Anyone here have an S4

A4/S4 is nice and everything, just don't crash in it.....

IIHS test, "Poor"


[video=youtube;Ob7BhzpPvNY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob7BhzpPvNY[/video]
 
oh bandwagon fanboi we can dig up bad crash test pics for your beloved Hondas too.
maxresdefault.jpg


hqdefault.jpg



On the opposite you can find videos of a smart car hitting a wall at 70 mph and you'd easily walk away from it. So what? I know, I know. It's on teh interetz so it's all true :rolleyes:
 
A4/S4 is nice and everything, just don't crash in it.....

IIHS test, "Poor"


[video=youtube;Ob7BhzpPvNY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob7BhzpPvNY[/video]
From what i know, newer car chassis are made like that purposefully. It looks bad but takes most of the force from the crash off the passengers
oh bandwagon fanboi we can dig up bad crash test pics for your beloved Hondas too.
maxresdefault.jpg


hqdefault.jpg



On the opposite you can find videos of a smart car hitting a wall at 70 mph and you'd easily walk away from it. So what? I know, I know. It's on teh interetz so it's all true :rolleyes:
 
From what i know, newer car chassis are made like that purposefully. It looks bad but takes most of the force from the crash off the passengers

Yes, this is the case. Better that the car crumple than your skull.

I got ahold of my friend Mike (VAG service manager) and he confirmed that the quattro version of the A4 is essentially the same drivetrain (minus engine of course) that the S4 has, and I misunderstood him WRT the A3 Haldex. However, the FWD version of the A4 has a CVT transmission and no Quattro pieces in it. Which, I am sure I could have found out by cruising Audi's site, but didn't want to. According to him, the S4 has been one of Audi's most reliable cars, for whatever reason; most of the issues are either sensor replacement or the stupid plastic thermostats that all the German cars seem to use. There was a mechatronic transmission issue in the early cars, but it didn't show up in the Canadian market, as it has to do with the transmission overheating in stop & go traffic queues in hot regions like you'd find in LA or possibly summer in NY - this was fixed with addition of a cooler and the B8.5 has a transmission revision with no reported issues to date (three model years). I assume the Germans didn't have that kind of environment to test in. The manual has no reported issues at all, though if you insist on doing drag launches at full throttle and slipping the clutch, you're on your own there... heh
 
Last edited:
I can understand the vanity angle for buying these cars.
If you are paying more for these cars then they should be bullet proof.
If you pay more then they drop like a brick in depreciation compared to the Japanese cars.

To each their own, just lease them...lol
The mentality of the manufacturers has changed over the years. I don't blame them because markets change all the time so do customer needs, in the 90's bmws & benz were over engineered & built like a tank. I think you can still find some diesel benz from the 80's driving around. Bmw still had their mentality of a normally aspirated engine was better. I also believe they had better resale value at that time, but that is long gone.

I always warn my family members of purchasing these luxury brands. My brother brought home a brand new ML350 in 2010 & the engine started leaking oil. He started getting fed up with it when he brought it to the dealer & they broke his windshield. Apparently they closed the garage door on his windshield. He then traded it in for a X5. The last time I saw him he was showing it off to me. My impression was... meh
oh bandwagon fanboi we can dig up bad crash test pics for your beloved Hondas too.
maxresdefault.jpg


hqdefault.jpg



On the opposite you can find videos of a smart car hitting a wall at 70 mph and you'd easily walk away from it. So what? I know, I know. It's on teh interetz so it's all true :rolleyes:
You're missing the argument. When you pay 2x for an automobile, you expect 2x the quality. You expect it to be better than an econobox.
 
The mentality of the manufacturers has changed over the years. I don't blame them because markets change all the time so do customer needs, in the 90's bmws & benz were over engineered & built like a tank. I think you can still find some diesel benz from the 80's driving around. Bmw still had their mentality of a normally aspirated engine was better. I also believe they had better resale value at that time, but that is long gone.

I always warn my family members of purchasing these luxury brands. My brother brought home a brand new ML350 in 2010 & the engine started leaking oil. He started getting fed up with it when he brought it to the dealer & they broke his windshield. Apparently they closed the garage door on his windshield. He then traded it in for a X5. The last time I saw him he was showing it off to me. My impression was... meh

You're missing the argument. When you pay 2x for an automobile, you expect 2x the quality. You expect it to be better than an econobox.

You expect a more expensive car to be 2x safer? That's a retarded expectation bro, no offense. They all meet the same standards.

The quality of build and materials is certainly better. The quality of design is better.

Reliability is a toss-up.
 
You expect a more expensive car to be 2x safer? That's a retarded expectation bro, no offense. They all meet the same standards.

The quality of build and materials is certainly better. The quality of design is better.

Reliability is a toss-up.
I always find that hilarious

Materials are better, build is better, design is better

"Quality" is better

Relaibility is a toss up

Lol

Define better

Edit- fwiw I'm not saying a $15,000 Hyundai looks, sounds, drives and feels the same as an $80,000 european luxury car car...just sayin'
 
Last edited:
You know, nice leather... higher quality plastics, nicer headliner, more expensive seats, alcantara steering wheel. Lightweight wheels, louder stereo, more electronic options, heating and cooling your ***... the list goes on.

