So, we're about to do go down to Italy for our Summer hols, and I look at the front boots on the 320d and think they're starting to look a bit sorry for themselves. To cut a very long and painful story short, and following the locking wheelnut key falling into several bits, my car is now in a garage having its locking wheelnuts drilled out. I have a replacement motor for my trip - a 15,000 mile, 63 reg Audi A4 2.0 TDI 150 Multitronic.
It's my first proper encounter with an A4, let alone Multitronic so it's all very new, but based on about 40 miles so far I'm impressed. The gearbox is ace. You accelerate, the revs settle between 1500 and 2200 RPM, depending on how hard you boot it, and the car just hauls itself up to your chosen speed in one long, seamless shove. It's a very bizarre sensation. Absolutely dull of course, but for a schlep across Europe with the family in tow, it's perfect. The other mention must go to the VAG 2.0 common rail diesel which is so much sweeter and smoother than the BMW 2.0d.
I know these 'boxes have an appalling reputation for reliability as they age, but I really can see the attraction. Before driving one, I thought of DAF Variomatic, with the engine screaming away and the car slowly catching up. Matched with a torquey diesel though, it works really well, keeping the engine right where it does its best work.
Have to say, the A4's a nice car too. Feels better built than the F30 3-series, and as an SE Teknik, is really well kitted out. Although the iDrive thing isn't a patch on BMWs for user friendliness. Also as an auto, it doesn't suffer from the horrible offset driving position that made me dismiss a manual version I drove within half a mile.
Anyone intrigued by this gearbox should try one. It really does work better than you'd think.
Cheers
DP
Last edited by: DP on Sat 9 Aug 14 at 08:43
|
This CVT gearbox is likely to be replaced by the DSG (S-Tronic) in most Audi's. There were a few updates recently to some A4, A5 and A6 models and they had the Multitronic swapped for the S-Tronic. And there's a new A4 out soon.
I didn't go for the A4 this time because the interior of the A3 is much nicer in my opinion.
|
My main issue is that nothing on our list of equivalent size and performance to the 320d is anything like as tax efficient. I'm looking at going from 109g/km of CO2 to something in the order of 130 which adds an unwelcome dollop to the BIK bill.
Been smoking around in various things this week. First was a Passat CC 170GT DSG which was a nice car completely ruined by the awful DSG box (when I want to accelerate off the line, I want to do it now, not in half a second once the transmission has got its act together) and a Mercedes C250CDi Sport which I liked so much I wanted to abscond with. Although that one is not on our list.
Our list is apparently being revamped in December in time for my next order, although at the moment another 320d with the ZF8 autobox is top contender.
|
|
A properly set-up CVT(on any make)is excellent.The main problem is that few dealers know(or can be bothered )to set them up properly.
|
Jazz CVT is a delight. Apart from engine revs and sound, changes are .. well.. seamless..
No set up required..(it's Japanese of course).
Which's recent reliability survey said basically VAG cars were great for three years from new and then deteriorated and became worse than average.. (Unlike Vauxhall's 4x4 Antara which was pants when new and got worse with age!)
|
Agree about the Jazz auto box it is seamless.Friend popped round yesterday he just sold his old estate Merc auto.I thought he bought another Merc but he has a 3litre Auto Jaquar Diesel.
Lovely car push button start engine sounded very quet.He is happy with the Auto box and the car.Critical chap Retired Engineer he should know.>:)
|
Been running it around the houses today getting used to it. Flawless transmission. Coped with crawling up a multistorey car park spiral on lock in a queue of traffic, a blast down the dual carriageway, and general urban running about with no dramas at all. Seems very thoroughly set up and calibrated in that it seems to remain unflustered and predictable whatever you throw at it. It's also much sharper and smoother taking up drive from rest, and far happier at trundling speeds than a DSG.
Only downside so far seems to be an indicated 27 mpg. I don't think I've ever seen the BMW below 45 even when tortured with loads of urban stuff.
|
>> Been running it around the houses today getting used to it. Flawless transmission.
Good. Glad you are enjoying it.
Think how much better it would have been with a proper torque converter gearbox.
|
|
700 miles scheduled tomorrow as part of about 2200 over the next 14 days. Should be a good test :-)
|
Lots of current cars beat or equal the 109g/km for CO2 figure.
The Audi A4 Ultra variants have 163PS and 109g/km. For me that made the A4 Saloon SE Technik Ultra as cheap as the TDie 136PS. Should have been cheaper each month but the rental for the Ultra was higher. BIK was lower. The same engine in other Audis like the A5 Sportback.
