Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
CR also loves the MB E-class as well.
I read CR's review of the A4 and I thought it was quite fair. They were actually quite positive about it. They praised the vehicle's performance in the emergency handling test, and its fit and finish, for example. As well they should have!
Their two main negatives was the quality of the low-speed ride, and that the rear seat is cramped. They noted the A4's excellent array of safety features.
I don't expect CR to come out and speak in lavish car-loving tones like the automobile mags do. Since such perceptions are so subjective in the first place, I just look to them for some base objective observations, then look toward others and my own opinions.
I think the reason they didn't give the A4 a checkmark is because the vehicle is new and a reliability history hasn't been established. Yes, the Camry is also new but CR does tend to base its initial estimate on the previous generation, especially if the previous generation was similar.
I suppose they could have based the 2002 A4's initial score on the previous-gen A4, but that would have been awful since the previous edition never did do too well in CR's surveys. One could argue that they could have used Passat numbers as a base but I'm not sure if that makes sense either. I'd rather they give the new A4 the benefit of the doubt and wait for real numbers to come in.
I guess many CR readers also agree with some statements from their most recent issue (March 2002). I do not have my copy with me now, but it goes something like this. According to CR, if you need a car (similar in size to those tested, I guess) what you need to get is either Passat or Camry. Currently tested cars (Lexus ES, Audi A4, etc.) are basically same thing and one does not need to pay 1000s dollars extra for these cars.(So far I have no problem with what they state, even though I do not agree.) And at the right upper corner of the page, they refer to the previosly tested cars, they say that BMW 330i and one other car (I cannot recall it now) "scored almost as high as Passat and Camry."
Well, I rest my case. If they are ignorant enough to compare BMW E46 (I drive one currently) and Camry (I owned one, unfortunately), and if they think Camry is the better one, tiger8 you are totaly, completely and 100% correct, I shouldn't be reading CR's auto reviews since I am a car buff (enthusiast?) as you correctly predicted (however, I am not single, I have kids and I am not young-I have been driving since 1966). And I don't race cars, I have no interest in skid pad numbers and so on......
I guess this concludes the discussion. You all have a good one!!
vince...8o)
--'rocco
I suspect its over reliability issues.:(
--'rocco
Hope to hear from you before Feb 22 via the Talk to the Press discussion or at jfallon@edmunds.com with your thoughts and contact information.
Thanks as always,
Jeannine Fallon
PR Director, Edmunds.com
Perhaps all Audi dealers are not created equal, but my experience in Cincinnati is that the dealer does a very good job aligning them.
And on that note, perhaps we are quite fortunate to have Northland Audi (which is really Northland Porsche + Audi) -- they seem to treat all cars as if their owners had "Porsche" expecations.
The only other thing your e-mail didn't address was the "bent" factor - bent wheel (ever so slightly?) or bent "tie rod ends" or some other component being bent. My friend's Audi hit a snow covered curb and the car developed the same symptoms you describe. It took a couple of parts and a four wheel alignment to right it.
Tom
Brian
The A4 outscored the TL-S and I35 and CR recommended both. CR will recommend any high-scoring vehicle with at least average reliability and without any major failures in some tests (e.g. emergency handling has to be at least "below average" from what I've seen).
While the sample they tested had problems, I think if the survey results come back positive then they'll ignore the sample issues. They didn't base the 2002 A4's reliability on the previous generation as they sometimes do.
It'd be strange if the A4 didn't have them, as it has a great variety of other safety equipment. Plus the Passat supposedly has pretensioners for all seating positions -- even the middle rear position, which is unusual.
The Acura has a lot of nice power. Straight-line acceleration is exhilarating and you can't say that with the A4 1.8T. Statistical reliability should be excellent, the A4 will probably be average or above average (just a guess). Rear seat room is quite good. Some more convenience features than the A4. While the leather isn't the best, the leather trim is real leather (though the A4's leatherette is reputed to be very good).
