Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

sweendogy

Haven't seen a TLX in the wild and after a year finally found one of these....I don't care care what the reviews say acura needs a win- the ILX clearly isn't it - nor is this - 

Michaell

sweendogy said:

Haven't seen a TLX in the wild and after a year finally found one of these....I don't care care what the reviews say acura needs a win- the ILX clearly isn't it - nor is this - 

The most interesting thing about that photo is .... you're listening to Rihanna?

I must be getting old.....

flightnurse

Michaell said:

sweendogy said:

Haven't seen a TLX in the wild and after a year finally found one of these....I don't care care what the reviews say acura needs a win- the ILX clearly isn't it - nor is this - 

The most interesting thing about that photo is .... you're listening to Rihanna?

I must be getting old.....

Or you have better taste in music

sweendogy

hahaha 

Michaell

flightnurse said:

Michaell said:

sweendogy said:

Haven't seen a TLX in the wild and after a year finally found one of these....I don't care care what the reviews say acura needs a win- the ILX clearly isn't it - nor is this - 

The most interesting thing about that photo is .... you're listening to Rihanna?

I must be getting old.....

Or you have better taste in music

Not according to my wife I don't.....

graphicguy

AB.....from the reviews I've seen, the TLX is been rated from positive, to very positive. You're going to have the "Fast and Furious" crowd that laments the omission of ground effects, "go fast" spoilers, etc. They still want the "blaaaaaat" exhaust cans that you won't get on a TLX. Matter of fact, like a lot of upscale cars, there's no visible exhaust pipes at all on the TLX.

I know it's early, but the numbers suggest Acura has a hit on their hands with. They want to sell 44K of them over 12 mos. They are on track to sell 50K to 60K (probably closer to 50K once the initial flurry slows down).

Something for everyone....4 cyl with DCT, and all wheel steer or 6 cyl. with SH AWD if you want it. As good in the tech dept as anything else on the road, and probably better than most. Performance that's competitive. Value equation that is probably best in class.

Plus, they're about darn near impossible to break, they last a long time, and they don't cost much to maintain or operate.

That's a winner to me.

stickguy

GG, those are all the reasons it is attractive to me!

qbrozen

Michaell said:

sweendogy said:

Haven't seen a TLX in the wild and after a year finally found one of these....I don't care care what the reviews say acura needs a win- the ILX clearly isn't it - nor is this - 

The most interesting thing about that photo is .... you're listening to Rihanna?

I must be getting old.....

LOL that you even looked! haha.

sweendogy

@ TLX talk- one thing that acura has been missing in sedans - more then anything is LOoks. You can talk about go fast spoilers or whatever BUT reason last TL failed - and make no mistake it did fail (along with RL) is looks. 

stickguy

The TL I think did take a hit from bad styling. The RL though to me looks just fine. Certainly not exciting or edgy, but conservative and reasonably attractive. Definitely not ugly though. RL was too expensive though, which hurt.

sweendogy

@stickguy - agree - my point was more directed at TL- as you stated I also think the RL was fine in looks. Nothing flashy but hard to buy that when you can pay similar for E class(thus the fail). The new rLx again looks fine but at that range it's tough when you look at comps- haven't seen a TLX yet and won't comment. 

flightnurse

stickguy said:

The TL I think did take a hit from bad styling. The RL though to me looks just fine. Certainly not exciting or edgy, but conservative and reasonably attractive. Definitely not ugly though. RL was too expensive though, which hurt.

The RL lacks in looks, there is nothing standout about it, it doesn't say Q-Ship, the RL is the top sedan for Acura and it doesn't say that, very understated..

benjaminh

The base TLX is very nicely equipped for $31k. I'm tempted to see if in 6-10 months good discounts are available....Otherwise, I'll probably go with the Accord again.

sweendogy

@benjaminh interesting you are cross shopping an Accord Vs an acura - I remember guys like @graphic_guy‌ on the old TL board loving the 'new' TL only to swap it a short time later. Argument has always been acura is a better car - but no one can argue the construction is accord- and nothing wrong with that

benjaminh

Although the TLX is based on the Accord, they actually did several significant structural upgrades, included use of even higher grades of steel. Here's some stuff from the Acura press release about that:

http://www.acura.com/PressReleases.aspx

"High strength steel uses include:

UISBOR – USIBOR is a boron-alloyed steel with an aluminum-silicon coating that protects against oxidation during the heating, forming and hardening process. This high-strength hot-stamp steel is used for the TLX's door opening rings, for 5% of the unit body. (See Safety section for more information.)
980 grade HSS – Used in certain key structural points such as the front edges of the door sills, and in the A-pillars and B-pillars, for 2% of the unit body.
780 grade HSS – Used for most structural load paths for ACE™, including the side sills and forward spars of unit body, for 2% of the unit body.
590 grade HSS – Used for the front frame spars, floor and roof supports, for 35% of the unit body...

