FORTUNE: Audi 'S' is For Sex, Speed, and Sales

So the "S" designation really doesn't have any significance then? Consider that the S4 competes against the BMW 335. What's the significance of the "S" badge?

Now let me stand back and wait for the attack. It's bound to come.

Stupid retard says that I'm stalking him. When I didn't reply to him at all. I guess I'm not even allowed to post in a thread that he has already posted to. What a stupid moron.

Now watch the idiot respond like clockwork.

Considering BMW made is and M performance pack to compete with the S4 the opposite looks to be true?

LexSucks is proof that drugs and online trolling don't mix.

Ummmm...are you okay?

Wow lol...this is scary lol ..

S is just marketing bs. You get quad exhaust, bucket seats, flat bottom steering wheel, chrome bits, s4 badges on the brakes and grill, and its barley any quicker than a normal looking C350 or 335. And the only way you can get a V6 in the A4 is getting and S4...it makes very little sense. So if a 40+ year old woman wants a V6 A4 her A4 the only option is an S4 which looks like it’s designed for a 20-30 year old. I think BMW will get it right by offering a standard 335 which looks like a regular 3 series, than an optional M335i to compete with the S4.

Well despite all those tweaks the standard 335 runs almost identical performance numbers without all the flashy bits. Also as far as I know BMW will not make is models going forward, they will now be M335 ect. to compete squarely with S models without having to sacrifice sales of its standard 335 that appeals to a larger demographic.

"it was BMW that got rid of their 325, yet now offers 4-bangers which many originally derided Audi for"

Not sure what you are referring to b/c Mercedes and BMW have always offered 4 cylinders in their cars throughout the world. BMW didn’t offer a four cylinder in the US during the 90's or 2000's b/c gas was relatively cheap, and the 4 cylinders Audi were using at the time were hardly more efficient. A 2001 A4 1.8t 18 City, 21 Combined, 26 highway. Where a 2001 BMW 325 got 20 Combined,17 City, 25 Highway...so 1 mpg diff, and the BMW had more power and torque..

The S4 outperforms the 335i which has gotten slower since it first came out and the need for M junior as you said. The S6 splits the difference between the 550i and M5. And the S8 is above anything BMW makes in the segment.

The 550 got a power bump this year in the form of 50hp, and 30 lb-ft. The S6 may be quicker to 60 due to launch control, but that is only one performance measure...plus LC is a novely that never would be used in the real world. The 750 also received the same power upgrade this year, and the consumer also has the choice of Alpina B7 for a performance 7 series. And Mercedes has the S63/5 amg which are overal faster than S8.

"The S4 outperforms the 335i which has gotten slower since it first came out and the need for M junior as you said"

The S4 also makes 330hp and the 335 makes 300, the test you are referring to the 335 also had all season tires compared to the summer tires on the S4. Plus the 3 also had better fuel economy, and more compliant ride while offering 98% of the performance at a lower cost. This just shows bmws realignment of its models making way for the M335 which will presumably eclipse the S4.

The S6 has a higher 1/4 mile trap speed than the 550i, haven't seen the updated 550i yet but it should improve but probably not to S6 figures yet.

Once the S8 is tested it will probably show numbers on par with the S63 and S65.

marketing bs? come now. a 420hp V8 vs. a 310hp supercharged V6. are you just ignorant? or an asshole?

S6, S7 and S8 are all fantastic cars. among the best in their respective classes. and, for those of us who prize performance, they are better than their respective BMW and mercedes competitors.

and the article is about the S6 S7 and S8. what are you talking about the S4?

yes, it's hard to argue with FACTS. please do explain why the S7 vs. A7, S6 vs. A6 and S8 vs. A8 are 'marketing bs.' you can't.

merce63amg, say what you want about performance, and 0-60mph times, etc. the bottom line is Audi has recently been beating BMW in a great deal of comparison tests.

As I'm sure you well know, the driving experience is more than just performance. It includes cabin design, luxury, comfort, in addition to the performance, handling, dynamics, braking etc.

When the total package is taken into consideration it is Audi's A8 that defeats the BMW 7-series (Road & Track), Audi's A6 that defeats BMW's 5-series (Edmunds InsideLine) Audi's Q5 that defeats BMW's X3 (Car and Driver.