For me the reason I didn't get the A4 in 2011 and again just now is the inside is dated. Roll on the updated one in Sept/October.
The C-Class Mercedes will be even lower than 109g/km for CO2 in some cars.
By the time you really have to order there will be a few options. And the 3% BIK charge goes in 2017 I think.
For me I am looking forward to a 150PS petrol with DSG in November (or later). In Yorkshire the last week the car could have easily been in 5th or 6th at times.... and then with the corner up ahead you know you'd need 4th again. So didn't change up. I wasn't up for constant gear changes on some drives to get better mpg. At times a 7 speed DSG might have been in 6th or 7th for a time... and coasting too (eco mode).
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 15 Aug 14 at 22:25
|
|
Forgot to add that the upcoming Jaguar XE diesels will emit less than 99g/km for CO2.
|
Posting this on a phone from Northern Italy. 1100 mlies covered. A4 so much nicer as a mile muncher than the F30 3-series. Lower noise levels, much more refined engine, better high speed stability, smoother ride, better seats. Multitronic is effortless and so smooth. Markedly slower car than my manual 320d but saw 120 a couple of times on the autobahn with a bit left and with no fuss at all.
The BMW feels harsh, noisy, and dare I say cheap by comparison.
|
Posting this on a phone from Northern Italy. 1100 mlies covered. A4 so much nicer as a mile muncher than the F30 3-series. Lower noise levels, much more refined engine, better high speed stability, smoother ride, better seats. Multitronic is effortless and so smooth. Markedly slower car than my manual 320d but saw 120 a couple of times on the autobahn with a bit left and with no fuss at all.
The BMW feels harsh, noisy, and dare I say cheap by comparison. I even think the A4 has better steering too.
|
>> Forgot to add that the upcoming Jaguar XE diesels will emit less than 99g/km for
>> CO2.
These emissions figures seem no longer to be fit for purpose. The manufacturers would be nuts not to optimise their cars for the official test, and the result now is that cars commonly average up to 30% worse than the 'official' combined figure, presumably with concomitant variance to the emissions rating.
The legislators, the taxpayers, and the motorists are all being diddled.
Not sure how reliable these figures are, but the gap does seem to be growing.
www.honestjohn.co.uk/topten/bottom-10-real-mpg-performers-august-2014/
|
|
Really hope our list expands to include some of those options. On the current list, the 320d ED is a no-brainer in BIK terms unless a 1.6 litre A3 diesel appeals.
|
I do not currently do many (any?) business miles. My Passat CC will be 3 years old in October and has currently done 21k miles. All personal. So I'm currently a diesel driver because it keeps costs down including better mpg and lower BIK.
But my next car will be an A3 Saloon 1.4TSi S-Tronic. CO2 emissions are 109g/km (not higher despite it being a DSG) and because it's a petrol there is no additional 3% BIK diesel charge. But the diesel 3% charge goes soon anyway.
I think your 320d ED is not the best example - it's the ED after all :-)
|
Mitsubishi PHEV mpg
EC test 148mpg
AotoExpress test: 52mpg
% 35%
|
That's a bit extreme in terms of difference.
But the official figure for my car is around 60mpg. I get less than 50mpg at best. Drive it locally on short journeys and it's a lot less than that. But I benefit from the official mpg figures and CO2 because it lowers my tax payment.
I wouldn't be surprised if I get more mpg from the 1.4 turbo petrol in the A3. I drive mine so I benefit from torque but on winding roads or on local roads probably stay in too low a gear. It will drive in high gears fine but you'll be changing up/down more than necessary IMO. The S-Tronic/DSG can select the best for me. And at times I'll have it in eco mode so will benefit from coasting. And cylinder deactivation too.
|
You need to take a look at the link Manatee posted above and look at both the Audi A3 and the Golf.
Both say the standard 1.4 is good but with cylinder deactivation is really off the EU test figures.
|
I could not live with a DSG transmission. A deal breaker for me. The inconsistency of behaviour during low speed manoeuvring (sometimes it creeps in D, sometimes not), and especially the lag on take off are just infuriating. I note that re-mappers can fix the lag problem, but that wouldn't be an option on a company car, and for me you shouldn't need an aftermarket mod to fix a fundamental flaw like this.