But for roughly the same price as the TL-S, you could buy a manual transmission quattro that offers Audi's excellent AWD system, giving you more capability and security in wet or snowy weather. The Audi will offer better safety features that the Acura doesn't have, such as side curtain airbags and optional rear side airbags (the 2003 TL-S does NOT offer any kind of head protection; I think Acura is waiting for an early MY2004 release that will be built on the 2003 Accord that may have head protection). The Audi's emergency handling will be better, as evidenced in Consumer Reports' testing where the Acura, with a heavy front-end weight bias, was harder to control at the limit, with some fishtailing. The Audi will include four years of scheduled maintenance while the Acura does not come with scheduled maintenance.
It comes down to your priorities, in weighing incremental safety differences, features, power, and handling. Good luck!
If any folks are in the Seattle area, I would also be interested in experiences with dealers. What are people paying for their A4's? As an aside, it seems Seattle dealers stock many A4 Quattro 1.8T's with the Tiptronic, 16" wheels, heated seats, leatherette, ski sack, and sunroof.
Finally, any thoughts on the classiest color combinations? For some reason I really like Dolphin Grey with Platinum (I'm sick of Silver with Black).
Thanks!
...hey, NSchulman3... if you had to dump either the A4 or the WRX... which one would you keep?
Byron
So you've got choices -- what ever benefit the auto has (and frankly since I have one, I can tell you there are no benefits whatsoever to the auto trans, IMHO): lower performance, lower gas milage, less work on the driver's part, less fun and convenience; versus the manual transmission which offers higher performance, better gas mileage (theoretically since you are likely to drive less economically with the stick), more work, more fun and less convenience.
Choices are good -- and nothing I have said as either fact or opinion is meant to criticize anyone who has made the automatic decision (or the manual decision for that matter.) It is just that the 1.8T engine performs "better" (by most definitions) with a manual transmission.
Now onto the issue of "after 400 miles. . ." Audi engines, at least all Audi gasoline engines "open up" at approximately 5,000 miles and again at 10,000 miles. I can think of no reason that the tip in and of itself will change these intervals. Relax, the A4 1.8T quattro with either transmission is an excellent car -- I happen to believe, however, that it is more so with the manual transmission.
How I long for one myself -- whenever I get the chance to drive my wife's TT with that sweeet 1.8T 225HP engine and 6spd manual, well I just turn green with envy knowing that I have to get back into my old man's car -- an A6 with a tiptronic. Even the 300HP V8 can't negate the life sucking power of the tiptronic (for my tastes, that is).
Your milage may vary.
The back seat legroom is small for sure, but heck, I don't usually carry people around (except my girlfriend) and if I do, it might be at the most for an hour or so inside Chicago. It's not as big as a Lincoln Town car, but heck, it's enough.
All in all, I still love this car after 15,300 miles (Feb 28 is her 1st anniversary)......take note, Rocco.
Billy
Rick
solve their problem. Works really well when complainee is a girlfriend. Or consider the minivan
alternative.....
markcincinnati: are you on audiworld?
Thanks!
Thanks!
The differences that I've heard are the Avant's wheelbase is 1.7" longer and of course, the Avant is only available with quattro ...so that means no mutitronic option, evidently. But you want a 5-speed anyway, so nevermind.
--'rocco
As far as differences between the sedan and wagon, exterior dimensions are identical, except the wagon sits an inch higher (might just be the roof rack rails). The Avants are about 100 pounds heavier than a sedan with the same engine/drivetrain. There are some subtle differences in how the wagons are optioned.
A few people on AW are driving theirs already, if you're looking for some personal accounts.
Rick
Rick-- Same wheelbase??? ...hmmm, I was sure it was longer on the Avant ...1.7" is what I understood but no, eh? That's a disappointment.
--'rocco
I just hit 1000 miles on my 1.8T. Still flawless. I might go test drive the 3.0 later just for the heck of it.
vince...8o)
Just curious if anyone just bought a car had to pay the VIT (Vehicle Inventory Tax). Does
anyone know if this tax is a state mandated fee that the non-dealer car buyer has to pay
or is it one of those fees/tax that the dealer is trying to pass on to us? I live in Houston.
