From the November 1998 issue of Car and Driver.
Forgive us if we sound like Will Rogers when we suggest we’ve never met a BMW 3-series or Audi A4 we didn’t like. Few vehicles are targeted more closely at what we ask for in daily transportation, to wit: utility, performance, value, and styling. The A4 has been on our annual 10Best list since 1996, and the 3-series since 1992, a commendable seven-year streak matched only by the Honda Prelude.
The last time the A4 and the 3-series faced off in Car and Driver was in May 1996, when the Audi pulled off a narrow one-point win. Both cars have changed since then. The Audi now has a five-valve-per-cylinder 2.8-liter V-6, which replaces the two-valve 2.8-liter engine, upping horsepower from 172 to 190.
The BMW 328i has been completely redesigned for 1999. It has also been given a slight bump in power since our 1996 comparison test—its new 2.8-liter, 24-valve aluminum straight-six with variable intake- and exhaust-valve timing has 193 horses, up from the 190 of last year’s six.
Clearly, it’s time for a rematch. We wandered the roads of southern Michigan, ending up at Waterford Hills Road Race Course, a 1.5-mile, 13-turn track that allowed us to push both sedans up to and beyond their limits. It was only after dozens of laps at Waterford Hills that we were able to agree on a winner, and then—once again—only by the narrowest possible margin.
First, though, a quick look at the players.
We initially drove the Audi A4 in early 1995 on a jaunt through Europe that ended at Audi’s then-new engine plant in Gyor, Hungary. Previous Audis had not prepared us for what the company was about to deliver as a replacement for the aging Audi 90, for less than $30,000: all-wheel drive, V-6 power, handsome styling, and even a leather-trimmed interior. It was a car so calm and quiet and light on its feet that we knew it was a winner an hour into the trip. Aside from wishing for more power (hey, we’re a car magazine!) and more interior room, there was precious little to complain about.
Updates have been largely evolutionary. The new-for-’98 five-valve engine was not the quantum leap you’d expect, not because it isn’t good—it is—but because Audi had done such a stellar job of smoothing out the dated two-valve V-6 it replaced. Since the car’s introduction, Audi has also added a 150-hp, 1.8-liter low-pressure-turbocharged four-cylinder engine to the lineup, allowing the company to reduce the already reasonable price even more, if you don’t require the V-6’s added muscle. And if you can live with front-wheel drive only, you can buy an A4 for less than $25,000.
The A4 seen here, a 1998 model, listed for $34,710 as tested, quite reasonable when you look at the features—a glass sliding sunroof and remote-locking package (optional for $1190); a Bose stereo with a six-disc CD changer ($1200); an All-Weather package that included heated seats ($630); and a downright cheap Sport package ($400) that gave us seven-spoke, 16-inch wheels, P205/55ZR-16 Dunlop SP Sport 8000E radials (the same size but higher performance than the standard rubber), a stiffer suspension, and the excellent sport steering wheel that costs $160 as a stand-alone option.
Perhaps the A4’s most important contribution has been to reinvigorate Audi in the eyes of both its customers and employees. Since the A4 sedan’s introduction, Audi has added to the lineup the handsome little A4 Avant wagon and the larger, similarly successful A6 sedan and wagon, as well as the innovative all-aluminum A8 luxury sedan. The TT sports car is just over the horizon.
In other words, the A4 has been a favorite of the public and the press. Our experience with the car was sullied only by the substellar maintenance record of our long-term Quattro: A failed alternator (at 7300 miles) and a new transmission (required at slightly more than 30,000 miles) could have cost $10,000 to replace had the car not been blessed with a three-year/50,000-mile warranty. Audi has concentrated on improving quality since then, and we would buy an A4 today with relative confidence that it would last.
To glance at the 1999 BMW 328i, especially in profile, you might think the changes there are similarly evolutionary. They aren’t. “Essentially all-new models” is how BMW describes the 328i and the 323i, the latter of which has a smaller 2.5-liter six-cylinder engine.
That 2.5-liter six-cylinder and the 328i’s 2.8-liter six have new aluminum cylinder blocks with cast-iron liners, new steplessly variable intake- and exhaust-valve timing systems, and dual resonance intake manifolds. Horsepower is up slightly, but maximum torque remains the same, although it’s spread a bit wider through low- and midrange rpm.
Wheelbase is increased by an inch; overall length is up 1.5 inches. The most noticeable change in dimensions is the 1.6-inch increase in width: Not only does it give a bit more interior shoulder room, but from the rear, the 328i looks like a 5-series, an impression bolstered by the fact that the wheels have been extended outward 2.2 inches in the rear and 2.5 inches in the front.
Still, “driving this car around over the past few days,” said a test driver, “it gets few stares. I’ve driven past last-generation 3-series owners, and even they barely glance over.”