Magnesium Steering Hanger Beam
Located behind the instrument panel, a 3-piece magnesium steering-hanger beam replaces the 26-piece aluminum and steel unit in the previous TL model. Its purpose is as a structural attachment point for the steering column, pedals and instrument panel, as well as a structural element that helps the passenger cabin retain its shape in certain collisions. This single robust magnesium component makes up 2-percent of the TLX's body weight...."

stickguy

OK, stopped at the dealer yesterday, and had a chance to see the TLX in person (did not drive, will do that when I take my TL in for an oil change soon).

they had a couple of black ones on the apron (did not scope out due to pouring rain). But, there was a graphite lustre (same color as my RDX) in the showroom. a V6 FWD. Overall, very nice. Loved the looks. Even the front end was sharp, particularly the headlights. Beak did not offend. the rest of the car had enough curves and design points to be interesting, without feeling overwrought.

Interior, very nice. pretty much shares the dash with the MDX it seems (the RDX and ILX are close to each other too). Well done. Nice, clean dash and very "Acuraish" super duper comfy seats. back seat to me was fine. I am 6' with a long torso, and had no problem with leg or head room. Might not be quite as big as the Legacy we drove, but plenty of space for 4 adults. Trunk was acceptable.

not a huge car, but certainly seemed to fit the entry level luxury profile. Performance? Well, the V6 is going to be fast, just based on how fast my RDX is, and the TLX s/b lighter and has more gears.

oh, the "shifter" gizmo on the V6 was a bit odd. Simple to use, but just strange. Did not get a chance to see a 4 cyl which has a normal gear shift.

I plan to drive a 4 cyl base car if they have one available in the next week or 2 when I go back down.

stickguy

oh, and as I typed this, saw about 3-4 different ads for the TLX on the Jets game. So Acura is making a push for selling this car. I think it will do well, assuming it drives as well as the car shows (particularly the interior and feature content).

my one big peeve? They pulled a Hyundai and deleted the spare tire. No run flats (a good thing) but just a can of fix a flat, and a cheap pump. I just refuse to own a car that has no back up plan for a bad tire. Did not explore/question if you could just take out the foam tray under the trunk floor and put a donut in there. Heck, the Legacy not only had a tire, it was on a matching alloy wheel! and per the salesman, was rated for 200 miles.

sweendogy

Jets fans are huge target for acura, always has been that way- you go 10 seconds into Long Island and you are bound to find an acura. Just like today's game they are very promising but when it matters they can't score- very similar to Hondas acura but maybe this year will be different.

tlong

I rented a BMW 328 last week while staying in Las Vegas.

In short, I was particularly underwhelmed by this car. This is coming from somebody who currently drives an '05 TL and previously had a 6 cylinder Audi A4.

The BMW was black and is gorgeous outside. I was a bit surprised at how low the roof is on this car - definitely not a lot of headroom.

Since it's a rental, I'll grant that this was probably a downmarket trim level vehicle. The seats were black and I'm not sure if they were leather or leatherette - I suspect the vinyl as they didn't have a leather smell. The seat bottoms were very flat with almost no bolstering. In general, although the car did have nav, I didn't feel the interior was very upmarket. Seemed pretty middling to me - not as cheap as entry-level cars, but certainly not luxe, either. The trunk is large laterally but is shallow.

The automated nanny behavior had me screaming thoughts of repair costs had I owned this car. The electronic shifter seemed more gimmicky than useful. The auto-engine shutoff was exactly as has been described here - unrefined and jerky on restart. Yes, you can disable it but you need to do that every time you get back in the car.

I thought the steering was a bit numb and vague on-center. The ride was decent but not that quiet. The engine was refined for a 4 but not all that smooth to me. I didn't push the car as I was in traffic, but this car firmly convinced me that I didn't want to pay north of $40K for a 3-series.

circlew

TLong, did you try the TLX yet? I haven't had interest in the TL since your series was destroyed by the last gen TL but I'd like to get your take to compare to the '05 you have.