The car magazine reviews and comparisons are just one piece of evidence that point to an even more important trend - Audi's global sales are rapidly closing in on BMW's.

It's pretty simple really. If you make cars that offer a great "value" proposition in terms of design, comfort, luxury, performance, efficiency, technology, and innovation you will outsell your competitors and make more money doing so.

Just ask Mercedes-Benz about the sales gap widening and ask BMW about the profit numbers :)

You're right the A1 is a great "Value" proposition, it starts at only $2K more than a Polo...I’m sure it’s great for the sales numbers.

"As I'm sure you well know, the driving experience is more than just performance. It includes cabin design, luxury, comfort, in addition to the performance, handling, dynamics, braking etc"

Exactly that is why a fast "headline" 0-60 of the S6 with launch control don’t necessary make it a "better" car then the 550i or E550.

"When the total package is taken into consideration it is Audi's A8 that defeats the BMW 7-series (Road & Track), Audi's A6 that defeats BMW's 5-series (Edmunds InsideLine) Audi's Q5 that defeats BMW's X3 (Car and Driver."

Yes Audi win some comparison, but so to Mercedes, and BMW. Usually the Audis win b/c they cost less while offering "similar" driving experiences...not always the best. It’s also always important to see if the cars are evenly specked, or else the comparison is irrelevant. Plus there are test where the other brands DO win...but you never seem to post them, odd. So you can paint you own picture the way you like....and have been, but it may not reflect reality. Plus everyone know you are a sales man for Audi, so you fanboy rants are taken with a grain of salt.

First off you do not own an S65amg, or any of the other cars you have claimed on the other threads. Judging by the amount of time you DO spend on here arguing/harassing people with your little kitty avatar there is no way you acquired enough money to buy a $200k S65amg let alone move out of you mothers basement.

I like Audis, I am just tiered of Germanuts Audi is superior to all brands BS.


"FACT. Two: the A1 and A3 make up less than 23% of all worldwide Audi sales, their 3 best sellers are the A4, A6 and Q5 which all avg. $40k and above."

FALSE. Funny you never use a source. But here is one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi

In 2011 Audis top Seller in order were the A4,A6,A3,Q5,A1,A5. And I’m sure most of the A4's are 2.0T's just like "75%" of 3 series are 328 as you claim without a source. The A4/A5 equal 33% of all Audi sales...the same as the BMW 3 series line. Also the A1 accounted for 112000 units last year and its a car further down market than anything Mercedes or BMW offer. The A1 starts less than even the cheapest Mini.

"This very site via Forbes last year rated Audi owners as having the highest household income over both Benz and BMW."

Yeah back in 2007 that article was published. In 2011 WSJ published an article stating the highest percent of American express black card owners own BMW and Mercedes.

http://blogs.wsj.com/drivers-seat/2011/07/08/have-a-black-card-buy-a-hyundai/?mod=WSJBlog

The average black card owner has $16.3 million in assets and an annual household income of $1.3 million.

"Thirdly, you can complain all you want about which car was outfitted with what, but it is up to the discretion of each dealer network as to what they have avail."

So just because a higher spec car is available for a review, it should be deemed one generation of car is always superior to the other b/c they were once reviewed in different specification? Lol, that makes no sense, reliable review is of two cars with the same spec everything to see which is better. If not you are just comparing apples to oranges.

"Honestly, just give me ONE link, just ONE where you saw an Audi win based on price."

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2013-audi-s6-page-4

S6 vs E63 Vs M5, these are performance cars right?...yet the car with the worst performance won b/c it was cheaper, and they liked the interior for the money. If you look at all measurable performance data from this comparison the S63 and M5 demolish the S6 in EVERY category, with the S6 only TIEING to 60. The M5 hit 100mph a full second faster, hit the 1/4 mile 8mph faster, and hit 130mph 2.5 seconds faster while slaloming considerably quicker. Yet in other comparison, even by CD by another reviewer they praised the M5s ride and steering, but this reviewer faulted the BMW on it? And same with the Mercedes , and yet crowned the Audi on non performance related issues, but on price, and subjective areas.

