2005 AUDI S4

[BMWDave]

2005 AUDI S4
DATE IN FLEET: May 2-16
AS TESTED PRICE: $55,745
POWERTRAIN: 4.2-liter V8; awd, six-speed automatic
OUTPUT: 340 hp @ 7000 rpm, 302 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
CURB WEIGHT: 3925 lbs
MPG (EPA COMBINED/AW OBSERVED): 17.78/16.03

RAYNAL: I know I should love this car. I love other A4s, so one with all this power and torque should be just the ticket. And I do like it. But my problem is there's the 2.0-liter turbo A4: I think that is the best engine for this small chassis. It is a better-balanced package. No, clearly it is not as fast as the S4, but it is plenty quick and feels lighter on its feet.

All A4s, this one included, are beautifully built and feel exceptionally solid, with good ride and handling characteristics. This S4 is all that and quick quick quick. There's nothing really wrong with it-I just like the A4 2.0 turbo better. Yes indeed, for nearly $20K less, I'll take the turbo four.

HART: I'm not sure what Raynal is smoking to prefer the 2.0-liter turbo motor to this refined, potent V8. While I like that turbo motor in a Golf, I love the V8 in the A4. The car is a rocket ship with crisp handling, a sporty (read, sometimes harsh) ride over Detroit's wonderful freeway system, great brakes and an excellent interior. This is a driver's car; the back seat is merely for decoration and your briefcase. The trunk is big enough for a couple of golf bags and probably a couple of soft-sided suitcases.

But this car is all about driving, and from that standpoint it's wonderfully fulfilling. Yes, it's expensive, but the overall package is worth it.

LUU: Who doesn't like an S4? I'm not sure it looks better than the outgoing car, but it still turns heads. The interior is handsome, particularly with the two-tone leather/suede Recaro seats. The handling leans to the choppy side, which contrasts with the S4's smooth, touring-car feel. The steering is quick but not aggressive. Is the S4 fast? Yes, but not M3 fast; the power delivery is not as explosive as the M3's, or even what I'd expect of an S-model Audi. But the S4 straddles the line between performance and comfort by providing four doors, a sleek, upscale presence and a strong dose of sport and power.

MORRISON: Raynal is crazy to say he prefers the 2.0-liter turbo. Yes, his pocketbook might prefer it, but I'm disturbed if so too does the driver in him, especially after testing the two cars back to back. The S4 delivers awesome performance, with the advantage it holds over the 2.0-liter comparable to that held by BMW's M3 over the outgoing 325i: The two are a universe apart. This is a car for a driver's driver, and price aside, there is nothing about the 2.0-liter that appeals to me more than the V8.

Some might prefer a slight rethink of the suspension settings, as the stiff setup pays off (mostly) for hard cornering but delivers some impact shock over relatively minor bumps. But if that really bothers you, this isn't your car; it provides more grip than 99 percent of its drivers will ever even dream of exploiting.

No, it does not involve its driver as does the M3, and as Luu says, it doesn't feel as raw and explosive. But it's a damn fine experience. Great, quick steering, killer brakes, one of the world's best interiors. Even the automatic gearbox is decent, though the true six-speed manual will go a long way to adding some of the missing involvement. In fact, the entire shebang entices you into full-fledged hooligan mode far more often than is prudent. Now, bring on the RS4 and get the hell out of my way!

[Raghavan]

3925 lbs??? damn, quattro and the V8 make this thing FAT!!

[BMWDave]

I edited the quote out because if people start quoting your post it would get really long.

[Raghavan]

I edited the quote out because if people start quoting your post it would get really long.

??? huh???

[BMWDave]

I edited the quote out because if people start quoting your post it would get really long.

??? huh???

Basically, you shouldnt quote the article because then if people start quoting your post the thread gets very hard to read.  Thats all.

[Raghavan]

I edited the quote out because if people start quoting your post it would get really long.

??? huh???