I appreciated the reviews from others here as well and did some research on the TLX. Sounds good but haven't seen one live.

I've been pricing the 335is used. I'd never go for the 328 or lower. The 2 series is too small for me and the premium for new 335's are too dear for my aching college-ravished bank account!

graphicguy

One of the things that always confounded me was how you go up the lux car ladder, that things like metallic paint was a costly option. My former S4, which didn't have metallic paint, made it available for a fairly significant extra charge. I think my 335i had metallic black paint that ran somewhere near $600 extra. My TL's? No extra charge. And, Acura puts a very nice paint job on their cars to boot....easily as good as anything else on the market, most times better.

While Acura isn't immune to trying to get people to pay more for leather, all but the base TLX's have leather....and it is a very nice leather....soft, high quality. MB tries to push their vinyl to be as good as leather. From what I can tell, they seem to do a good marketing job on that front.

Was in Costco last night. They always seem to have BMWs in the front as an enticement to use their car buying service. They had a 435i xDrive with the M Sport package....dark metallic grey with red leather interior. It was equipped exactly the way I'd want it. Very nice. But, as I suspected, it was knocking on the door of $60K. For $60K I could negotiate a new Corvette plus a Spark for daily driving duties.

qbrozen

I noticed Mazda is charging $600 for metallic paint on the mazda2, so its definitely not limited to luxo cars anymore.

stickguy

The only paint charge I saw at Mazda was $300 extra for the flashy red. If the are doing it on the 2, probably why you can see them advertised so cheap.

robr2

qbrozen said:

I noticed Mazda is charging $600 for metallic paint on the mazda2, so its definitely not limited to luxo cars anymore.

Actually it's $200 and it's for the white pearl mica.

ab348

GM is doing this now too. Their nicer colors like White Diamond Tricoat and Crystal Red Tintcoat are significantly more money - I believe $1200 on a Cadillac here in Canada.

stickguy

Some of those I think are actually special process paint, so probably actually cost more to do.

flightnurse

graphicguy said:

Was in Costco last night. They always seem to have BMWs in the front as an enticement to use their car buying service. They had a 435i xDrive with the M Sport package....dark metallic grey with red leather interior. It was equipped exactly the way I'd want it. Very nice. But, as I suspected, it was knocking on the door of $60K. For $60K I could negotiate a new Corvette plus a Spark for daily driving duties.

Regarding the vette, GM has stopped selling them as there are a couple of safety related recalls. I like the new C7, but why can't GM get it right when it comes to reducing the amount of recalls.

The Costco by us will either have two Mazada's or one MB sitting outside, never a BMW.

robr2

flightnurse said:

Regarding the vette, GM has stopped selling them as there are a couple of safety related recalls. I like the new C7, but why can't GM get it right when it comes to reducing the amount of recalls.

Every manufacturer now errs on the conservative side when it comes to recalls, stop sales, et al.

On the BMW front, they have recalled i3's for airbags, X5's for latches and 3 series, X1, Z4 and X3 all for brake issues. Porsche Macans have already been recalled. Some GLK350 have been recalled. Even 918 Spiders have been recalled.

tlong

circlew said:

TLong, did you try the TLX yet? I haven't had interest in the TL since your series was destroyed by the last gen TL but I'd like to get your take to compare to the '05 you have.

I appreciated the reviews from others here as well and did some research on the TLX. Sounds good but haven't seen one live.

I've been pricing the 335is used. I'd never go for the 328 or lower. The 2 series is too small for me and the premium for new 335's are too dear for my aching college-ravished bank account!

No, I haven't taken a look at the TLX yet. I'm leaning toward wanting a smaller car, however. My TL is a bit bigger than I'd like.

qbrozen

robr2 said:

qbrozen said:

I noticed Mazda is charging $600 for metallic paint on the mazda2, so its definitely not limited to luxo cars anymore.

Actually it's $200 and it's for the white pearl mica.

The green has disappeared from their online configurator. It was $595, though. I'm almost certain of it.

cdnpinhead

Charging extra for "special" paint colours is much like the high-end hotels charging an extra $10 per night for internet while Super 8 (and nearly everyone else) includes it in the nightly rate. If you complain or feel you're getting screwed, you're not worthy.