Thanks in advance!
There may be other Audi groups in Texas but that's the only one that I'm aware of. Let us know if you get any responses to your question over there.
--'rocco
--'rocco
Thanks!
brick44-- um, ok *looks puzzled* no reason, just curious ...no offense.
Rick-- Whoa! Guess what? I went to the Edmunds specifications area and this is what they're reporting: sedan wheelbase = 104.3" and the Avant wheelbase = 103.2" They are reporting that the length of the Avant is actually 2.7" shorter than the sedan. Can this be right??? I think I do remember somebody saying that the Avant was shorter but didn't pay it too much attention. I'm going to do some more research on this but can you look at your brochure again and see if you can confirm that the Avant's length is 176.3" and its wheelbase 103.2" and report back please? TIA!
--'rocco
To all you A4 owners out there: Does the 1.8T have the dual outlet exhaust coming out of the back like the 3.0 does?
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD
Interior dimensions are not listed with the exception of volumes. Interestingly enough, while the front volume is a steady 50.7 cu ft for both styles, the Avant has an extra .7 cu ft of room in the rear (39.4 to 40.1), which I suppose could be from the roofline although I'm hoping it's from a skooch more rear legroom. Luggage volume is listed at 13.4 and 27.8 cu ft respectively. No mention is made of room with the seats folded.
Again, I have not yet seen an Avant in person; this info comes strictly from Audi's literature
Thanks!
sorry if I sounded gruff-scirocc!
"Auto makers of the world, fix your gaze upon this engine.
How does Volkswagen AG manage to give out this much in cars that don't cost a whole lot? After all, this grunty but high-tech little powerhouse now can be had with a Volkswagen badge for around $19,000. Go to the domestics — and more than one of the Japanese auto makers, too — and that same money gets you some crappy unit that deserves the moniker of “4-banger.”
But somehow, VW makes a business case for doling out in inexpensive cars: DOHC, five valves per cylinder, turbocharging and intercooling — and the bragging rights of an even 100 hp/L. That exposes a $19,000 Pontiac Grand Am and its grubby pushrod V-6, while similarly thrashing any 4-cyl. from anybody in this price range.
This engine has enjoyed a unique distinction of migrating on and off the Best Engines list a couple of times, usually depending on the power level. We originally liked this 4-cyl. technical showcase at its initial 150-hp rating, so it stands to reason we're happier still with an added 30 hp. The 180-hp rating has done nothing to blunt this engine's outstanding NVH properties — the VW 1.8T continues as one of the market's sweetest, most powerful 4-cyl. engines, and to call it a “base” engine is a disservice.
We applaud VW's generosity in providing this level of engine techno-finery at the bottom part of the market, but we remain at a loss to explain the yo-yo marketing that dictates this engine's ever-changing power ratings. Last year, VW-brand vehicles got the engine at 150 hp and the up-market Audi unit enjoyed the advantage of the 170-hp rating for sedans and 180 hp for the TT sports car.
Although we can't see the reason for such minor distinctions within a brand, the rationale is at least evident. But for 2002, we're befuddled by the VW brand's access to the punchy 180-hp rating for the 1.8T, while Audi's all-new A4 remains saddled with the 170-hp version. Huh?
That's OK, VW. We're happy to point buyers to the Golf or Jetta 1.8T, thankful that VW makes available in affordable cars one of the most technically sophisticated 4-cyl. engines available at any price."
Rick-- Okay, thanx. This issue has now really got me curious. I'm going to continue to do some more research on this when I have the chance.
gerry-- Yup, it does look cool!
Bradd-- Good comments! *lol* ...exactly what I've been hearing too. But still doesn't explain why we in Seattle area get both crumby weather and worse deals on A4s! :-p
--'rocco
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD
The only ones I trust are the exterior dimensions.
About rear legroom, I sat in an 02 Avant and it feels about the same as the sedan. It's larger than the pre 02 A4's but not by much....barely noticeable.
Billy