Basically, you shouldnt quote the article because then if people start quoting your post the thread gets very hard to read.  Thats all.

i didn't quote anything.... :blink:  

[BMWDave]

I edited the quote out because if people start quoting your post it would get really long.

??? huh???

Basically, you shouldnt quote the article because then if people start quoting your post the thread gets very hard to read.  Thats all.

i didn't quote anything.... :blink:

You "quoted" my article, and thus the article showed up again.  By pressing the quote button instead of add reply, you quote the post youre responding to, and so you accidentally quoted the whole article I posted again.

[Raghavan]

I edited the quote out because if people start quoting your post it would get really long.

??? huh???

Basically, you shouldnt quote the article because then if people start quoting your post the thread gets very hard to read.  Thats all.

i didn't quote anything.... :blink:

You "quoted" my article, and thus the article showed up again.  By pressing the quote button instead of add reply, you quote the post youre responding to, and so you accidentally quoted the whole article I posted again.

i did? i didn't know that i quoted the article. i just though i responded.
o well. Thanks anyway.

[BMWDave]

I edited the quote out because if people start quoting your post it would get really long.

??? huh???

Basically, you shouldnt quote the article because then if people start quoting your post the thread gets very hard to read.  Thats all.

i didn't quote anything.... :blink:

You "quoted" my article, and thus the article showed up again.  By pressing the quote button instead of add reply, you quote the post youre responding to, and so you accidentally quoted the whole article I posted again.

i did? i didn't know that i quoted the article. i just though i responded.
o well. Thanks anyway.

No problem.  But even with all the pounds, the car is seriously quick.

[Raghavan]

I edited the quote out because if people start quoting your post it would get really long.

??? huh???

Basically, you shouldnt quote the article because then if people start quoting your post the thread gets very hard to read.  Thats all.

i didn't quote anything.... :blink:

You "quoted" my article, and thus the article showed up again.  By pressing the quote button instead of add reply, you quote the post youre responding to, and so you accidentally quoted the whole article I posted again.

i did? i didn't know that i quoted the article. i just though i responded.
o well. Thanks anyway.

No problem.  But even with all the pounds, the car is seriously quick.

yes, but it's quite heavy, being that the A8 is much bigger and only about 500 lbs more.

[850CSi]

I really don't understand Audi's logic with the S4... It's WAAAAAY too heavy IMO, which is why they should return to the twin-turbo 6-cylinder setup of the B5 S4 (Which was also heavy, though).

Look..
The 2006 A4 3.2 quattro weighs ~3400 lbs and has a good 250HP.
Let's bolt 2 Turbochargers onto that thing, and give it the various upgrades S models usually recieve.
I'm betting around 3700 lbs. and 370HP would be the result (Although you could get a lot more... The 2.7T was known to get over 350HP with a simple chip upgrade). You could always make it lighter using lighter materials and removing some sound-deadening, etc.

I would like to see a 3500 lb, 375HP S4.
That would be a real killer.

[Raghavan]

I really don't understand Audi's logic with the S4... It's WAAAAAY too heavy IMO, which is why they should return to the twin-turbo 6-cylinder setup of the B5 S4 (Which was also heavy, though).

Look..
The 2006 A4 3.2 quattro weighs ~3400 lbs and has a good 250HP.
Let's bolt 2 Turbochargers onto that thing, and give it the various upgrades S models usually recieve.
I'm betting around 3700 lbs. and 370HP would be the result (Although you could get a lot more... The 2.7T was known to get over 350HP with a simple chip upgrade). You could always make it lighter using lighter materials and removing some sound-deadening, etc.

I would like to see a 3500 lb, 375HP S4.
That would be a real killer.

maybe an RS4...

[BMWDave]

I really don't understand Audi's logic with the S4... It's WAAAAAY too heavy IMO, which is why they should return to the twin-turbo 6-cylinder setup of the B5 S4 (Which was also heavy, though).