All especially annoying when the CC is otherwise a lovely car. Hope the new A4 is as comfy and smooth as the old (and appears on the list).
|
>> The inconsistency of behaviour during low speed manoeuvring (sometimes it creeps in D, sometimes not)
I thought that with a Passat CC DSG I test drove.... and then after getting one as a manual realised it was the auto-hold function. It creeps and then touch the brakes and it engages them and auto-holds. So no more creeping. Emissions on the DSG variant were a lot higher than a manual too. A DSG creeps along just fine. The A3 saloon I'm getting does not have auto-hold option (standard on a CC)... if it was ordered as a manual I'd get it though.
The CC has been a very comfortable car over the past 3 years (nearly).
If I was ordering in a few months I am sure I'd like the new A4 and go for it. Not an option for me. I had to order by early June. Delivery time (stock date) has gone from mid December to mid October.
|
"I could not live with a DSG transmission. A deal breaker for me. The inconsistency of behaviour during low speed manoeuvring (sometimes it creeps in D, sometimes not), and especially the lag on take off are just infuriating."
I think all of that may be true for the 7-speed dry clutch DSG, but I've found that the 6-speed wet clutch version on bigger VAG cars is fine (the number of speeds makes little difference, but the type of clutch does).
I had the Multitronic on an A4 Avant ten years ago, and my previous Octavia had the wet-clutch DSG. Both were smooth and had 'creep' when it was needed, and for me at least both were reliable. Cold be worth a try, DP, provided that either the new A4 has wet-clutch DSG or they have improved the design of the dry-clutch. Hopefully we'll find out when RTJ gets his new A3.
Your comment on the Audi's steering is interesting. The magazines all pan Audi steering for being lifeless, where I've always got on well with it. That's possibly because my personal preference is for lighter steering: most BMWs are on the heavy side for me, and whatever I do it the seat position I always seem to be too close to the wheel when at a comfortable distance from the pedals.
|
|
When I had an A3 1.4TFSi S-Tronic for a weekend test drive, the gearbox behaved like I expected. I didn't notice hesitancy on setting off. And without an auto-hold function it would creep just fine. I know it was auto hill-hold on the Passat CC that stopped it creeping when reverse parking. I didn't at the time though.
|
>> Cold be worth a try, DP, provided that
>> either the new A4 has wet-clutch DSG or they have improved the design of the
>> dry-clutch. Hopefully we'll find out when RTJ gets his new A3.
>>
It could be something they simply cannot fix. Imagine sitting in bumper to bumper traffic creeping along, how would a dry clutch dissipate the heat? The wet can absorb and pass through a cooler.
>> Your comment on the Audi's steering is interesting. The magazines all pan Audi steering for
>> being lifeless, where I've always got on well with it. That's possibly because my personal
>> preference is for lighter steering: most BMWs are on the heavy side for me, and
>> whatever I do it the seat position I always seem to be too close to
>> the wheel when at a comfortable distance from the pedals.
>>
The problem I have with BMW is the seat being too close to the tarmac. It's great fun in a go-kart for a few hours in the evening however not my idea of a relaxing drive with seven or eight hundred miles to cover.
|
The Kizashi has a CVT box which I presume has a torque convertor also as it pulls away like a TC auto initially and then when you expect it to switch to a different cog it appears to lock up the TC and move into pure CVT.
I like it a lot - once moving it is nippy enough with no real hesitancy and the paddle-shifts work pretty well. Away from a racetrack I expect it's at least as quick as a manual box.
Economy is decent due to the gearbox shifting to very long gearing once you stop accelerating (35mph/1000rpm): 30mpg mostly town, 40mpg cross country with a gentle right foot.
Makes the new Forester XT a tad more tempting if its CVT box is as good...
I've given up on reading journo reviews on how cars drive: I'm quite sure any under 30 yr old don't even know how to drive, other than as a fud.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Tue 19 Aug 14 at 22:58
|
>> I think all of that may be true for the 7-speed dry clutch DSG, but
>> I've found that the 6-speed wet clutch version on bigger VAG cars is fine (the
>> number of speeds makes little difference, but the type of clutch does).
I had the 6 speed in a Touran (58 reg) for a while, about 18 months. Traded it in for a Ford Galaxy with a proper TC box due to the issue with the lag on take off. Couldn't live with it any more, what with my driving mostly being in town. Never want a DSG again sadly, as I loved the box when the car was on open A/B roads.
|
Was the Touran a diesel, Alanovic? I think the lag may be worse on a diesel as they don't have much oomph under 1500 rpm. With a manual you use a bit of accelerator when starting of; an automatic starts from idling speed.