Inside, there are some nice touches, and some touches that are less nice. The two center-console-mounted cup holders have eight little spring-loaded fingers each to grip the drink container; in one, the fingers had receded into the console, and in the other, the fingers would sometimes stick—a condition we suspect a couple of spilled colas would permanently engender. Also, our tan interior had an odd gold-plastic strip that ran horizontally mid-dash—sort of 1960s-era Chevrolet Impala. Kudos, though, to the engineer in charge of mounting the controls for the stereo and cruise on the steering-wheel spokes—nice to know General Motors has some influence on German design. Also, at long last, the steering wheel tilts and telescopes.
Our 328i had the Sport package, a pricey (compared with the Audi’s, at least) $1350 option we nonetheless endorse. It gave us striking 17-inch alloy wheels, P225/45ZR-17 radials (Dunlop SP Sport 2000Es, very similar to the A4’s 16-inch tires), sport seats, a lowered and firmed-up suspension, and the aforementioned multifunctional steering wheel. A sunroof would have added $1050 to the price, swapping the cassette player for a CD unit would have added $200, and a premium Harman/Kardon stereo costs $675. Leather upholstery adds $1450. Still, even if we had loaded up our 328i the way the 3-series was in our 1996 comparison test, it would be less than the $39,137 sticker attached to that ’96 model.
Although neither car is cheap, both are pretty affordable when you consider their pedigree and how they perform.
And how do they perform? Read on . . .
2nd Place: Audi A4 2.8 Quattro
The Audi A4 Quattro feels like an old friend, but what’s odd is that the first time we sat in one, it felt like an old friend. Its quiet competence and hospitable ergonomics make it comfortable in every driving situation.
Although the Audi has only three fewer horsepower than the 328i, its straight-line performance suffers by comparison. There’s a good reason: The Quattro is pulling all four wheels, and that’s a big part of the Audi’s 121-pound weight disadvantage compared with the 328i. There’s nothing wrong with the A4’s 7.4-second 0-to-60-mph time (in our 1996 test, it took 8.1 seconds), but it lags a second behind the BMW, and as speeds increase, the difference does, too. The BMW takes 38.0 seconds to reach 130 mph; the Audi does it in 46.8 seconds.
HIGHS: Impeccable road manners, silky powertrain, all-wheel-drive confidence.
LOWS: Updated engine still needs some low-range grunt, seems undertired and too softly sprung at its handling limits, brakes not the caliber of the rest of the car.
VERDICT: Superb cruiser vulnerable only if you insist on the BMW’s sportier feel.
As you march through the gears, the Audi seems to run out of steam long before the BMW. Accelerating in fifth gear from 50 to 70 mph takes 9.5 seconds in the Audi, just 8.3 seconds in the BMW—meaning you’ll want to downshift the Audi to rustle up some passing power.
That said, the Audi’s five-valve 2.8-liter V-6 is sewing-machine quiet, bumping against the 6500-rpm rev limiter long before any audible or tactile sensations tell you you’re running out of rpm. The five-speed manual transmission shifts smoothly, with a less notchy feel than the BMW’s. Starting the A4 from a dead stop is an intuitive maneuver that always results in a seamless launch. Getting the BMW rolling smoothly requires a bit more concentration.
Once under way, the Audi glides over rough pavement that the BMW reacts to with a bit of chattering. The Audi’s novel four-link front suspension makes its steering, as it always has been, among the best of any car. The seats are supportive and comfortable for even the longest trips.
The warm wood trim is nicely executed; the switchgear, while serviceable, is beginning to look dated, and the stereo controls are unnecessarily complex. Audi’s sliding glass sunroof gave the car a pleasant open-air feel, and the stereo and CD changer added to the appeal. Tote up all the features of the Audi—don’t forget the Quattro four-wheel-drive system—and it seems like a superior value to the BMW.
At the Waterford Hills racetrack, the A4 seemed much less at home than it does on the road, even on twisty two-lanes. When driven too hard into a turn, its nose rapidly drifts sideways with little warning; it isn’t dramatic and it was always catchable, but it wasn’t that much fun. Likely that’s due to the Dunlop SP Sport 8000E tires (come to think of it, the A4’s tires have never been aggressive enough to suit us). The A4 is also two inches longer than the 328i, but the wheelbase is nearly five inches shorter, and the A4 is much more nose-heavy than the BMW, with 58.6 percent of the weight at the front, compared with 50.2 percent. All this, plus the long-travel suspension that makes rough roads so tolerable, conspires to limit the A4’s performance when driven at 10/10ths. The all-wheel drive is no help on a dry racetrack—soak it with an inch of rain, and it would be a different story.
“The body structure doesn’t feel quite as tight as the BMW’s,” said a test driver. “There’s a slight shudder through the steering column when we hit a bump. It doesn’t turn in quite as eagerly or with as much feel as the 328i, and there’s a little less body control.” The shifter that feels so silky on the street feels less precise on the track—”I missed a couple of shifts on the track,” a tester wrote, “and I never did in the BMW.”
Additionally, the BMW’s brakes are significantly better, with its 70-to-0-mph distance of 175 feet, six feet shorter than the Audi’s. Braking the Audi down at the end of the back straightaway at Waterford required a lot of pedal pressure.
