I highly recommend trying a Boxster/Cayman/991 generation PDK, to get a frame of reference for the best actuated manual on the market. You can give it all of the inputs of a manual. It will take care of your downshifts to a stop light, which is less work for the driver. You can also shift by stomping your right foot if you catch the “clicks” at the bottom of the pedal (perfect 6-2 or 7-3 downshift). Dealers should have a 2013 Boxster CPO you can try, or a new demo model.
West is, unfortunately, right on with this one. Unless the RS4/5 comes with a different gearbox, my S4 replacement a few years down the line will be an M4
That M4 GTS might be the ticket, with the OLED tails, the aero, and the OEM meth injector in the intake. I’d kick myself for buying another BMW though. It’s Porsche prices and VW quality.
The 991.2 is a temping leap to make. It actually has enough features as standard that a base model for $90,395 isn’t a stripper - it has parking sensors, alcantara headliner, satellite radio, and a bunch of other things you’d expect in a high end car. Unfortunately to get into a 991.2 “S” model with the 420 HP tune, sport suspension, axle lift system, and rear steering you’re in for $109,965. And you’re leaving about $20k on the table of stuff you want like 410mm PCCB and, uh, nicer paint and full leather.
The S4 already does this. With the APR TCU tune (which I think is very good), you have a true manual mode if you want it. The only thing you can’t do is put the trans into neutral without physically moving the gear selector (which you can do if you really want to).
I always thought it would be cool if you could pull both + and - levers at the same to enter neutral and then let go to back into the same gear.
Just merge the other ones in with this one and don’t leave a shadow behind. Should solve it.
Gallardo does something similar
I think the GT3 does the double paddle pull neutral but my shitty Boxster doesn’t. Gotta pony up another $100k for that privilege.
Out of curiosity for those with DSG is it possible to execute a J turn? would the trans allow you to go from Reverse to first like quickly in the turn?
Really? Sweet I didn’t know any of the cars currently did that.
Someone’s been watching The Transporter (with Jason not the new guy) ;D
Thanks for combining my thread with Ron’s…
So, my thoughts on the new B9 after getting a chance to think about it for a few days:
Exterior: Blah. It’s fine, but definitely nothing special. I will say that seems to be Audi’s MO, and a lot of times it grows on me. The overall style is very understated, which is just fine. I like the overall look of the front although the front grille is a bit large, and I like the slightly more aggressive look of the front overall. The front is a good progression of Audi’s current style on the B8.5 (very evolutionary). The rear from the C-pilar back just doesn’t work for me. The C-pilar, trunk, rear bumper, and diffuser just seem a little off. Maybe that will change when I see it in person? I don’t like the slight hitch in the C-pilar as I don’t think it flows well into the rear section of the car (the A/S3 has this also, but I thought it was more for headroom). I don’t like the fake added grille look on the rear bumper. I’m sure it’s there to visually break something up, but it looks like crap… Overall, the rear is just off to me. My guess is, that will get fixed in the mid-cycle refresh.
Interior: Overall, I like it a lot. There are some minor gripes like the placement of the cup holders, but overall it is very Audi. I absolutely hate the tacked on MMI screen on top of the center dash, but to Audi’s credit, I am sure it is retractable like the 3/6/7 lines. That is my one gripe about the new (very nice) C-class interior. Not only does the Nav screen look like an afterthought, but you can’t move it out of the way. At least Audi got that part right. I also don’t love the way the vents carry over across the dash in front of the passenger. I like the idea of the continuity of it, but I think it just ends up looking weird and easy to break. With all that said, I think the interior overall is a winner compared to the exterior (or at least the rear of the exterior). Pretty much what I’d expect from Audi.