Look..
The 2006 A4 3.2 quattro weighs ~3400 lbs and has a good 250HP.
Let's bolt 2 Turbochargers onto that thing, and give it the various upgrades S models usually recieve.
I'm betting around 3700 lbs. and 370HP would be the result (Although you could get a lot more... The 2.7T was known to get over 350HP with a simple chip upgrade). You could always make it lighter using lighter materials and removing some sound-deadening, etc.

I would like to see a 3500 lb, 375HP S4.
That would be a real killer.

The high weight is showing you that Audi is not focused purely on sport with the S4, but rather on fast GT touring.

[Raza]

I really don't understand Audi's logic with the S4... It's WAAAAAY too heavy IMO, which is why they should return to the twin-turbo 6-cylinder setup of the B5 S4 (Which was also heavy, though).

Look..
The 2006 A4 3.2 quattro weighs ~3400 lbs and has a good 250HP.
Let's bolt 2 Turbochargers onto that thing, and give it the various upgrades S models usually recieve.
I'm betting around 3700 lbs. and 370HP would be the result (Although you could get a lot more... The 2.7T was known to get over 350HP with a simple chip upgrade). You could always make it lighter using lighter materials and removing some sound-deadening, etc.

I would like to see a 3500 lb, 375HP S4.
That would be a real killer.

The high weight is showing you that Audi is not focused purely on sport with the S4, but rather on fast GT touring.

Call me a purist, but I believe that no car should weigh 3900 pounds.

[SJ_GTI]

I really don't understand Audi's logic with the S4... It's WAAAAAY too heavy IMO, which is why they should return to the twin-turbo 6-cylinder setup of the B5 S4 (Which was also heavy, though).

Look..
The 2006 A4 3.2 quattro weighs ~3400 lbs and has a good 250HP.
Let's bolt 2 Turbochargers onto that thing, and give it the various upgrades S models usually recieve.
I'm betting around 3700 lbs. and 370HP would be the result (Although you could get a lot more... The 2.7T was known to get over 350HP with a simple chip upgrade). You could always make it lighter using lighter materials and removing some sound-deadening, etc.

I would like to see a 3500 lb, 375HP S4.
That would be a real killer.

The high weight is showing you that Audi is not focused purely on sport with the S4, but rather on fast GT touring.

Call me a purist, but I believe that no car should weigh 3900 pounds.

Keep in mind Audi also has an RS4 which weighs around 3600 lbs (close to an M3). I agree the S4 is on the chunky side though. I still wouldn't mind having one.  

Though honestly I understand the first guys point. 200 HP in a 3300 lb package has its advantages over 340 HP in a 3900 lb package. If you gace the wheel/brake/suspension upgrade to the normal A4 2.0T (new Ultra-sport model...?) it would be a great car.

[850CSi]

Hell, you can probably get 300HP out of a 2.0T...

[850CSi]

I really don't understand Audi's logic with the S4... It's WAAAAAY too heavy IMO, which is why they should return to the twin-turbo 6-cylinder setup of the B5 S4 (Which was also heavy, though).

Look..
The 2006 A4 3.2 quattro weighs ~3400 lbs and has a good 250HP.
Let's bolt 2 Turbochargers onto that thing, and give it the various upgrades S models usually recieve.
I'm betting around 3700 lbs. and 370HP would be the result (Although you could get a lot more... The 2.7T was known to get over 350HP with a simple chip upgrade). You could always make it lighter using lighter materials and removing some sound-deadening, etc.

I would like to see a 3500 lb, 375HP S4.
That would be a real killer.

The high weight is showing you that Audi is not focused purely on sport with the S4, but rather on fast GT touring.

True, and somehow they still manage to make the S4 handle beautifully.

Hey, the M3 isn't very light either... The S4 weighs 400 lbs. more, but it's an AWD V8 sedan as opposed to a RWD I6. coupe.

