2009 Audi A4 Avant: More Fun than the Camaro?

Camaro to borrow, A4 to own.

Burn outs and "look at me everyone" is fun but it gets old after a short time.

A mariokart mode in real life would be sweet. imagine, driving down the road and having to dodge banana peels and turtle shells and such. And you could blast undeserving drivers from the fast lane out of your way.

I get both my S4 Avant. :)

"The visibility can best be described as "exotic," and with its wide, squared-off hood, the car is difficult to place into a corner. I kept feeling like I was going to smash into shrubs and trash cans mid-corner."

" much would be sullied by a steering wheel seemingly shaped not for human hands"

I was really hoping GM would have resolved those issues as those same traits haunted previous Camaro's. Given it is a performance coupe I can excuse the lack or limited visibility.

Is the driving position at least better than the last Camaro? I sincerely hope so as that cars driving position was the worst Ive yet to experience. To make matter worse the high cowl/low seating position further amplified its size and lack of road placement. It was just all wrong. The plastics and the lack of shift quality made it even worse.

In terms of my (limited) experience with a few of GM's high performance offerings (several C4 and C5 Corvettes base/Z06 and numerous 93-02 Camaro Z28/SS and a base Solstive manual that I absoulutely hated) Ive always felt that GM never could grasp the concept of a car driving smaller than it is physically. With the Corvette (especially Z06) being a light car one would think it would feel more nimble and feel physically smaller but its the exact opposite.

"it made up for in this environment with athleticism and agility."

Many die hard muscle car enthusiasts don't understand that brute force isn't always necessary in a fun car. Finesse, agility, precision, technique and athleticism go a long way in terms of a positive driving experience. An overly responsive, eager, refined, free revving engine and great shift quality (something that base Solstice I drove seriously lacked) basically makes the deal complete.

This thread made me remember a track battle from another publication between the awesome supercharged CTS-V and the V10 powered BMW M5. Even though the CTS-V was consistently 3 to 4/10ths of a second faster over the 2 mile track the commentator stated that " while in the CTS-V you always feel that you're conquering the track rather than cooperating with it".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4Fop4eC1cw

I guess it all boils down to personal preference and target audience.

hondacura - I think of the difference as a miata, RX8, S2000 group versus the Mustang and Camaro group. They're all fine cars in their own way. For me, it depends where I am. I have some fun roads I can use, but I can't go all that fast (cops and blind corners) so I think I would prefer the little sports coupe group here. If I was surrounded by thousands of square miles of fields (like I am farther south, west and north) I would probably prefer the muscle car group with the push-your-butt-into-the-seats power.

So the sort version for me is it depends where I'm living.

RWD vehicles require a different approach to driving that many find more rewarding. Being 'easy to drive' never qualified as a compliment in my book.

Is it more rewarding to glide around a track in an M5 or to conquer it in a CTS-V? I suspect many enthusiasts will favor the latter.

I'll take the scalpel to the sledge hammer any day. I've driven both, and I find the former more fun, even if ultimately I have to give up a few tenths. I guess I prefer lateral to longitudinal g's. Also, any idiot can mash the throttle and go fast in a straight line, but balancing a car through the twisties takes some talent.

"RWD vehicles require a different approach to driving that many find more rewarding. Being 'easy to drive' never qualified as a compliment in my book."

I don't think the original post was meant to draw a line between RWD and AWD. Imagine that instead of the Audi, the comparison was with one of the long term BMWs. I think the essence of the original point would remain the same.

http://monstermiata.com/

I will own one of these someday.

I'm definitely in for the light, small, nimble driving experience. That's not to say I can't enjoy a big brutish thing (having powerslid a Jaguar XJR was a lot of fun) but you can't beat something with a sublime chassis in my mind, even if it's lacking in power. And of course, I also love cars that don't need a lot of power because they're on the good side of 2500 pounds or so.

i like it, definitely not "fast" in stock trim but the instant torque makes it feel the part. a chip would make it even better... and a turbo upgrade will make it great.