The car can have higher quality finishes without being more reliable. I've NEVER heard of someone buying a $100k Benz for reliability. You buy it for the luxury.
 
You know, nice leather... higher quality plastics, nicer headliner, more expensive seats, alcantara steering wheel. Lightweight wheels, louder stereo, more electronic options, heating and cooling your ***... the list goes on.

The car can have higher quality finishes without being more reliable. I've NEVER heard of someone buying a $100k Benz for reliability. You buy it for the luxury.
I agree. must've ninja edited just as you were posting this
 
The quality of build and materials is certainly better. The quality of design is better.

Reliability is a toss-up.

Every thing can be better these days and a lot of things are. But suppliers are always asked to meet a certain price point. Everything gets whittled back a touch to just shy of failure.
 
You know, nice leather... higher quality plastics, nicer headliner, more expensive seats, alcantara steering wheel. Lightweight wheels, louder stereo, more electronic options, heating and cooling your ***... the list goes on.

The car can have higher quality finishes without being more reliable. I've NEVER heard of someone buying a $100k Benz for reliability. You buy it for the luxury.
This. I don't expect a Ferrari or bugatti to be #1 on crash tests. I expect their fit and finish to be pristine and second to absolutely no other car. Would I expect a s4 to be nicer in the same regards as a fiesta? Yes. Do I think that makes it crash better? No.
 
You expect a more expensive car to be 2x safer? That's a retarded expectation bro, no offense. They all meet the same standards.

The quality of build and materials is certainly better. The quality of design is better.



The high end cars are perceived as better, because they are expensive and have the fancy badge.

The dismal A4 offset crash test rating is a perfect example. Where is this "quality" design, when a $15,000 Civic can ace the same test?
 
I asked Mike about this. He told me: "that test was brand new for 2014, no manufacturer was testing for that specific impact type" and apparently a lot of cars from a lot of manufacturers didn't fare well with that test. Probably addressed with the B9. In other words, this test was cherry-picked by Sunny since it wasn't even on the map until 2014.

Take a look:

http://blog.caranddriver.com/unsafe...or-subcompact-cars-released-world-flips-a-st/

In other words, if you want a car that passes IIHS SOCT then you'll have to scrub pretty much all the cars that are pre-2015 except for a relatively small list of them that were rated "good" or better. Several cars, one of which was the A4, that were rated as being the safest on the road in 2013 were rated marginal or poor on this new test in 2014.
 
Last edited:
I asked Mike about this. He told me: "that test was brand new for 2014, no manufacturer was testing for that specific impact type"


Sherman, your buddy has no clue.....


The $15,000 Civic which is a 2013 model, aced the test. The current gen Audi A4 fared poorly. The 2015 A4 is no different.


[video=youtube;qlo77euKkCI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlo77euKkCI[/video]
 
Last edited:
You expect a more expensive car to be 2x safer? That's a retarded expectation bro, no offense. They all meet the same standards.

The quality of build and materials is certainly better. The quality of design is better.

Reliability is a toss-up.

How is that retarded?
My e46 bmw had a subframe issue where the whole wheel system can rip apart from the chassis. There was a recall issued in the US & I spoke to the dealer, they only wanted to pay 50% of the costs. I asked them how much that is, they said $6000. I just laughed.

The sad part was this issue manifested itself in the previous chassis model, the e36 and they did not rectify it. In other words they manufactured cars with a safety issue for more than 10yrs.

This was a simple design flaw which could've been fixed for $50 by the manufacturer. So my point is if they neglected simple things like that when you're paying 2x, that's totally unacceptable.
You know, nice leather... higher quality plastics, nicer headliner, more expensive seats, alcantara steering wheel. Lightweight wheels, louder stereo, more electronic options, heating and cooling your ***... the list goes on.

The car can have higher quality finishes without being more reliable. I've NEVER heard of someone buying a $100k Benz for reliability. You buy it for the luxury.
Some of the basic luxuries can be found in econoboxes. Like my Elantra has 4 heated seats (which entry level luxury car has that?) ; mirror defrost & other luxuries. I believe some entry level cars have been blurring the line of what these luxury cars have to offer, thus prompting the luxury manufacturers to add features we don't really need. Like electronic hand brakes, really? If a door is half ajar, it will automatically suck the door in... really? You're that lazy? How about the door on the trunk of an suv, closes with the touch of a button... are you not man enough to close that yourself? Then they ask why people are getting fat.
This. I don't expect a Ferrari or bugatti to be #1 on crash tests. I expect their fit and finish to be pristine and second to absolutely no other car. Would I expect a s4 to be nicer in the same regards as a fiesta? Yes. Do I think that makes it crash better? No.
You're putting your life behind pristine finish? Lolz

You know if you're dead you can't enjoy that anymore.
 
Some of the basic luxuries can be found in econoboxes..

Yeah, stuff tends to trickle down after 15 years. There's no point in me posting any further if you can't recognize the differences in quality between your Elantra and a $100k BMW. Or a $40k Infiniti, or a 30k Acura for that matter.
 
Back
Top Bottom