[Fire It Up]

Hell, you can probably get 300HP out of a 2.0T...

It wouldnt be reliable enough for a production car.  

[850CSi]

I really don't understand Audi's logic with the S4... It's WAAAAAY too heavy IMO, which is why they should return to the twin-turbo 6-cylinder setup of the B5 S4 (Which was also heavy, though).

Look..
The 2006 A4 3.2 quattro weighs ~3400 lbs and has a good 250HP.
Let's bolt 2 Turbochargers onto that thing, and give it the various upgrades S models usually recieve.
I'm betting around 3700 lbs. and 370HP would be the result (Although you could get a lot more... The 2.7T was known to get over 350HP with a simple chip upgrade). You could always make it lighter using lighter materials and removing some sound-deadening, etc.

I would like to see a 3500 lb, 375HP S4.
That would be a real killer.

The high weight is showing you that Audi is not focused purely on sport with the S4, but rather on fast GT touring.

Call me a purist, but I believe that no car should weigh 3900 pounds.

I'm the same way.

WTF are we doing, driving 4000 lb. monsters...

The frikkin RL, a 6-CYLINDER, weighs 4000 lbs...
If that's not crazy, I don't know what is.

[850CSi]

Hell, you can probably get 300HP out of a 2.0T...

It wouldnt be reliable enough for a production car.

That's not a rule written in stone. I was talking more of aftermarket upgrades, anyways.

[Raghavan]

Hell, you can probably get 300HP out of a 2.0T...

It wouldnt be reliable enough for a production car.

why not? Mitsubishi can get 400hp out of a 2.0 in their Evo.

[Raza]

I really don't understand Audi's logic with the S4... It's WAAAAAY too heavy IMO, which is why they should return to the twin-turbo 6-cylinder setup of the B5 S4 (Which was also heavy, though).

Look..
The 2006 A4 3.2 quattro weighs ~3400 lbs and has a good 250HP.
Let's bolt 2 Turbochargers onto that thing, and give it the various upgrades S models usually recieve.
I'm betting around 3700 lbs. and 370HP would be the result (Although you could get a lot more... The 2.7T was known to get over 350HP with a simple chip upgrade). You could always make it lighter using lighter materials and removing some sound-deadening, etc.

I would like to see a 3500 lb, 375HP S4.
That would be a real killer.

The high weight is showing you that Audi is not focused purely on sport with the S4, but rather on fast GT touring.

Call me a purist, but I believe that no car should weigh 3900 pounds.

Keep in mind Audi also has an RS4 which weighs around 3600 lbs (close to an M3). I agree the S4 is on the chunky side though. I still wouldn't mind having one.  

Though honestly I understand the first guys point. 200 HP in a 3300 lb package has its advantages over 340 HP in a 3900 lb package. If you gace the wheel/brake/suspension upgrade to the normal A4 2.0T (new Ultra-sport model...?) it would be a great car.

There's a reason I got the Passat 1.8T instead of the V6, since I knew the turbo four would be peppier and lighter on the front wheels than the lazier, though more powerful V6.  

But still--3200 pounds on the Passat is heavy enough.  If the car can't be made for less than 3500, priorities need to be reevaluated.

[Fire It Up]

Hell, you can probably get 300HP out of a 2.0T...

It wouldnt be reliable enough for a production car.

why not? Mitsubishi can get 400hp out of a 2.0 in their Evo.

Well, the 4G63 (or something with a 4 and a G in it) is a crrazy engine. I'm not so sure about the 2.0T. (Performance - moddability speaking)

[Raghavan]

Hell, you can probably get 300HP out of a 2.0T...

It wouldnt be reliable enough for a production car.

why not? Mitsubishi can get 400hp out of a 2.0 in their Evo.

Well, the 4G63 (or something with a 4 and a G in it) is a crrazy engine. I'm not so sure about the 2.0T. (Performance - moddability speaking)

it's easily possible.