Love the Mariokart

You know, I don't see what the complaint with the Camaro steering wheel is. It isn't the best wheel I've gripped, but it certainly fits quite comfortably in my hand.

Visibility also isn't nearly as bad as the Edmunds folks are making it out to be. To me it seems like a cross between a Corvette up front and a Cobalt coupe in back, with a few extra feet in between.

Then again, it doesn't surprise me that they exaggerate the Camaro's fault. Look how they took a one-off list of single faults found in a very few Camaros that was posted on the Camaro5 forums, and used that without any statistical data to say the Camaro is plagued with quality problems. I'm about ready to just come out and say it: these guys are hacks.

Thank you for writing an article like this! I've argued for years that there are different ways to judge a car as different people weigh a vehicle's different attributes differently. Personally, I value torque, comfort, and style so I've been annoyed at most reviewers trend towards valuing handling on twisty roads above all else. Personally, I like the way motorcycles are reviewed: sportbike editors judge sportbikes according to their standards and cruiser editors judge cruisers.

The question largely depends on where you are in life and what kind of person you are. There are Camaro type folks and A4 type folks. I'm definitely an A4 type person.

After recently shopping all the cars in its class, I was blown away by how good the new A4 drove. I preferred its combination of ride and handling to a 328, it felt as quick (though the engine is not as smooth), it had a nicer interior, and you don't see one on every block. However, after my horrible dealer/reliability experience with VW I don't think I will actually buy another one of their cars. And it was way too expensive compared to say, a G37.

"Is it more rewarding to glide around a track in an M5 or to conquer it in a CTS-V? I suspect many enthusiasts will favor the latter."

Wrinkle, the conquering comment was actually negative as the M5 showed more finesse and used its technique rather than extreme brute force on the track. At least thats what the commentator stated. I prefer finesse.

"Then again, it doesn't surprise me that they exaggerate the Camaro's fault. Look how they took a one-off list of single faults found in a very few Camaros that was posted on the Camaro5 forums, and used that without any statistical data to say the Camaro is plagued with quality problems. I'm about ready to just come out and say it: these guys are hacks."

Stovt, it goes both ways as when the current Tundra debuted certain people here and the media literally broke their necks trying to post about the few camshaft failures the 5.7L V8 had. I think there were only 25-30 examples with associated issues.

It basically had to do with public perception of both companies. Toyota was relying on its reputation for quality although thats slipped a bit in the past few years, and they have admitted it. People simply jumped on any and every opportunity to validate that.

In regards to GM, GM has to prove themselves to the public as their reputation unfortunately isn't as good as Toyota's. GM has claimed to step up quality control tremendously (which they have) among other things. That said, when the smallest quality issue surfaces, those same people will jump on the story and blow it out of proportion.

"Horses for courses", as the Brits like to say. My 2700 lb. Club Sport is hugely entertaining on a twisting back road, and returns 31 mpg at 80 mph on interstate jaunts. That said, I also enjoy cars with tons of horsepower and torque; the only problem is that they are usually too big and heavy for my tastes. One of these days I may yet buy some iteration of the Mustang, but at present I can't wait to try an Evora. And if all else fails I just take a long ride on my 1996 Speed Triple.

Every road I'm on, I can think of a different car that would be just perfect for it. I generally don't care much at all for the Challenger, as I find it far to big and ponderous, but when I drove from LA to Tuscan last month for my wife's grandparents' 50th wedding anniversary, I could think of few cars I'd rather take on that drive than a Challenger. When I got there, the event was on Roller Coaster Road, and boy did it live up to its name. I wish I had a GTI or MX-5 or perhaps even an Evo following behind my fantasy Challenger on the way up so I could hop into that. Its too bad that unlike the Edmunds editors, most of us can only have two, maybe three cars in the garage.

i love my GTI. its very likely my next car will be an audi.