I found DSG + petrol wasn't a problem when starting from rest, but I did feel that the transmission seemed to be holding the car back under acceleration, a feeling I don't get at all with the current manual (both cars petrol Octavia vRS estates).
|
|
Yes, the much derided (but I quite liked) 2.0 TDi PD 140.
|
|
It's funny, I really get on well with the DSG on my Transporter and most of my driving is urban. I prefer it to TC autos I've had in Mercs before, and they're supposed to be pretty good as TCs go. What I really don't like about TCs is the inefficient wasteful 'feel' of the torque converter.
|
>> What I really don't
>> like about TCs is the inefficient wasteful 'feel' of the torque converter.
>>
You wouldn't like the Multitronic. It feels like a slipping clutch.
While driving around the mountains near Garda I encountered the hill descent mode which is effective, but plain bizarre. The revs suddenly creep up to 3k which brings a degree of engine braking, but as you slow, the revs actually increase slightly.
Done 1600 miles in it now including 130 mph Autobahn, twisty mountain passes and an hour of stop start stuff in Munich. Has behaved impeccably throughout. Computer is showing 46.1 MPG average since leaving home.
Last edited by: DP on Thu 21 Aug 14 at 14:19
|
Back home now. 2660 miles covered at an indicated average of 45.2 mpg.
Very nice car. Would recommend anyone looking for an auto of this size to test one with an open mind. Munches miles completely effortlessly, and the transmission is so gentle and smooth. Keeps the engine at around 1500-2500 RPM most of the time, at which speeds the VAG common rail diesel is whisper quiet and completely smooth.
Last edited by: DP on Sat 23 Aug 14 at 17:59
|
Albeit over far fewer miles, this weeks Avis hire car from Edinburgh airport was not the category C Kia C'eed or equivalent (it never is) but a BMW 420i M Sport Auto. Driven like a hire car along 60 miles of motorway it averaged 28mpg per the OBC. A cruise controlled 75mph return journey in 'Eco pro' mode achieved 34mpg and the calculated average when I refilled was 30 mpg over 260 miles.
I really didn't think the 8 speed auto suited the normally aspirated 4 cylinder petrol engine at all; not enough torque. It never felt quick and in white, with ///M badges liberally scattered around, privacy glass and big alloys it really was all show and no go. The ride was poor too. The MB A180 petrol (a 1.6 turbo I think) was far nicer to drive, and felt far more solid. That had a calculated average of 39 mpg, and if anything was driven harder as it was more fun :-)
|
DP, I hope you'll let us have some 'comparative' thoughts when you eventually get back into your BMW. Road testers have for years overrated BMWs and criticised Audis, mainly because they think that driving to the limit on twisty B-roads is how you judge a car's handling.
Just recently they've been a bit more objective about BMWs: initial impressions of the 2-series Active Tourer have been lukewarm and I think we're all having trouble distinguishing the 3-series GT, the 3-series Gran Coupe and the X4.
|
The Audi I misjudged badly, I will admit. I've been in a couple of S-Lines and I found them harsh riding, noisy and rather wearing, and probably did read too many reviews complaining about the dynamics without ever bothering to find out for myself. I drove a manual version for all of 500 yds before dismissing it for the hopelessly offset driving position, and the clutch being where you'd expect to find the brake pedal. Of course, the auto doesn't suffer from this.
Get away from the silly 18" vanity wheels and the "sports" suspension though, move to SE Technik spec, and the A4 is a comfy, beautifully built, effortless cruiser. I suspect if it had been a sporting model it would have annoyed me, but this didn't claim to be anything other than a small luxury saloon, and it delivered in spades. In contrast to the "Ultimate Driving Machine" stuff that BMW still trumpet out for a range of cars where it applies selectively at best, and then only with the right options ticked.
Subject to a BMW refresher, where I prefer the A4:
Interior: Impeccably constructed and well laid out. Feels a class above the 3-series and a nicer, more 'special' place to sit. Chunky wheel rim, clear dials, not a cheap feeling surface anywhere. Much more supportive seats with proper lumbar support (a cost option on the BMW). This one is also completely silent inside at 17k, and feels like it still will be at 100k+. The BMW has been squeaking and rattling from about 8k. I still find iDrive more intuitive than the Audi MMI system though. The BMW system has far fewer buttons, for starters.