There's a lot of this going on.

flightnurse

robr2 said:

flightnurse said:

Regarding the vette, GM has stopped selling them as there are a couple of safety related recalls. I like the new C7, but why can't GM get it right when it comes to reducing the amount of recalls.

Every manufacturer now errs on the conservative side when it comes to recalls, stop sales, et al.

On the BMW front, they have recalled i3's for airbags, X5's for latches and 3 series, X1, Z4 and X3 all for brake issues. Porsche Macans have already been recalled. Some GLK350 have been recalled. Even 918 Spiders have been recalled.

Yes, of course, however, I was just pointing out that the C7 has been plagued with problems, first blown engines (Car and Drivers C7) as well as others, these are on early C7, as well as auto transmission problems and now safety recalls which GM pulled the sales of them.

graphicguy

FN.....didn't know that about the 'vette. My best friend just ordered a '15 convertible a few weeks ago. I wonder if he knows production is held up? He said he expected it by early-mid- October.

flightnurse

graphicguy said:

FN.....didn't know that about the 'vette. My best friend just ordered a '15 convertible a few weeks ago. I wonder if he knows production is held up? He said he expected it by early-mid- October.

Its been interesting following C&D online, they talk about the issues they have been having with their long term C7, not a good thing to have a blown engine... I'm fully aware of issues that manufacture have, but GM has been plagued with them for years...

roadburner

cdnpinhead said:

Charging extra for "special" paint colours is much like the high-end hotels charging an extra $10 per night for internet while Super 8 (and nearly everyone else) includes it in the nightly rate. If you complain or feel you're getting screwed, you're not worthy.

There's a lot of this going on.

And not just on high end cars either- Mazda and Ford charge extra for certain colors.

sweendogy

I read the same article and it was overall positive on the vette- the other problems a punctured tire and a chipped windshield, sure the blown engine - they seem happy - as the header reads "Our Corvette blew an engine but we still love it."

andys120

> Audi probably thinks the only people that'll order a manual will do so despite the mileage penalty, >and there's so few they won't bother developing a 7 speed with 3 pedals.


I think trying to row your way thru 7 forward speeds would be very confusing and really a bit annoying but then again I'm a bit old-fashioned and for most cars I think six speeds is one too many.

sweendogy

People still buying manual corvettes as take rate is 40%.
Who says you have to go thru all 7 speeds each time? 6 was a nice number in my VW GTi but I can count on one hand the times I went into 5th and not straight to 6th. I get what you are saying

andres3

Hit 12,000 miles in the S4 the other day. It has past my "it better get through Summer without needing a tow truck post accident" test. Other than the body shop "coolant hose" debacle, it has been flawless and perfect mechanically. No breakdowns, no problems, no issues.

I love the car. It is amazingly fun to drive and flog around turns at extremely high rates of speed. I feel like I have double the power and control with Quattro and the 3.0 vs. my old FWD 2.0T.

I did find one issue, I'm getting into the music file market (still a CD guy), and I like high resolution "HD" music files... like FLAC, but Audi doesn't support anything but MP3 and AAC (the two worst for sound quality). The manual says up to 320 bit rates but in my testing only 256 will work, at least in AAC.

Using ITunes to turn a CD into AIFF, AAC, ALAC, WAV I found only 256 AAC to work. (avoided MP3 all together but that works too; though I didn't test 320 bit rate MP3 yet).

Shame on Audi for not being up to date with FLAC support in a 2014 car. I even have the Bang & Olufsen upgraded sound system, so you'd think they'd support modern quality.

flightnurse

andres3 said:

I did find one issue, I'm getting into the music file market (still a CD guy), and I like high resolution "HD" music files... like FLAC, but Audi doesn't support anything but MP3 and AAC (the two worst for sound quality). The manual says up to 320 bit rates but in my testing only 256 will work, at least in AAC.

Using ITunes to turn a CD into AIFF, AAC, ALAC, WAV I found only 256 AAC to work. (avoided MP3 all together but that works too; though I didn't test 320 bit rate MP3 yet).

Shame on Audi for not being up to date with FLAC support in a 2014 car. I even have the Bang & Olufsen upgraded sound system, so you'd think they'd support modern quality.

The "upgraded sound system" is only speakers and amp, not head unit. I also think the reason for not supporting FLAC has to be the HD space. Since the files would be too large.