Engine: I love the idea of a turbo engine. Especially one that is as responsive as they say it is with a single turbo. That’s quite an accomplishment when compared to turbo applications of even 5 years ago. As I stated in my post, I expect it will be a twin scroll to eliminate as much lag as possible, and very possibly top mounted in the “hot-V” position as it is on the 4.0 TSFI engines. That’s the only easy way I can see them going with a single turbo, and eliminating turbo lag as an issue. Upgrades should be easy, but I am curious how much headroom there is with the factory turbo. If it is top mounted, upgrades could be super easy.
Transmission: This is obviously the biggest point of contention. First off, boo on Audi if they don’t offer a true manual. I won’t be surprised if they don’t as this seems to be the way most German manufacturers are going especially in Germany, but I’m not will to call the manual dead just yet. They’ve been known not to release one in Europe, but to do so in the US. All my cars up until the B8 S4 were manuals, and I wanted to try a good “auto” transmission to see if I could live with it. I found out I could, but I think I’d like to go back to a real manual in my next car. I know it won’t be quite as fast, but there is a certain level of engagement that’s just not there with any form of an auto transmission.
I also have mixed feeling about going from the DSG to ZF 8-speed for the auto transmission of choice. I’ve driven all forms of the current ZF 8-speed (A6, RS7, BMW applications), and while I think it is a fine transmission and definitely the best torque converter automatic I have driven, it still leaves something to be desired in my eyes. It just doesn’t always do exactly what I want it to in any of those applications, and it is a tad slow. However, the DSG is by no means a perfect animal either. While I like the speed of the shifts and I feel like it does a better job of doing what I tell it to, it is clunky as hell at low speeds, and reliability is a huge issue. For 95% of people, the ZF is probably a better choice so I can’t fault Audi. It makes sense, and with the reliability issues of the DSG, it probably goes a long way to addressing several issues Audi had with the DSG. I do think they need to offer a real manual option if they go the ZF route. They will alienate a certain segment of enthusiasts by going with the ZF as the only transmission option; albeit a pretty small percentage of their market (which you could argue Audi doesn’t give two shits about based on how they deal with modifications/TD1…).
To add to the above… I don’t think a B9 S4 is in my future, but I will leave the door open as I decide on a new car over the next year or so. At least right now, the whole package just doesn’t do it for me. I like the interior and engine choice just fine on paper. The exterior styling, and transmission choices are a turn-off. My mind could change on both especially once I see the car in person, and I have a feeling in my older age I may be OK with the transmission once I drive it (assuming it really works well).
I’ve had the B8 for over 4 years now, and I’m all over the place on what I want to do with it. I’m definitely done modding it for the time being. I have it pretty much where I wanted it to be. I’d like to see what the deal is with the RS3, but I don’t think I could justify spending more than $60k on that car. If I went that route, I’d get rid of the B8. If the RS3 is over $60k, I think I’d rather just go up to something like the MB C63 (which I think is awesome minus the Nav screen).
I’ve also kicked around the idea of getting rid of my B5, getting an older Porsche (993 Carrera or 997 Carrera S), and just keeping the B8. Lastly, I’ve considered getting a toy car to play with like the new Focus RS to replace the B5, and again, I’d probably keep the B8… I don’t know what I’ll do, but I am ready for a new car to play with. At this point, I just don’t think that new car will be a B9 S4. OK, enough rambling…
the transmission makes sense whether some of us like it or not. Almost nobody offers manuals anymore. I think the only manual they still sold was the B8.5 S4, and in North America only.
To be honest, I don’t think I will miss a manual when my hand is forced. If there’s a reasonable paddle shift option and it shifts reasonably briskly, I’m good.
After another road trip with the PDK on some back roads on Sonoma Coast, I have to say it’s the most satisfying transmission ever. Sure it costs $14k to replace if you break it, but it’s completely awesome. The sound in the cabin is intoxifying when it rips off a shift near 8000 RPM without the chassis even taking note that a shift happened. There’s no weight transfer front-rear at all. Poor man’s GT3 all the way.
