MVR 155

NICE!!!!

What did you end up doing for options??

6spdg37s

6MT , premium plus , ibis white / magma red/black int , sport diff , tech pack , summer 5 segment spoke 19"s

MVR 155

You didn't go with the B&O audio? For the extra $850 it's a bargain..... If you can still edit your order I would definitely suggest it.

6spdg37s

Na I devfided against it was trying to keep the cost down ... The one I drove had reg stereo no tech pac or anything and sounded fine to me

E in Phila

Resale mistake. I would try to switch that. Most cars have it because it's considered a no-brainer upgrade.

Dave68

Now that you've drawn me into the discussion......

Would you comment on this news clipping?

http://www.carcomplaints.com/news/20...-lawsuit.shtml

Seriously, you should enjoy your Audi until its warranty has expired and no longer. They do perform well and are comfortable. If that is at the top of your list, enjoy yours while you can.

Regarding Mazda: I never stated that any Mazda competes directly with Audi, Mercedes, Porsche, or BMW BUT, consider these facts when comparing Mazda to non-luxury brands:

1. Mazda is the only manufacturer to have 2 of its models in Car & Driver's 10 Best Cars for 2015
2. Mazda's 3 came out on top in Car & Driver's Best interior in any vehicle under $30,000.
3. Mazdas on average are more reliable than that of any German manufacturer's models, especially VW and Mini.

Side note regarding Lexus: Motor Trend just compared the new Lexus NX 200T F Sport against 4 other mini-SUVs. Here are the results:

1. Lexus NX200T F Sport
2. BMW X3 XDrive28I
3. Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
4. Lincoln MKC 2.0 AWD
5. Volvo XC60 T6

While Audi does offer a Q5 with turbo 2-liter, they didn't have any for media evaluations. The diesel version was tested and while it did perform well, its interior was described as "pretty boring and old" with leather that would've placed 5th out of 6. The Evoque interior placed first, the Lexus, second and the BMW, last.

Vernon

The article referenced in the link is the 2L turbo engine, not the Audi S4 engine. My wife has the 2L T engine in her 2010 Passat wagon and we've had no concerns - guess we're lucky.

The Audi S4 has a 3L supercharged engine. I've had no oil consumption concerns with my 2010 S4.

I would agree that any of the cars in the OP's market are expensive to service outside of warranty.

I also have a '14 Mazda3 GT sedan (2014 was only available with the auto) and it's a wonderful car. It satisfies many of the same driver appeal qualities as the S4 but at a reduced level of achievement. The '15 Mazda 3 GT is available with a manual transmission - a 'must have' for the OP. A better competitor for the Mazda3 would be a Volkswagen Golf. But these cars don't 'hit the mark' sought by the OP.

The OP will thoroughly enjoy the Audi S4.
Great choice for the OP's market - congratulations!

OP, if you enjoy music, add the B & O system - as others have suggested - to your factory order.
It's a very fine sounding system.

Dave68

This has been a problem with direct injection engines by VW and Audi, although maybe not to the extent of the 2.0 liter. Turbocharging and supercharging may aggravate the oil consumption issue.

Drivability issues due to excessive oil use tend to surface at the 60,000 -80,000 mile mark in many DI cars.

I too, have a 14 Mazda 3 GT, but with Eibach suspension. Its auto tranny is exceptional, especially in Sport mode. The Golf R is probably close to what the OP needs, although I have no doubt that it too will have oil consumption issues.

E in Phila

A Mazda with an auto tranny is a great car for one's wife or daughter, so practical. How is your gas mileage? Pretty awesome I'll bet.

Dave68

I know you're being sarcastic, but I'll tell you, anyway that its handling at double posted limits is exceptional for an economy car. My average MPG is about 30. And after having Corvettes for more than 34 years, I honestly do not feel like I need a mega-horsepower monster on the street. Maybe if I were to move to Montana......

6spdg37s

I am not overly concerned about that for a few reasons ...

-generally the longest I keep a car is a 1-2 years...
-life is too short to drive boring cars
-I worked as a mechanic and am mechanically inclined
-my best friend owns a car shop so I get everything for wholesale prices and can do the work myself or with him

MVR 155

I am enjoying my Audi and I'm not one that keeps my DD cars past the warranty period so long term reliability is non issue for me at the end of the day. I've owned my Audi for 2 years now and other than routine service and a software recall for the airbags the car is rock solid. I owned 4 Acuras before this car and all of them visited the service department for warranty prior to the 2 year mark. One of them had a blown transmission at 17K miles!!!

All car companies have issues and recalls from time to time..... it's not uncommon. If you want to talk recalls how about we look at Lexus/Toyota....LOL!!! They are one of the kings of recalls!!! Here is a nice list that pegs well over 1 million units.
http://www.edmunds.com/recalls/toyota.html

Now while being some of the most boring cars on earth, Toyota I feel does make a quality car but they are suffering tons of recalls over the past few years.


Regarding Mazda..... I have no problem with Mazda, they make a fine non luxury automobile. You seem to think they are one of the only automobiles that people should consider though.