In regards to sound quality, and this subject has been beaten to death on the forums like Car Audio also people like Harry Kimura (he lives in San Diego and is the grand father of the modern day aftermarket sound competition) if you truly want sound quality in your S4 then contact usdaudio.com/ they are the only people who I would allow to touch my car. Sound Quality comes at a price, and that weigh and space. So if you could get your FLAC files to work, they wouldn't sound all that much different especially driving down the road. If you think your S4 is quite now, you should hear what 200lbs of sound deadening will do to your car. But then it comes at a price, added weight.. Current car audio has come a long way from the days when I work in then car audio industry... But they are far off from having a complete sound quality atmosphere in which you would hear the true difference, also if you want SQ, just use a CD...

sweendogy

I have the b&o and recently had a 2015 loaner a4 non- b&o and found the stock radio fine but nothing special, it couldn't stream from my iphone. I like the b&o as I'm usually listen to Rihanna and she sounds pretty good, I listen to a lot of streaming talk radio as well --For a real treat in sound I throw it in dynamic mode/ and hammer down- the artificial sound coming thru the car is all I need.

tlong

The question is can you hear the difference in sound quality between a high bitrate MP3 and FLAC when in a car moving down a road and generating its own noise? I would be interested in somebody running a blind test to see if and how many people could tell the difference.

flightnurse

tlong said:

The question is can you hear the difference in sound quality between a high bitrate MP3 and FLAC when in a car moving down a road and generating its own noise? I would be interested in somebody running a blind test to see if and how many people could tell the difference.

I think I answered that, and the answer is no, well unless you add about 200 lbs of sound deadening to the car. People who compete in the car audio competition spend HOURS making their cars as quite as possible. When they go through the SQ (Sound Quality) check their engines must be running so of course they do not want anything entering the cabin. This is why I said to use a CD instead of the FLAC files. Who remembers DAT (Digital Audio Tape) players poor Panasonic (for the car) thought they were going to be future and make CD's obsolete, the sampling rate was far superior then that of CD's but did not hold the same amount of music as the CD. Car audio in cars today are very good, for me, I think the Mark Levinson system in the Lexus LS460 is one of the best.

sweendogy

The good news people the mark lev is awesome - bad news is its in an 80k msrp dollar sedan the size of Texas- more good news 10k off right now according to truecar. How's the camry systems? How's the system in the 320? I'm ok with the b&o from audi- just like I was ok with the bose from Infiniti - good radios - better the base but not like sitting in a movie theater or an Lexus.

flightnurse

In the 3 series there are two type of Sound Systems, Standard and Harmon Kardon (upgrade.) So in the 320 I have to standard sound system, however I have improved it slightly, I upgraded the amp and made the "sub's" under the seats more of a mid bass then "sub's" so over all the sound has improved. There is a thread on Bimmerfest about upgrading the standard sound system by upgrading the amp, for $45 was able to buy the adapter and a friend had the amp I did (he gave it to me.) 55 minutes of my time and I used the setting that people have recommended. Oveall, much improved, but nothing close to the B&O in the S4, or Lexus.

markcincinnati

Has anyone here yet test driven an Acura TLX Advance SH-AWD or a high-spec Mercedes C class?

If so, please post your driving impressions -- the TLX seems to be getting less than stellar reviews from the likes of Automobile, C&D, MotorTrend & R&T. Funny thing, to me at least, Acura put the transmission that the paid car reviewers seem positive about in the 4-cylinder rather than in the high contented, big motor, SH-AWD version.

The TLX 8-speed dual clutch (but with torque converter -- a rarity) transmission in the 4 is everyone's darlin'. Then the review turns ugly by suggesting that the 9-speed V6 just feels [essentially] fat, sluggish (due to its apparent porky-ness) and a lot less fun.

On the other hand, the new C-Class is lauded as a baby S class.

Who's driven these here? Tell me more, tell me more -- in many ways, your opinions are the ones that matter most.

markcincinnati

The "She's Too Fat Polka"!

Not too long back, I took out a new S6 and was smitten by the intoxicating power of the thing, as well as its ability to blend sportiness and luxury into one sweet, sophisticated and sporty package.

Another month, about, has passed with my S4 -- now at 17,300 miles.

