First the A5...now the S5

[Raza]

Car and Driver's "Ferrari has more soul" is garbage.  I remember a comparo where they pitted the 360 against the Z8 and the Z8 was better in almost every way, but the Ferrari won only because it was a Ferrari.

People get badge blind with those cars.

[TheIntrepid]

Agreed.

[MexicoCityM3]

Car and Driver's "Ferrari has more soul" is garbage.? I remember a comparo where they pitted the 360 against the Z8 and the Z8 was better in almost every way, but the Ferrari won only because it was a Ferrari.

People get badge blind with those cars.

I remember that one too. They said the Z8 cockpit was too windy.

[TBR]

Are you implying that in *some way* an S4 is better than a 996TT?

No I am not, though in fact it is better in "some way" (that being practicality, it also undebatebly triumphs over the M3 in the way). I am sure the M3 is in fact more exciting to drive than the S4, but that doesn't make the S4 an appliance for speed, it is just a result of what it is (a relatively heavy AWD sedan). I think this is excuseable in cars that are meant for daily transportation (a task which the S4 performs better), but once you get into Ferrari territory excitement is more important.

[MexicoCityM3]

No I am not, though in fact it is better in "some way" (that being practicality, it also undebatebly triumphs over the M3 in the way). I am sure the M3 is in fact more exciting to drive than the S4, but that doesn't make the S4 an appliance for speed, it is just a result of what it is (a relatively heavy AWD sedan). I think this is excuseable in cars that are meant for daily transportation (a task which the S4 performs better), but once you get into Ferrari territory excitement is more important.

I didn't say it was an "appliance for speed", C/D said it and about a 911TT. I think that statement does not apply to an S4 or (even less) to a 911TT.

I'd say the importance of excitement (or looks, speed, reliability, etc.), is an entirely personal preference. That's why I'd take the M3 in this case. That of course doesn't make it "better" than an S4 (or any other car for that matter).  I just prefer it in this particular (S4/RS4 vs M3) comparison due to its being more exciting to drive.

[850CSi]

The RS 4 is more capable than the E46 M3 when you're talking about lap times, etc. but I'd bet the M3's a lot more fun. At least that's what Tiff Needell said.

[850CSi]

Would you take an A4 Cabrio over this?

Yes. But that's mostly because of my love for convertibles.

[Raza]

I remember that one too. They said the Z8 cockpit was too windy.

I'm not even a BMW fanboy, but it's kind of ridiculous.  That comparo pissed me off. 

[SVT_Power]

I didn't even know there was a S4 convertible until today

[Colonel Cadillac]

I didn't even know there was a S4 convertible until today

Shame! 

[BENZ BOY15]

I really don't like it. But I do love the S8/A8. I saw a white S8 the other day....looking hot. The A8L is a huge ass car. I love it though!

[AudiMan2001]

To my best knowledge, there have been two comparos. The first involved an S4 and an M3 (plus a third-place-always AMG Merc), and the second an RS4, an M3, and another AMG Merc (in Europe).

About the RS4, I think you are right. I'll admit that the RS4 will be faster and more capable than an E46 M3 in almost any situation. As it should for what it costs. However, it is not necessarily more fun and for my money, I'll take an E46 M3 every time and wait to see the next E90 M3 which will most likely wipe the floor with the RS4 (though it may also become less fun, we'll see).

The S4 is a different matter. I have seen it beat the M3 only on that C/D comparo and on a run on a damp track by Top Gear. Funny how when its a contest in C/D between say, a Ferrari and a Porsche Turbo, the Ferrari always wins because it has more soul and is more fun to drive (while being slower than the Porsche), while a Porsche Turbo has been called by C/D an "appliance for speed" (while being faster). However, when comparing the M3 and the S4 C/D editors seem to turn into old geezers who prefer an "easy to dirve , unflappable" S4 (which is objectively slower) over a "raw boy racer image" M3 (objectively faster). I'll take the Ferrari in the first case and the M3 in the second, thank you.