Still, the Audi A4 2.8 Quattro has so much to offer. That a car about to start its fourth model year with only minor updates was defeated by a brand-new car by just a single point suggests what a superb package this was from job one. It still is.
1st Place: BMW 328i
A neighbor, taking a walk-around tour of the 1999 328i, concluded with this comment: “Did the 328 really need an update?”
Well, um, probably not. The styling of the ’98 still looked pretty fresh, and the performance numbers of the new car don’t suggest an improvement: Our 1996 test had the 328i running from 0 to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds, just 0.1 second slower than this new 328. The old car was a bit quicker to the quarter-mile, stopped 13 feet shorter from 70 mph, and pulled 0.85 g on the skidpad, compared with the new car’s 0.82 g.
HIGHS: Drum-tight build quality, willing engine, ride is a successful compromise between handling and comfort.
LOWS: Interior design is brighter but still a bit cold, shifter is slightly balky, clutch is slightly grabby, rear fold-down seat is an option.
VERDICT: Although breaking little new ground, a straight-arrow bull’s-eye to the target market.
But it’s better than it was in ’96, right? Yes. It’s bigger, roomier, more rigid, and better-looking—even if only slightly better. Its ride is more supple, but the handling remains crisp, thanks to a much-evolved suspension. Still, most of the improvements can’t be discovered by the seat of your pants. The clutch is stronger and self-adjusting. Less scheduled maintenance is required. BMW says the new self-proportioning brakes should solve any occurrence of warped rotors on cars that have been driven hard. The headlights are 30 percent brighter (those bluish Xenon high-intensity-discharge headlamps are a $500 option), and the 328i has side airbags (also standard on the A4) and a head-protection airbag system.
Before the comparison test, we took the 328i on a 2000-mile, three-day trip, the sort of journey that uncovers flaws you don’t find in casual driving. But none surfaced. Aside from the mediocre cup holders, which we already found suspect: nothing. Certainly, it’s natural to compare the 328i with the current-generation M3 (the next new one is still a year or so away), making us wish for stickier tires or a stiffer suspension or more power. But the M3 is a bit extreme as daily transportation goes, and BMW did not require that level of performance for the more mainstream 328i. Even with the relatively low-profile tires, BMW has done a stellar job at reducing noise, almost too well—the car makes no spirited sounds at all. At speed, what engine noise there is seems as indistinguishable as that coming from a Buick.
Still, it’s a BMW, and feels like one on the racetrack. “Feels as though there’s a lot more grip to work with in the BMW,” wrote a test driver. “It has none of the vertical floatiness you get with the Audi. The BMW feels more connected to the pavement and sends more accurate signals to the driver. I think even novice drivers would be able to handle this car well in an emergency situation—if they needed to change direction quickly when they couldn’t anticipate it.” The 328i slithered around the cones of our emergency-lane-change test with surgical precision, at a brisk 67.9 mph—5.8 mph faster than the Audi. In normal driving, the steering feels marginally less precise than the Audi’s, but then, steering in almost any car suffers in comparison with the A4’s.
BMW’s new 3-series, then, is a success. The company has said it hopes this design and platform will last for a relatively long product cycle—until 2006 or 2007—and although we can’t guarantee we’ll be enamored of it into the next century, we sure are now.
Specifications
Specifications
1999 Audi A4 2.8 Quattro
Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $28,710/$34,710
ENGINE
DOHC 30-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 169 in3, 2771 cm3
Power: 190 hp @ 6000 rpm
Torque: 207 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm
TRANSMISSION
5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: multilink/control arms
Tires: Dunlop SP Sport 8000E
205/55ZR-16
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 102.6 in
Length: 178.0 in
Width: 68.2 in
Height: 55.8 in
Passenger Volume, F/R: 48/37 ft3
Trunk Volume: 14 ft3
Curb Weight: 3382 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.4 sec
1/4-Mile: 15.8 sec @ 89 mph
100 mph: 20.8 sec
130 mph: 46.8 sec
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 8.0 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 10.8 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 9.5 sec
Top Speed (gov ltd): 130 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 181 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.80 g
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
City/Highway: 19/27 mpg
—
1999 BMW 328i
Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $33,970/$36,824
ENGINE
DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, port fuel injection
Displacement: 170 in3, 2793 cm3
Power: 193 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque: 206 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
TRANSMISSION
5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilink
Tires: Dunlop SP Sport 2000E
225/45ZR-17
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.3 in
Length: 176.0 in
Width: 68.5 in
Height: 55.7 in
Passenger Volume, F/R: 50/41 ft3
Trunk Volume: 11 ft3
Curb Weight: 3261 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 6.4 sec
1/4-Mile: 15.1 sec @ 93 mph
100 mph: 17.6 sec
130 mph: 38.0 sec
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 7.2 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 8.9 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 8.3 sec
Top Speed (gov ltd): 132 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 175 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.82 g
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
City/Highway: 20/29 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED