[sam964]

Hi everyone,

I am debating between waiting for the new F30 to be released, and order a 328i or get an Audi A4 2.0t S-line.

They are both good looking, fuel efficient cars, what do you guys think is the better option and which would you choose?

[Robin_NL]

I'd say, buy a VW Passat , cheaper and more room than the Audi A4 .

[h1nch]

Depends on what you're looking for: The A4 will likely be more reliable, but less fun to drive. Which exterior look do you prefer? Interior?

[justinnum1]

I am having a similar debate, in the end, an audi might look really nice inside and out but it wont drive like a bmw. F30 for me. gonna order a 328i maybe with either sport line or just opt it myself. Im not looking for any extra gizmo bullshit. Also 6sp.

[sam964]

Well they are both nice cars, if the m package is available on the 328i it will make me reconsider getting the audi

[papaalex]

The B8 just got a midcycle refresh for 2012 model year but it is still the same body. A redesign might happen in +/- 3 yrs. The F30 just got redesigned and is gonna be hear for awhile.

[Wolf]

i don't think that the 328i is fuel efficient :P

[pokerface]

I have an E90 and a B8. The B8 is a highway cruiser and not nearly as fun to drive, and the 2.0 is not as fuel efficient as the 3.0 i6. And I don't think the Audi will be more reliable (we'll see...)

[sam964]

Originally Posted by pokerface

I have an E90 and a B8. The B8 is a highway cruiser and not nearly as fun to drive, and the 2.0 is not as fuel efficient as the 3.0 i6. And I don't think the Audi will be more reliable (we'll see...)

what do you think of the steering of the audi? can it handle the corners well?

[CMSS2000]

I just drove an A4 with the sport suspension yesterday, and I thought the steering was a little flimsy. It was lighter than my 135i (which I like) and was sharp off center, but as you turn the wheel more it doesn't seem to respond as much...feels like it needs a quicker ratio.

I had to go hand over hand for some turns that I should have been able to take without taking my hands off the wheel. It doesn't help that the wheel itself feels a little too large. Also the cornering was not as good as in my 135i. The BMW steering is much more linear in my opinion.

[Saintor]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

I'd say, buy a VW Passat , cheaper and more room than the Audi A4 .

Actually this is NOT a bad idea. With 280HP VR6/DSG + better fuel economy than the E9X 328i, the Passat 3.6 SE/NAVI+sunroof puts those little insignificant 4-turbo to shame and behaves like a 40000$ car's engine should.

[Saintor]

Originally Posted by MERCSUk153

The Passat doesn't have the VR6 engine and the Turbo 4 engines that you are talking about will also be heading to a BMW dealer near you. Even the 5series is going to come with a 4 cylinder engine. Audi was just ahead of it's time with the 4 cylinder in this class. I also have a 2000 1.8T A4 and just a chip and exhaust have beat a many 330i.
I see you bought a 323i and it might have a V6 but so what if it is a V6? It would get dusted by a 2.0T engine without a chip. With a chip forget about it.
The new BMW 4 cylinder turbo engine would do the same with a tune.
You need to get with the times and accept that the future will be less cylinders and more turbos.

Why are you stating wrong information?

The Passat sure has the VR6 280HP engine - see vw.com for further information. 20/28mpg EPA is very good.

I prefer not to have FI in my engines. I had 3 turbo cars before. I don't care about 4-cyl. turbo that sounds like a Civic or Corolla. I drove the N20 and it really sounds that bad. I'll take my I6 before it every day and twice on Sundays.

[justinnum1]

Originally Posted by MERCSUk153

Sorry you are correct the Passat does come with the VR6. But if you still think that the Passat with the FWD is better than the Audi A4 with AWD and the 2.0T engine is better you are nuts. The 2.0T engine can be easily modded and the key word is easily here to outperform the VR6. Then you add in the AWD and the A4 is miles ahead with the handling. I figure that a BMW driver would understand this but I guess not. The VR6 overpowers the front wheels and all you get is screetching front wheels on takeoff not to mention horrible torque steer with FWD.

FWD is horrible, awd too if you dont need it. RWD ftw!

[335BBS]

Originally Posted by papaalex

The B8 just got a midcycle refresh for 2012 model year but it is still the same body. A redesign might happen in +/- 3 yrs. The F30 just got redesigned and is gonna be hear for awhile.

I think thats the key. They are both great cars. Did BMW make a sport suspension available yet? I figured they would with this car.
BMW will sell at list for a while whereas there may be a deal to be had at Audi. New car/old car.

[335BBS]

Originally Posted by MERCSUk153

Well take a look around and you will find as many awd supercars as rwd supercars.
The fact of the matter is that as hp/tq goes up the more need there is for AWD grip.
Even BMW M division admitted as much that if going forward and hp/Tq rises they will have to look into AWD.
You can't have great handling unless you have grip especially for a road going car. We aren't talking track cars here.
I agree that RWD is more fun but it doesn't mean necessarily it is better. More fun going around a corner drifting but faster without it.