Evo actually rated an E46 M3 as better than a much more expensive RS4 recently in a comparo won by a Cayman S.

Actually, after the first generation S4 was introduced (bi-turbo), it was compared to the E36 M3 (this is back in '97 or so), which it won out.  The one you refer to was the more recent one done just a few years back.  In fact, the S4 has placed 1st in all C & D comparison tests it's been in.  You brought up an interesting point regarding the RS4's steep price, but there have been tons of comparison tests where BMW vehicles have won despite their high price tags.  Now, we'll see if Audi can do the same.

As for the comment about the S4 being more fun to drive, it's perplexing to see how you describe the fact that the editors liked the S4's "unflappable" "easy to drive" nature as a demerit, when those same superlatives have been used to describe BMW vehicles' dynamics in the past.  I also point out that there have been tons of comparison tests where BMWs have won despite not being the fastest (or quickest) vehicle in the lot (for the most recent example of this, see: $35,000 Sports Sedans in the October 2005 issue of Car & Driver).

[MexicoCityM3]

Actually, after the first generation S4 was introduced (bi-turbo), it was compared to the E36 M3 (this is back in '97 or so), which it won out. The one you refer to was the more recent one done just a few years back. In fact, the S4 has placed 1st in all C & D comparison tests it's been in. You brought up an interesting point regarding the RS4's steep price, but there have been tons of comparison tests where BMW vehicles have won despite their high price tags. Now, we'll see if Audi can do the same.

As for the comment about the S4 being more fun to drive, it's perplexing to see how you describe the fact that the editors liked the S4's "unflappable" "easy to drive" nature as a demerit, when those same superlatives have been used to describe BMW vehicles' dynamics in the past. I also point out that there have been tons of comparison tests where BMWs have won despite not being the fastest (or quickest) vehicle in the lot (for the most recent example of this, see: $35,000 Sports Sedans in the October 2005 issue of Car & Driver).

I remember well the adjectives used on various 3 series cars that won comparos in C/D. Phrases like "a liquid that never sloshes", "this car makes you a better driver", or "black magic" regarding the suspension tuning were written. However, in those cases, the A4 was never relegated to second place because it was "raw" or a "boy racer". The A4 also never did beat the 3 in the objective tests. So, your comparison does not necessarily applies as is.

I agree that the fastest car is not necessarily the best. That's why I'd take the M3 over the RS4 (the price difference is also important). There was also one comparo where an A4 1.8T Quattro beat an E46 323i even though it was slower (in that case I believe it was well deserved, the A4 was probably more fun than that base 323i with skinny tires).

What I can't fathom is why when comparing the sportier versions of these same cars suddenly "sporty" qualities become a liability for the M3. When picking in this segment, fun and involving are my top criteria. In the old S4 vs. E36 M3 comparo you mention, if I remember well, the S4 won out on practicality. Give me a break, C/D is supposed to be an enthusiast magazine and they pick based on rear seat room? Leave that to Consumer Reports.

[Raza]

That's actually an awful comparison.  There are barely five words about the handling of the cars in the whole thing.

[JYODER240]

Car and Driver's "Ferrari has more soul" is garbage.? I remember a comparo where they pitted the 360 against the Z8 and the Z8 was better in almost every way, but the Ferrari won only because it was a Ferrari.

People get badge blind with those cars.

Bit of a bold statement when you haven't driven either of the cars for yourself

[Raza]

Bit of a bold statement when you haven't driven either of the cars for yourself

No, that's what they said in the comparison.

[TheIntrepid]

I didn't even know there was a S4 convertible until today

Really? They've been out for quite a while.

[SVT_Power]

Really? They've been out for quite a while.

[JYODER240]

No, that's what they said in the comparison.

They said that the Ferrari having more soul is garbage and the only reason why it won was because of its badge?