Dave68

Okay, I had to laugh at 6spdg37s's insinuation that Mazda makes "boring" cars. That's about as far from fact as you can get. I think anyone who compared an Audi A3 against a 14-15 Mazda 3S 2.5 would find the Mazda to be every bit, if not more engaging with man-machine-road connectivity that is not easily found in small sedans. In fact, with its tech package, there really is nothing the Audi has over the Mazda other than maybe lane tracking. The days of having to buy a luxury vehicle that costs twice as much as a non-luxury to get all the "goodies" is long gone.

But no, I wouldn't recommend a Mazda to those who take long highway drives at high speeds with high priority placement of maximum sound isolation conditions. German cars in general are much quieter that Mazdas (but not Toyotas, like the Camry) or Hondas. However, for city driving, quietness tends to take away from the connectivity aspect, especially if we're comparing to the MX5 driving experience.

6spdg37s

im not anti mazda persay lol ... I just like performance cars... drive to work and then hit the track up on the way home lol

MVR 155

The Mazda 3 sedan Grand Touring (this would get the car closest to the Audi in terms of "higher end" options/finish..... still not completely comparable) pretty loaded costs about $30K. This car is front wheel drive and has 184hp and 185tq. Peak torque is at 3250rpm.

The Audi A3 with the 1.8T and front wheel drive loaded up costs $34K This car makes 170hp and 200tq. Peak torque is at 1600rpm

The Audi A3 with the 2.0T and Quattro AWD loaded up costs $37K. This car makes an impressive 220hp and 258tq. Peak torque is at 1600rpm.

Now while $7K is a significant amount of $$$ the large difference in power and AWD capability of the Audi would make it a no brainer for me. Hardly "twice the money" as you stated above. Even the car that is $4K higher has better low end torque at a much lower RPM. The audi has a better bumper to bumper warranty but the Mazda has a longer power train warranty so I guess that could be a wash. The low RPM usable torque of the Audi is also very nice for daily driving as you don't need to rev the car to the moon to get very adequate acceleration.

Dave68

When I mentioned the older days of having to spend double to get all the amenities typically associated with luxury, I meant many years ago, not today. However, people still believe that rotating HID headlights, HUD, Radar and laser-based safety technology are exclusive to "upper-end" vehicles. The Mazda 3 has these and much more.

And as far as the Quattro, well, let's just say that you should compare it to the upcoming Mazdaspeed 3 which will have AWD and 300 HP for less money than that Quattro.

My latest Zoom Zoom magazine had an article about a guy with a Mazda Protégé 5 (precursor to the Mazda 3) with 336,000 miles on it. Can you imagine what it would cost you to keep an Audi until it had that many miles?

Also, the torque of the 2.5 Mazda 3 in the city (especially while in "Sport" mode) is plenty. It reminds me a bit of my old MX6 GT with 12 psi of boost.

MVR 155

If the Mazda 3 Grand Touring is $30K, then a loaded Mazdaspeed 3 is going to be creeping in on the same territory as the Audi in terms of price. If you have noticed as of late that the gap in price between Japanese cars and German cars is greatly narrowing. Also german reliability is getting better and better with maintenance intervals getting further apart. Bottom line is that manufacturers across the board are building better quality cars. And while the 2.5 Mazda 3 in the city may feel like it has plenty of torque (remember 185tq@3250rpm), its not even close to having the 258tq@1600rpm that the Audi has. While I know you live in California where you experience great weather all year, there are people who live in the snow belt that see a great value in AWD. Also the driving dynamics of a FWD car don't compare to that of an AWD car..... especially during any kind of inclement weather.

6spdg37s

If I lived in Cali I would have ordered the m6 coupe I need awd over here tho

Dave68

That's what I paid out the door, including every possible option, registration and state taxes. Previous generation Mazdaspeed 3s started in the low 20s, so it is conceivable that the new MS 3 will top out at just a couple of thousand more than what I paid - an incredible bargain as usual. And with AWD, sales should increase in snow belt regions. Mazda does have plenty of experience with AWD transmissions and turbos, starting with their 323 AWD Turbo, back in the 80s.

Regarding torque: I owned my C5 (with close to 400 lbs-ft of torque) for 13 years. In the city, there really aren't many opportunities to take advantage of the torque other than to be able to ascend steep hills in high gear, occasionally. Sport mode amplifies the sensation of torque to a higher level, at least by seat-of-pants.

I have had two cars since 1980 when I was living in CT. One was for inclement weather and bad neighborhoods and the other for everything else. Of course, during those days, I also had a motorcycle.

MVR 155

I beg to differ on the torque Dave....... low RPM torque makes everyday driving situations easier to deal with...... especially in a manual trans car. Great example was my Acura TL-S that I came out of before buying my Audi, while the 3.5L wasn't a slouch it made it's peak torque of 256 ft/lbs. at 5,000rpm. My S4 makes significantly more torque of 325 ft/lbs. at a much lower RPM of 2900. I can tell you directly from driving experience that the lower RPM torque is much more useful in daily "around town" driving as the car hardly labors to get out of its own way, quickly dart into or across heavy traffic, merge, etc...... I also see equal to if not slightly better fuel economy around town from a car that has significantly more HP and torque along with AWD vs. FWD.

I don't disagree that the incoming MS3 will be a great little car and offer some bang for the buck but as it gets into the $30K+ range it's not nearly the bargain it once was (although it is getting more HP and the addition of AWD which people will pay a bit more for). While I understand that Mazda does have AWD experience, it's not even remotely as experienced as Audi who is rivaled to have one of the best AWD systems in the world.