RWD is fun until you try and merge quickly and TRACTION CONTROL takes over. Kills all the fun AND grip. I can't wait to go back to Audi.
How much torque does that 280hp v6 make? 2.0 i4 makes 258 I believe which was more than the 3.2 litre v6 Audi used.

[Saintor]

Originally Posted by MERCSUk153

Sorry you are correct the Passat does come with the VR6. But if you still think that the Passat with the FWD is better than the Audi A4 with AWD and the 2.0T engine is better you are nuts. The 2.0T engine can be easily modded and the key word is easily here to outperform the VR6. Then you add in the AWD and the A4 is miles ahead with the handling. I figure that a BMW driver would understand this but I guess not. The VR6 overpowers the front wheels and all you get is screetching front wheels on takeoff not to mention horrible torque steer with FWD.

No I am not nut. The A4 2.0T is essentially an overrated front-driver with a poor engine not up to the task, unfit for 45K$.

Forget the tuning part. That's a fantasy for kids and nobody in his right mind would jeopardize the 45K$ car's warranty.

The VR6 3.6 engine is a much superior engine, although personally I am not interested in a Passat.

For instance two vehicles with the same weight;
Passat 3.6/DSG 2012 5-60mph 6.5s
Eos 2.0T/DSG 5-60mph 7.9s

It basically kills the unfounded little theory that the 4-cyl. turbo has superior low-end ooomph than 6-cyl. - simply not true, whatever the torque charts say.

[justinnum1]

Originally Posted by Saintor

No I am not nut. The A4 2.0T is essentially an overrated front-driver with a poor engine not up to the task, unfit for 45K$.

Forget the tuning part. That's a fantasy for kids and nobody in his right mind would jeopardize the 45K$ car's warranty.

The VR6 3.6 engine is a much superior engine, although personally I am not interested in a Passat.

For instance two vehicles with the same weight;
Passat 3.6/DSG 2012 5-60mph 6.5s
Eos 2.0T/DSG 5-60mph 7.9s

It basically kills the unfounded little theory that the 4-cyl. turbo has superior low-end ooomph than 6-cyl. - simply not true, whatever the torque charts say.

What does the eos have to do with anything? The 2.0T VW uses is not the same as audi...same horsepower but torque is 60 less with vw.

[Saintor]

Originally Posted by justinnum1

What does the eos have to do with anything? The 2.0T VW uses is not the same as audi...same horsepower but torque is 60 less with vw.

Yeah but it doesn't help either.

Always according to C&D, an A4 2.0T 211HP a bit heavier has a 5-60mph of 7.8s automatic. I chose the EOS because it had DSG.

The 211HP version is no quicker than the 200HP found in the GTI (admittedly lighter).

[justinnum1]

Originally Posted by MERCSUk153

A4 is not a front driver it is AWD. The weight of the engine on the B8 has been moved back so it no longer is over the front wheels anymore so it isn't like a front wheel drive like you say.
Are you on crack? Seriously have you been reading any forums on this BMW board, Audi or VW board? Just because you may be too chicken to tune your car doesn't mean no one else is. It isn't a fantasy. LOL There are tonnes of guys who tune their cars brand spanking new. I did with my 1.8T and I still have the car 10years later no problems. It went from 155hp to 225hp. It isn't a fantasy. The only fantasy is that you think a Passat is better than the A4 just because it has a VR6 engine.
The 2.0T engine is also much more easy to modify than the VR6. We won't even mention any turbo upgrades or anything like that because the 2.0T won't even be in the same ballpark. Then we also won't mention everything else the Audi offers in terms of luxury, insulation and ride.

I'll leave you with this:

Stock A4 2.0T 0-100km/h = 0-62mph = 6.4s(per Audi) > Passat VR6 3.6@6.5

So get your facts straight. Your Eos example doesn't work because it isn't the same 2.0T engine used in the A4. Secondly the A4 is heavier most likely than the Passat so the 4cylinder low end Torque isn't a fantasy either.
Seriously can anyone be any more wrong.

[335BBS]

Originally Posted by MERCSUk153

A4 is not a front driver it is AWD. The weight of the engine on the B8 has been moved back so it no longer is over the front wheels anymore so it isn't like a front wheel drive like you say.
Are you on crack? Seriously have you been reading any forums on this BMW board, Audi or VW board? Just because you may be too chicken to tune your car doesn't mean no one else is. It isn't a fantasy. LOL There are tonnes of guys who tune their cars brand spanking new. I did with my 1.8T and I still have the car 10years later no problems. It went from 155hp to 225hp. It isn't a fantasy. The only fantasy is that you think a Passat is better than the A4 just because it has a VR6 engine.
The 2.0T engine is also much more easy to modify than the VR6. We won't even mention any turbo upgrades or anything like that because the 2.0T won't even be in the same ballpark. Then we also won't mention everything else the Audi offers in terms of luxury, insulation and ride.

