Audi A4 2.0 v BMW 318i ?

Silvera

Ok...this is the story -

I have a '03 Astra XE and have been looking for some time now for the right 01/02 A4 130bhp TDi, with no luck. Either the mileage is too high or the colour is wrong or whatever.

So now I'm considering going for a petrol A4 or BMW 318i.
(I do about 12k per annum)

Looking at the options on carzone.ie, I see several cars which would suit me and my budget....either petrol 01/02 A4's or 318's.

Question is ....which one is best overall?

For some reason petrol A4's dont get mentioned much here, or get indifferent opinions?!?

colm_mcm

A4's aren't all that unless you get one that's loaded with kit, which they don't tend to be.

bazz26

2001/2002 Audi A4 2.0 litre petrol only has something like 115bhp afaik which is pretty weak for a 2.0 litre even back then. It is the old 2.0 litre 8 valve VAG engine from the likes of the Passat and Golf GTi (in some countries). I think this engine dates back to the old Audi 80/100 of the early 1990s. I would not bother with it to be honest, paying tax and insurance on a 2.0 litre with the performance of a 1.6 litre. The A4 1.8T would be much better, it is a 20 valve unit with a turbo charger producing something like 163bhp. I had one as a rental a couple of years ago and it was fairly lively, though a small bit of lag experienced from the turbo. Only thing to watch is the cylinder coils on the VAG 1.8 litre which had issues but should have been well replaced by VAG at this stage.

Same kind of goes for the BMW 318i, back in 2001 the E46 318i had a 1.9 litre engine which produced around 118bhp afaik which wasn't great either. However in late 2001 when the 3 Series got a facelift the 318i got a new 2.0 litre valvetronic engine with 143bhp. But to be honest the best engines are the 6 cylinders so if you can afford the 320i (2.2 litre) it will be worth it. Alternatively the 320d with 150bhp is also a nice car but watch 2001 to 2003 models as they had a problem with the turbo afaik.

E92

01 onwards 2.0 A4 had 130 bhp. It was a 20 valve unit, apparantly it has nothing to do with the ancient 8V lump(according to Audi, but both engines have an identical 1984ccs, a bit of a coincidence, don't you think?:eek: ).

Either way, 130 bhp is not a lot for a 2.0 of that time, especially when the previous A4 managed 125 bhp from its 20 valve 1.8.

bazz26

E92 wrote:

01 onwards 2.0 A4 had 130 bhp. It was a 20 valve unit, apparantly it has nothing to do with the ancient 8V lump(according to Audi, but both engines have an identical 1984ccs, a bit of a coincidence, don't you think?:eek: ).

Either way, 130 bhp is not a lot for a 2.0 of that time, especially when the previous A4 managed 125 bhp from its 20 valve 1.8.

130bhp really? Even that is not great. I had a 1994 Honda Accord 2.0 litre a good few years ago and it had around 125bhp from the factory.

Biro

bazz26 wrote:

130bhp really? Even that is not great. I had a 1994 Honda Accord 2.0 litre a good few years ago and it had around 125bhp from the factory.

Tht's cause Honda know how to make a good engine!

PauloMN

@ OP: As stated above, avoid the non-turbo 1.6 and 2.0 petrols. Not worth having if you want any sort of poke TBH. I got a 1.8T which I'm delighted with and has a decent amount of power (163bhp), can easily be remapped also. I changed from an Astra as well funnily enough.

The other thing is (as I'm sure you have found) that a lot of the diesels are high-mileage and many are thrashed having spent their lives as rep cars not really cared for by their owner. You are much more likely to find a privately owned clean lower mileage A4 in petrol form than in diesel. I was shocked at the condition of some of the A4s I went to see, but the 1.8T I ended up with is a minter.

Watch out for UK cars - if you are serious about one, check the mileage via a HPI check. I had picked out a A4 TDi and almost bought it - turned out to be clocked. Thankfully I found out in time. Don't go near one if not mint or if a full history is not provided.

E92

Biro wrote:

Tht's cause Honda know how to make a good engine!