[Raza]

They said that the Ferrari having more soul is garbage and the only reason why it won was because of its badge?

That even though the BMW was better it felt more special driving the Ferrari because it was a Ferrari.

[AudiMan2001]

I remember well the adjectives used on various 3 series cars that won comparos in C/D. Phrases like "a liquid that never sloshes", "this car makes you a better driver", or "black magic" regarding the suspension tuning were written. However, in those cases, the A4 was never relegated to second place because it was "raw" or a "boy racer". The A4 also never did beat the 3 in the objective tests. So, your comparison does not necessarily applies as is.

I agree that the fastest car is not necessarily the best. That's why I'd take the M3 over the RS4 (the price difference is also important). There was also one comparo where an A4 1.8T Quattro beat an E46 323i even though it was slower (in that case I believe it was well deserved, the A4 was probably more fun than that base 323i with skinny tires).

What I can't fathom is why when comparing the sportier versions of these same cars suddenly "sporty" qualities become a liability for the M3. When picking in this segment, fun and involving are my top criteria. In the old S4 vs. E36 M3 comparo you mention, if I remember well, the S4 won out on practicality. Give me a break, C/D is supposed to be an enthusiast magazine and they pick based on rear seat room? Leave that to Consumer Reports.

I can't speak for other automobile mags, but with Car and Driver, they're usually looking for the best all-around car, with an emphasis on good performance (particularly handling).  Beemers in the past has always been praised for their ideal compromise of handling vs ride.  However, if I remember correctly, this was not the case with the M3.  I remember them describing the M3's ride as extremely firm to the point of being punishing, not to mention the noise levels.  I believe the S4 won because it simply was a better all-around car with fewer compromises while still offering boatloads of fun; while the Beemer may still have the upper hand in steering feel and such, it's no longer enough to overcome the punishing ride, NVH, etc ..  That was the dealbreaker for the M3 in my opinion. 

Of course, all of this is subjective, and what may seem fine for you won't seem fine for the editors and vice versa.

[Raza]

This is slightly a non sequitur, but I've never found a punishing ride, and I've driven an Elise. 

Most journalists are too old and fat and soft if you ask me. 

[MexicoCityM3]

A spanish magazine (www.km77.com) just came out with official engine info for the A5/S5. The A5 will run a 265hp 3.2L V6 w/FSI and the S5 will run a 354hp 4.2L V8. No info on weight yet.

Those numbers are euro-spec, U.S. cars might vary slightly.

[AudiMan2001]

A spanish magazine (www.km77.com) just came out with official engine info for the A5/S5. The A5 will run a 265hp 3.2L V6 w/FSI and the S5 will run a 354hp 4.2L V8. No info on weight yet.

Those numbers are euro-spec, U.S. cars might vary slightly.

I hear that there will be a six speed manual version available on both the V6 and the V8; if that's the case, that's excellent news.

I'm still holding out for a DSG option as well ....

[TheIntrepid]

If the A5 is essentially an A4 coupe, why doesn't it have a 2.0T option?

[r0tor]

If the A5 is essentially an A4 coupe, why doesn't it have a 2.0T option?

look at the link i p0sted in the other thread...

[MrH]

This is slightly a non sequitur, but I've never found a punishing ride, and I've driven an Elise. 

Most journalists are too old and fat and soft if you ask me. 

You, uh, want a cookie for being such a hard ass? 

[TheIntrepid]

look at the link i p0sted in the other thread...

Thank you.

[Raza]

You, uh, want a cookie for being such a hard ass? 

If you're offering...

[SJ_GTI]

If the A5 is essentially an A4 coupe, why doesn't it have a 2.0T option?

Its not an A4 Coupe. If it was an A4 coupe, it would be called the A4 Coupe.

Forgetting the fact that its on an all new platform, its style  and interior (and I will assume price) suggest it is more of an A6 coupe, if anything. As its name suggests, however, it will sit somewhere between the A4 and A6.