I'll leave you with this:

Stock A4 2.0T 0-100km/h = 0-62mph = 6.4s(per Audi) > Passat VR6 3.6@6.5

So get your facts straight. Your Eos example doesn't work because it isn't the same 2.0T engine used in the A4. Secondly the A4 is heavier most likely than the Passat so the 4cylinder low end Torque isn't a fantasy either.
Seriously can anyone be any more wrong.

Ouch. Good one. Saintor needed a tune-up.

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by Saintor

No I am not nut. The A4 2.0T is essentially an overrated front-driver with a poor engine not up to the task, unfit for 45K$.

Forget the tuning part. That's a fantasy for kids and nobody in his right mind would jeopardize the 45K$ car's warranty.

The VR6 3.6 engine is a much superior engine, although personally I am not interested in a Passat.

For instance two vehicles with the same weight;
Passat 3.6/DSG 2012 5-60mph 6.5s
Eos 2.0T/DSG 5-60mph 7.9s

It basically kills the unfounded little theory that the 4-cyl. turbo has superior low-end ooomph than 6-cyl. - simply not true, whatever the torque charts say.

Your choice of cars to compare torque is rather pointless.
The VR6 has more power to begin with so naturally it will have better acceleration when both cars weight the same with same drive wheel config.
I have no idea what you think you're proving with that comparo, other to say that a greater power to weight equals better acceleration.

An A4 2.0T with quattro equipped with premium plus and sport pkg and the very sweet BO audio is about $40K. It's priced quite nicely.

Over rated FWD?
You are nuts.
Any performance seeking driver knows that quattro makes for the best drive experience in an Audi. Audi's highest performing cars all have AWD.
Thus, it's not a FWD when it has quattro.
A FWD Audi is for those who simply want a nice cruising car, not performance.
Also, an AWD BMW is not the drivers choice either.

Forget torque charts if you like, the 2.0T has very good low rpm torque compared to the BMW NA 3.0.
The NA 3.0 is an extremely sweet engine that builds torque nicely and loves to rev.
In everyday driving though the 2.0T has more useable low rpm torque, the NA 3.0 needs more revs, but it nicely builds those revs.
With a manual trans the 3.0 is sweet. With automatic it lacks low rpm take off power.

As far as off the line accel, RWD can't match AWD quattro grip.
AWD requires a bit different driving style. Is it better or less so than RWD? NO, just different.

Many people risk warranty in high priced cars.
The x35i turbo engine is tuned by a LOT of BMW owners and those cars cost well over $40K.
Kids don't have that kind of money, and plenty of right minded enthusiasts love to tune their high dollar turbo's in any size and cylinder count.

[Saintor]

Originally Posted by MERCSUk153

A4 is not a front driver it is AWD. The weight of the engine on the B8 has been moved back so it no longer is over the front wheels anymore so it isn't like a front wheel drive like you say.
Are you on crack? Seriously have you been reading any forums on this BMW board, Audi or VW board? Just because you may be too chicken to tune your car doesn't mean no one else is. It isn't a fantasy. LOL There are tonnes of guys who tune their cars brand spanking new. I did with my 1.8T and I still have the car 10years later no problems. It went from 155hp to 225hp. It isn't a fantasy. The only fantasy is that you think a Passat is better than the A4 just because it has a VR6 engine.
The 2.0T engine is also much more easy to modify than the VR6. We won't even mention any turbo upgrades or anything like that because the 2.0T won't even be in the same ballpark. Then we also won't mention everything else the Audi offers in terms of luxury, insulation and ride.

I'll leave you with this:

Stock A4 2.0T 0-100km/h = 0-62mph = 6.4s(per Audi) > Passat VR6 3.6@6.5
C&D time is also 6.4s not your 7.8s for the A4
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...car-and-driver

So get your facts straight. Your Eos example doesn't work because it isn't the same 2.0T engine used in the A4. Secondly the A4 is heavier most likely than the Passat so the 4cylinder low end Torque isn't a fantasy either.
Seriously can anyone be any more wrong.

Ahhhh youngsters.

First, Audi A4 is essentially a front-driver with an optional AWD, want it or not. Even with AWD, it still feels like a FWD, unless S4 owners get the optional rear differential. Couldn't care less about AWD.... it is a waste of money, a dead weight even if some naive people think there is so magic about it. lol. If it was just a small portion of what they think it is, all M-cars, Porsche, Ferrari, Corvette would have it standard. Get real. BTW I owned an Audi Quattro.

How many times a week do you make 0-60mph with drop-off clutch from 3-4000rpm? .....* there you go*.

Again, 0-60mph or 0-100km/h is irrelevant, just a show to impress kids (and it works for you). What REALLY matters is the 5-60mph.

And this is where those 4-cyl. in heavy cars are put to shame compared to NA 6cyl.

My figures for the automatic cars (as I said) are totally correct, even if you continue to live in your fantasy.