude.

 

so yeah, that last post didn't really answer your question.

i'd say the build quality of audis is second to none. my b6 is definitely more solid than any other car i've ever been in, including any bmw.

 

I bought my B7 (2005.5 A4) after seriously considering an '06 BMW. I've owned BMWs before, this is my first Audi.

Generally, esoterically speaking, the A4 and 3-series have similar build standards, are equally tight and share that same Teutonic "thump" that accompanies everything the car does, from closing doors to rolling over highway expansion joints. The A4 has what is unanimously considered to be the best interior in its class. It has comparatively a tad less power than the 3, but doesn't give up anything in acceleration. If anything, the Audi is quicker in the highway ranges, i.e. it will do top gear 70-100 faster than the 325. Top end is essentially the same.

Handling at the limit has always been BMW's niche, and the real purists will still argue the point in favor of the 3-series. The reality behind the legend is that extracting that little bit of advantage requires true 10/10ths effort at the hands of a professional driver. For everyday guys like us, the Audi equipped with Quattro will always feel more stable and secure in normal handling. The BMW tends to feel twitchy on occasion.

In less than ideal conditions, especially in the wet, there's no substitute for the Audi. BMWs suck on wet roads. If you opt for the x variant (all wheel drive) you get some of that back but the Quattro system is still superior. Consider that the drive bias of a Quattro is 50/50 by default. As required, Quattro and the per-axle EDL (Electronic Differential Lock) can move power forward or rearward, left or right, in less than 1/3 of a single wheel rotation. The 325x on the other hand is predominantly a rear-wheel drive car that can, under traction loss conditions, shift up to 40% of its power to the front wheels. It simply isn't as responsive, nor as agile, in bad conditions.

Given that the 325 is, bit for bit, a few grand more than the A4, I opted to go for the Audi. I haven't regretted it for an instant. Best decision I ever made, car-wise.

 

1) The big draw of the Audi name is Quattro all-wheel drive, which is about traction and inclement weather stability. If you live where it snows or rains frequently, Quattro will be your buddy. You can buy a FWD Audi, but I can't imagine why you would.

2) I have never owned a BMW and have only driven a couple, but I can't imagine that the Audi would give up anything to the BMW in terms of quality. The Audi will certainly not disappoint in the areas of "solidness" and "build quality."

4) If by 2005 A4 you mean the newest A4 version compared to the latter model, the 2005.5 A4, the B7, the newest model, is this big: overall length (in) 180.6
overall width (in) 69.8
overall height (in) 56.2
wheelbase (in) 104.3
curb weight (lbs) 3549

The 2002-2005 A4, the B6, the last generation, is this big:
overall length (in) 179.0
overall width (in) 69.5
overall height (in) 56.2
wheelbase (in) 104.3
curb weight 3252 lbs 4 cylinder manual, 3550 lbs V6 automatic.

 

Quartz05, Audi will be switching to rear biased torque in 2007.

 

I own one of each so here's my 2 cents ...

Quattro rocks! I have not experienced a better AWD system. And my X5 doesn't hold a candle to my A4 in the AWD department.

Engine might just go to BMW but that's a reallyyyyy close call. But, they're very different motors (4 cyl. turbo vs. 3.0 liter normally aspirated straight six).

I can say the 5-series cars are distinctly different (significantly better) than the 3-series cars. I've driven them both quite a bit.

I love both our cars. But, for what it's worth ... After driving a new 325xi I decided to stick with a rejuvenated version of my '00 A4 1.8T Quattro with 100k miles. I just couldn't see spending $35k on something no better than I already have.



[IMG]local://upfiles/7218/E0EAEFE07F544344ADEC58F5423DC0B6.jpg[/IMG]

 

As I suggested in my earlier post, the superior reputation of the BMW is largely due to the ongoing love affair that the 3-series enjoys in the trade mags. I found a really great example of this today while reading a Car and Driver comparison test of $35,000 sport sedans. In it, the Audi A4 3.2Q finished 5th out of 9 entrants, while the BMW 330i finished 1st. First, in spite of:

Our 330i labored hard to lose. The electrical ticks began shortly after it was delivered. The new 3-series has a push-button start. Ours would work only after several exasperated pushes and fiddling with the key. Why, we wondered in the free moments this created, must you even insert the "key" into the dash when many push-button systems, including the IS350's, allow the radio-transmitting key fob to roam free?

Then the ABS lamp lit. We tried to execute one stop on our high-desert test road and nearly executed a 360 spin at 70 mph instead (thus, our braking number is from a previous test). Shortly thereafter several airbag-malfunction warnings lit up. Maybe it was just a coincidence.

Even with its dash ablaze in emergency alerts, the 330i wormed its way into our hearts.

So their test BMW essentially self-destructed immediately upon arrival with at least one of those failures being potentially life-threatening. Performance of this nature would have drawn very harsh criticism from the C&D staffers, but because the vehicle in question was a 330, they basically took it in stride.

So what did the A4 do that was so horrible by comparison that it landed in 5th place?

Audis and BMWs usually ace these tests with just a few points between them, but enthusiasm failed to thunderhead for the latest A4. Here is one reason: It remains pretty much as it has always been, and others have gotten better.

Solid, silky, immaculately finished, and light on its tires, the all-wheel-drive A4 stays firmly on message. For some, that's a problem. The A4 didn't move, didn't find a new direction, didn't develop a new argument for convincing the unconvinced.

In other words, it's still the same great car it's always been. It's still got the best interior in its class (noted in the test write-up), it "excels" at "swallowing up miles", but because it hasn't come up with any new tricks, because it has the same basic motor as the B6 instead of a gimmicky magnesium mill like the Bimmer, it gets unreasonably (in my opinion) judged.

Worth noting that 2nd, 3rd and 4th place were the new Lexus IS350, Infiniti G35 and Acura TL, respectively. The Lexus is an impressive car but the IS350 fully loaded is WAY more than 35k. In fact, it's way more than 40k. The G35 has gobs of horsepower, but "...did demonstrate some of its coarseness for which we have criticized it in the past, including elevated road noise in the cabin, chatter in the steering column over bumps, and an unpleasant graunching of return springs each time the clutch was pressed. The stability control was prone to fire a brake caliper or two even when the car was well within its slip limits." The G35 was my personal 3rd choice when I bought my A4. I hated the interior, thought it terribly chintzy for a car of its price and wasn't the least bit impressed with its road manners on a spirited test drive.

As for the 4th place TL, it's a great car and was my personal 4th choice and is a great car. Unfortunately I've owned Acura products recently and have experienced serious reliability problems. The TL seems, at least according to owners' reports, to share some of these build quality and endurance weaknesses. Indeed the most acurate generalization I can make about Acura products is that they are somewhat fragile. They don't have that solid German feel to them that we expect in the mid-30s price range. Also my wife thought it was butt-ugly.