I’m not impressed with any MY2015 turbo motor. The Macan S is laggy. The C400 Mercedes is laggy. I’m not expecting the B9 S4 to have better technology than either of those. I’m even skeptical that the 991.2 base turbo can pull it off at the $90k price point (at 1800 RPM the lag is 3 seconds, at 2400 RPM it’s 2 seconds). If the RS4 does an electric turbo I think that could work better.
The iPad screens aren’t bad at all. I think it’s going to take a while to get Apple Car Play to market on them. I was playing with Android Auto last week and it’s totally not ready. When the car is in park it stayed in Hyundai UI mode, and only when it was in drive would it start to mirror the phone screen. You jump back and forth between the 2 interfaces and it’s really janky. Apple needs to support Android devices and Google needs to support Apple devices for these systems to be market ready. Basically the car relies on your device to provide the center stack experience. If you don’t have a paired device the manufacturer still needs to provide a default implementation so you can use the car.
Why would Apple need to support Android or vice versa? Couldn’t the auto manufacturers just support both options, and allow the system to be configured for either depending on the end user’s preference? Similar to a dual operating system? Just seems like it would be easy to have three basic operating modes, and they are sold/installed as options at the software level. Assuming the ecosystem stays the same, it’s pretty easy when there are two main players. Just have a system capable of supporting Apple, Android, or a default option that support neither. There is no way Apple will ever support Android software or the other way around. That is pretty clear.
For what amounts to most of the population, that is true. Eventually, all the people that really care about manuals will die off (literally). There are a million reasons why the new breed of autos are better than a manual, but it still doesn’t change the fact that a true manual is more engaging, involved, and entertaining to drive.
I’m really torn because in my older age, I definitely enjoy the ease of a good auto (or more specifically a dual clutch). However, on the rare occasion that I drive my B5, I’m like damn, I really miss the manual sometimes…
It’s 3x the bugs to support 3 systems. This generation is already a hack with supporting a car OS and a phone OS skin. It’s not reasonable to expect that both Apple and Google will be ready to go to market at the same time, on the same car, with all of the bugs worked out, and seamless handoffs between Android carrying drivers and iOS carrying drivers who use the same car.
For a company like VW/Audi, it just doesn’t seem like a hard thing to support. All the basic functionality is done by someone else (the supplier). Even most bug fixes would happen at the supplier level. It almost seems easier to take that route then coming up with your own software to try and support basic functionality of all the different device platforms. Let the supplier do most of the work… I mean that is the route most car companies are taking anyway.
Really, there are like 4 options that exist:
- Come up with something completely on your own. This is less and less common; even what you see in most cars now is an offshoot of 2-3 common operating systems (see next).
- Use a generic platform/OS that supports basic funtionality of all devices. Most common is Microsoft or Blackberry QNX (about 80% of the market right now). Most are using the QNX OS now that Ford has moved away from MS. Linux/GENIVI will increase over the next 5 years.
- Apple CarPlay
- Google Android Auto
Options 2-4 all basically have the supplier do 90% of the development, release, bug fixes, updates, etc. Then it’s just integrated by each auto manufacturer with minimal changes. I think most auto manufacturers find this model a lot easier, and why you see the popularity of QNX, and now CarPlay and Auto. For someone like Audi/VW, supporting two of these versus one is a pretty minimal difference in the big picture.
Microsoft has the largest install base in cars right now, and the most experience with shipping product to a full manufacturer lineup (Ford). I think they’re the dark horse in this game and at this point have a better shot of being successful than Google or Apple. The car manufacturers don’t trust Google nor Apple, Google especially has a bad reputation in Germany. Google may lose interest in this project in 24 months and leave them stuck supporting it until 2027.
The real goal for a company like Google is to sit on top of the funnel for things you buy after you buy your car. They want to check if the car has insurance and offer to sell it to you before you start driving. They want to pick what gas station you go to and where you eat lunch. They want to help you pick what Audi dealer or local mechanic you bring it to.