Power isn't the only ingredient to a good engine, otherwise all engines would have only 1 cylinder, have no torque , and to hell with refinement!

Silvera

Thanks for the updates guys.

AFAIK, the 01/02 A4 2.0 petrol is 130bhp (same as the A4 diesels I was considering).
According to guides I was reading, they stated that the 2.0 was 'swift' to drive, which doesnt sound too bad...especially when going from (what I would consider ) a 'swift' 90bhp Astra.

I have heard about the power of the 1.8 but have also heard about some reliability issues with them ....and the fact that they may only do c. 15mpg when pushed on:eek:
As fuel economy is a concern...I reckon that the 2.0 would be a better bet for me.

Anybody have experience with the 2.0's fuel economy?

I have also found that it is very difficult to source a clean lowish mileage A4 diesel (at a sensible price!) and yet mint petrol versions seem more plentiful in comparsion.

bazz26

Don't know the exact mpg for the 2.0 litre but I would guess it is around average at low 30s or high 20s.

Just to add a wild card to the above two, would you consider a Honda Accord 2.0 litre? The current model has been around since 2003. It produces 155bhp from the I-VTEC engine. Go to the UK and you will probably pick up a very high spec low milage example with all the trimmings.

PauloMN

Silvera wrote:

....and the fact that they may only do c. 15mpg when pushed on:eek:
As fuel economy is a concern...I reckon that the 2.0 would be a better bet for me.

Where did you read/hear 15mpg? :eek:

I filled up mine yesterday, just did some quick sums for you, I worked it out to be a shade under 29mpg with mainly town/suburbs driving. I doubt the 2.0 would achieve much better than that. In fact, it doesn't (I just checked).

You'll save on road tax anything extra you put in the tank, there's so little difference between the economy figures.

kingcolers

I have a 2.0 Audi A4 (late 2001). I brought it home from the UK. I'm not an expert but it gives great welly. Much, much better than a Golf 1.6, in reference to another post here. No comparison. Also much better than other 2.0 litres I've driven.

No idea about fuel efficiency.

E92

2.0 AFAIR averages 35.3 mpg, pretty poor when you consider that a new BMW 530i does 37.7 mpg, and that has 1 litre more and 2 more cylinders and is a bigger and heavier car. A 6 cylinder BMW 320i of that era does around 31mpg.

1.9 TDI does around 52 mpg AFAIR.

cyborg

having owned a 01 a4 2.0 and a 02 318 (143bhp) the BMW is the better car on most accounts. better engine,handling , refinement, economy and ride quality (both on 15" wheels) , the audi has a nicer interior and a much better audio system that is all.

groupb

Audi A4's are fine if you have zero interest in cars.The fact that they are totally useless to drive(current RS4 aside ,i've read) seems to be of no significance to most badge led Irish people.Drive one back to back with a mondeo on a bad road and the difference will become apparent within a mile or two. At least BMW built a car in the 3 series which lives up to the badge although it struggles to keep up with the mighty ford.Before I'm condemed I have owned all three cars (on my second mondeo) and can't wait to buy the new shape mondeo when depreciation kicks in.

yayamark

own an audi 02 a4 2.4 petrol. have driven bmw for years and have to say that the audi is a superior drive and my dog could create a nicer interior than the inside of a bmw:eek:

mike65

A4 says "professional" 3 series says "ambitious junior"

Mike.

Silvera

I've actually also considered a Mondeo, a lot of owners sing their praises for handling and power.

I suppose I would probably get a 04/05 Mondeofor the same money as a 01/02 A4 or BMW 3 series?!

Though I dont mind the year so much once it's a quality car.

How does a 01 A4 2.0, 57k for €14k sound?
or a 01 318SE 80k for €13.5K ?

yayamark

BMW's are staring to be used by some "Boyracers".

You'll never see that with an Audi. --- Class

colm_mcm

Boyracers are driving them for a reason though!

E92

yayamark wrote:

BMW's are staring to be used by some "Boyracers".

You'll never see that with an Audi. --- Class

Boyracers can never win, when they start driving sh!tboxes we give out about them for doing up heaps of rubbish, then when they start doing up proper cars we tell people not to buy them, because they are driven by the modified car crew!