And, while I am certain another wild drive in an S6 would have me again tumescent with desire for this $80K super-sedan, it's just too damn fat, too big in the overall scheme of things. What would be really to my tastes, with the benefit of hindsight now, would be a slightly larger S4 -- add about an inch or so to the wheelbase, make it another 3 or 4 db quieter and put the SQ5 engine in it (for the added torque, natch). Open it up just a smidge in size and power -- 333HP and 325 ft/lbs just are about at a point in the marketplace to require a bit of a bump northward.

Here we sit with no new 4's coming until 2016 MY and, if history repeats, no new S4 for at least another year (or two) beyond that.

Now, if someone wanted to provide me with a new S6 for a couple of years at no charge, well, you can be certain I would not re-gift it.

My comments pertaining to my opinion that the S4 will certainly require a power boost to remain competitive are a good example of "situational velocitization". That is what used to feel really quick and fast, well, feels simply "normal" these days.

The only cure for this velocitization is to get an A4 2.0T loaner for a day or two, so I can essentially push my quickness and speed reset button, for there is surely no lack of quickness or speed in my S4 -- I've just gotten used to it so much I take it for granted.

Drive it like you live.

sweendogy

Mark I just had a 15 loaner a4 - and missed every bit go the s4 power for those 2 days. With The new s3 at almost 3oohp I would guess the power bump for the next s4 should be close to 400, but I have not seen any publications on this figure. Maybe that is to high of a figure given the s6 is at 425- that would get us to the Sq5 's 350ish listing. I would love to see a dyno of a stock s4 and a stock sq5 - something tells me they are closer the you think.

markcincinnati

sweendogy said:

Mark I just had a 15 loaner a4 - and missed every bit go the s4 power for those 2 days. With The new s3 at almost 3oohp I would guess the power bump for the next s4 should be close to 400, but I have not seen any publications on this figure. Maybe that is to high of a figure given the s6 is at 425- that would get us to the Sq5 's 350ish listing. I would love to see a dyno of a stock s4 and a stock sq5 - something tells me they are closer the you think.

Here's my [generally in violent agreement] thought about that power figure, sween: Ever escalating abilities to get power, coupled with a market that seems to have an endless appetite for more power may well take the next S4 (not the RS4, the S4) to 400 HP. Yet, there may be good reasons NOT to go there. For instance, isn't it true that part of the cost of our auto-insurance is based on HP (not torque, HP)?

If my assumption on that matter is correct, perhaps AoA will lobby for whatever the next lower HP (below 400) is but press for more readily available torque. Economy and emissions, too, would have to be a consideration, no?

The current 3.0T in the S4 puts out a conservative 333HP and 325 pound feet. The beefed up version in the SQ5 adds 21HP (taking it to 354) and 21 pound feet (getting us to 346). The crank is a heavier duty part than in the S4 iteration and apparently the SQ5 engine is "strong enough" to be cranked to another like increase without breaking much, if any, of a sweat.

A new model S4 with 375HP and 367 pound feet might just be the Goldilocks answer (at least in the US). This would leave plenty of "headroom" for either a blown V8 or an even more tightly tuned V6 (T) to be fitted into an RS4 model. Indeed, based on what is easily do-able these days with plain ol' "normal" forced induction (super or turbo), twin-charging (super AND turbo) or other, "compound induction" derivatives, I wouldn't be shocked to "hear-tell" of an S4 with a 4 cylinder engine of some-kind or another, putting out an easy-peasy 350HP with gobs of low end torque, either.

Program note:

For reasons that would require at least two more paragraphs, I will tell you that I was cruising along at about 67 MPH on I-71 N (north of the I-275 interchange this Saturday PM last). I had the "need" to "punch it" -- and for the count of 1, 2, 3 floored the S4, cleared the incident, glanced at my digital read-out and found it reading 100. Under the circumstances (light traffic, four lanes heading north, etc), I was simply able to coast down to a relatively legal 68 without the need for the dampers. I realize the S6 seemed to do this exact same thing in what I "recall" as 1,2,3 -- the difference is that the S6 did so with practically zero drama. The S4 made all kinds of fun sounds as it made the jump to light speed.


Newer S4's will, due to market conditions, surely come with more grunt than current versions, but for the life of me, I find it difficult to imagine ever being able (or rarely so) to use such power.

1,2,3 -- the thing is like a freakin' sling-shot.

Dizzy with the rush of speed, I leave you saying "Drive it like you live"!

nyccarguy

And now back to our regularly scheduled program:

An article on the BMW 320i from our friends at Consumer Reports.