"Down to the final paragraph of a comparison test

.... musing about how the Audi offers comparable or better features, only slightly reduced performance, and a significantly lower price."-CD

Its ok you accept defeat...instead you draw the discussion away to something irrelevant like owner wealth from '07, or you resort to name calling. Anyway no sources equal no argument. You can claim anything you like, but no facts to back it up just looks weak.

"Honestly, just give me ONE link, just ONE where you saw an Audi win based on price."

I gave him a link....then he responds with.

"Why not find another article that specifically states it won because it was cheapest?"

First you said give me ONE....now its find ANOTHER. LOL!

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/2013-audi-s6-vs-2013-bmw-m5-2012-mercedes-benz-e63-amg-1.pdf

What are we missing here? Why do the other cars need 18 to 20 grand more in cash due at signing?

Highs, Lows, and Verdict > M5
Highs:
A leather-lined bullet for five, smoothly sophisticated power, one gorgeous devil in a blue dress.

Lows:
Comparatively dull steering, hippity-hop over bumps, that @#&$ shifter, unsatisfying in ways an M5 shouldn't be.

Verdict:
Cleanup in aisle five, please.

Highs, Lows, and Verdict > E63
Highs:
Turns on a pfennig, sounds like Beethoven's "Blitzkrieg in C," rear tires are often smoking, engages all the senses.

Lows:
One or two loose parts, tailpipes look like buckteeth, the most expensive.

Verdict:
This robot is the biggest thrill ride.

Highs, Lows, and Verdict > S6
Highs:
Abundant details make it feel special, less power but more personality than the M5, smallest sticker price.

Lows:
More squishiness in corners, steering is less reactive than the Benz's, a choppier ride on 20s.

Verdict:
In a blind taste test, you'd never pick this one as the cheapest. "Only the most complete."

"What are we missing here? Why do the other cars need 18 to 20 grand more in cash due at signing?"

Right? So I guess this will make RS6 is obsolete, which will most likely cost more than the M5. Also who would ever pay 180 grand for a panamera turbo S when you can get a comparable M5 for 80 grand less? And when a Porsche 911 turbo is faster and has more driver involvement than a Lamborghini gallardo for half the price whats the business case for the Lambo?

The fact is that review is one editors opinion, and should not be read into any more than that. Especially when other reviews have praised the things that were dinged in this review. What can be taken away is the objective data, and in that area the E63 and M5 spanked the S6. Plus the M5 has the ability to be tracked hard, and be a cushy lux sedan the next minute. A duel personality the others cannot match, and for me that would be worth the premium alone.

A sham you have to resort to name calling, very immature. Best overall car yet it lost in every performance category? LOL. The editor gave it the win b/c he felt it was just as fun to drive as the other two for 30K less, and he thought it felt “special”... So yes price was the deciding factor. Read the Article.

You're right, when comparing performance sedans the one with the worst performance in every category should win b/c it "feels compete" aka Subjective opinion. The objective data speaks for its self. Funny you won’t acknowledge price had anything to do with it, even though it states it blatantly in the article.

Who said I own a $200K car? Putting words in peoples mouths again?

"Yup, not only more wealthy but also youngest and smartest. I'm sorry, but who's "

Wait, what does any of that have to do with was being discussed above? Trying to change the topic? As for your link, the average age was the same, the "college degree" percent was within 1%, and the "average income" was within 10K or so....that shows a lot.

"What's worse is that you don't even refute my claims, except for the A3 now being third in sales, despite your implication that Audi is ONLY successful because of its cheap offerings."

I never said they were "ONLY" successful b/c of cheap offerings. But if you look at all of the models Audi offers. The one model Audi sells that MB of BMW do not have a direct competitor to, or anything as far down market "cheap" as the A1. That is a FACT. And the A1 accounts for over 100K units a year. Fact. So take away this one sub-premium model (100K units a year) Audis number would be down near Mercedes. If Mercedes, and BMW would offer something that cheap, you could add 100K to their numbers essentially putting Mercedes on par with Audi, and BMW about 100k in front. Bottom line Audi gained 100K units a year by going way down market, and offering a car that could be argues is not "premium"...it costs 2K more than a Polo.

S for stooopid