Steering: When I drive the A4, I can feel vibrations from road surface changes, overbanding, drain covers etc through the wheel rim. Not intrusively, but enough to make me realise what I don't get from the BMW. The Audi steering is also weightier, and conveys much more information about the grip levels at the front end. We had some torrential downpours on the Autobahn heading into Austria on the way down. In all cases, I could feel the steering start to go light well before aquaplaning became an issue. I just don't get that sense of communication and confidence from the BMW.
Engine: I've driven various incarnations of this VAG 2.0 TDI now, and it has impressed me in all versions. Even as a 170 in a Passat CC it feels less muscular than the 163PS ED 320d, but it has the BMW unit completely licked for refinement. As a 150PS unit in the A4, with the Multitronic, it's never more than a background hum. Also 4 up and loaded to the gunwhales, it coped with Alpine passes and 120+mph Autobahn blasts without feeling underpowered. Such a smooth, quiet powertrain.
General refinement / NVH. Engine aside, the suspension is quieter in action, road and wind noise are significantly lower, and the car is much more relaxing to drive long distances.
Where I prefer the BMW:
Performance/economy compromise. Just staggering combinations of numbers that the Audi can't get near. OK it's a manual vs auto comparison, but colleagues who drive auto 320d's get identical figures.
RWD. You can feel it without going stupid. You feel the Audi just start to edge wide out of corners under power in a way the BMW doesn't. The BMW also has traction out of tight junctions or pulling out promptly on to wet roundabouts that the Audi can't match despite 20mm wider rubber.
Um.... I need to spend some time back in it to update further. I think it's also interesting that Mrs DP and both juniors want to keep the Audi. They instantly say it's more comfy, smoother, quieter and a nicer place to be.
Last edited by: DP on Sat 23 Aug 14 at 22:22
|
Round here, the drivers of BMWs without winter tyres either leave them in the garage or stranded by the side of the road on some cold days..
|
Can only assume that it's drivers who are particularly insensitive to the dynamics of RWD then. I've never found it a problem. I'd trade 3 or 4 days a year of having to take a bit more care driving a RWD with having 360 odd each year with inherent nasty FWD understeer any time.
I borrowed an A4 Avant a few years back for a week or three. Nice place to sit right enough but dull as ditchwater to drive. Always felt nose heavy and uncommunicative through the wheel. Wasn't sorry to get my then Mondeo back which despite it's similar drivetrain always felt much more planted.
Been back in RWD for 3 years and 100,000 miles in all weathers now and would take quite a lot of persuading to go back to FWD. Sure it's a different technique in slippery conditions but to say they are 'undriveable' as I've seen it postulated is a major and frankly, fairly preposterous exaggeration.
In my ever so humble opinion of course ;-)
|
|
Agreed RDH . Never had an issue with BMWs in the snow either. We had a good dump in 2012 just after I got mine. Got me 25 miles home with no issue at all, including some completely untreated surfaces. Also massive fun when the circumstances are right :-)
Last edited by: DP on Sun 24 Aug 14 at 13:40
|
Must be all the BMW drivers round here being carp. And the Mercedes ones as well.
of course, we get proper snow here and -18C at times... Not your southern wussy stuff.
|
Or it could it be a tiny bit of selective perception kicking in here maybe? Perhaps the word 'all' when describing BMW / Merc drivers might just be suitably replaced with 'some'?
Gets a bit parky in parts of Scotland too sometimes. Now and then anyway. Sometimes even a little bit chillier than it gets in those, erm, wussy, wee hills in Derbyshire.
;-)
Last edited by: Runfer D'Hills on Sun 24 Aug 14 at 18:12
|
I found that fitting Michelin Alpins to the 18" rims on my 330 transformed its ability on snow. Previously, living at the top of a short steep hill, any snow meant a walk home. Once fitted, and driven sensibly, the 330 ascended ok. With the traction control light ( or whatever it is called) flickering like mad!
I too would be reluctant to return to FWD, although I could be tempted by an S4 or S6 Avant as an alternative. In my dreams.
|
Let's tempt fate..... the Multitronic box on my 2005 A4 with 65,000 miles on the clock is still going strong. Changed the gearbox oil 18 months ago at 50k miles.
(Cue a catastrophe on my late-night run home tonight...! Bets anyone?!)
|
Audi A4 B8 - Audi Multitronic gearbox - wow! - rtj70