But its the E30 and early E36 3 series that "suffer" from this "problem".

This is an E30:
.

And this is an E36:



OP is talking about the E46 though, which looks like this:

JHMEG

yayamark wrote:

BMW's are staring to be used by some "Boyracers".

You'll never see that with an Audi. --- Class

Boll*x. For some reason the A6 is the weapon of choice for the "accomplished" boy racer. Pref white (some sort of homage to Japanese motor racing I presume) with tinted windows and smoked tail lights. And then there's the A4 with 18" wolfrace alloys. I've even seen one with 18" on the back and 16" on the front. Obviously he didn't know it's FWD...

E92

JHMEG wrote:

Boll*x. For some reason the A6 is the weapon of choice for the "accomplished" boy racer. Pref white (some sort of homage to Japanese motor racing I presume) with tinted windows and smoked tail lights. And then there's the A4 with 18" wolfrace alloys. I've even seen one with 18" on the back and 16" on the front. Obviously he didn't know it's FWD...

Lol, I'd love to see that A4 you described! Whatever next!

Worse is the crowd telling you this is an RS4(of course anyone even remotely interested in cars will know straight away that it is not an RS4, and those who don't know anything about cars won't know what an RS4 is), only to find out when they accelerate that there is 4 cylinder diesel making that lovely diesel racket that affects all VAG TDi with PD technology so you can tell a mile away its a paraffin stove....priceless:D !

Then again we have have the good old Honda Civic, between the EH's/EG's and EJ's, they all seem to modified these days!

I can't wait to see the first souped up Civic IMA with big huge exhausts and the sound of silence coming from them !

CarLover

Silvera wrote:

Ok...this is the story -

I have a '03 Astra XE and have been looking for some time now for the right 01/02 A4 130bhp TDi, with no luck. Either the mileage is too high or the colour is wrong or whatever.

So now I'm considering going for a petrol A4 or BMW 318i.
(I do about 12k per annum)

Looking at the options on carzone.ie, I see several cars which would suit me and my budget....either petrol 01/02 A4's or 318's.

Question is ....which one is best overall?

For some reason petrol A4's dont get mentioned much here, or get indifferent opinions?!?

To the OP - feel free to ignore this btw...just my opinion.
Both are boring lumps. If I see another 318i 3 series on the road I will probably barf

Go 6 cylinder...you will never regret it...even when the Greens shaft you later on this year for killing all those bunny wabbits with your exhaust!!

If you're not into cars save your money and buy a Focus or a Mondeo or something. There is NOTHING WORSE than lowly versions of prestige brands. I'd rather drive a standard Golf or Focus.

Of the two I might be tempted by the 1.8T A4...or 130BHP TDI which is the way to go alright if you're thinking Audi. Not a big fan of diesels though and you're only doing 12k per annum anyway so probably overkill.

siralfalot

mike65 wrote:

A4 says "professional" 3 series says "ambitious junior"

Mike.

yayamark wrote:

BMW's are staring to be used by some "Boyracers".

You'll never see that with an Audi. --- Class

what utter bullsh1t :rolleyes:

to me they both say "boring and conservative"

JHMEG

E92 wrote:

Worse is the crowd telling you this is an RS4

Yes, have seen quite a few RS4 1.9TDi's going around lately.

Eoin

siralfalot wrote:

what utter bullsh1t :rolleyes:

Completely agree with you there; utter crap.

siralfalot wrote:

to me they both say "boring and conservative"

I'm obviously biased, but the e46 saloon can be made to look very nice with a few subtle mods.

siralfalot

eoin_s wrote:

I'm obviously biased, but the e46 saloon can be made to look very nice with a few subtle mods.

yeah I was just jesting on that one:p , I agree with you, they do need to be subtle though

yayamark

E92 wrote: »

Boyracers can never win, when they start driving sh!tboxes we give out about them for doing up heaps of rubbish, then when they start doing up proper cars we tell people not to buy them, because they are driven by the modified car crew!


But its the E30 and early E36 3 series that "suffer" from this "problem".

This is an E30:
.

And this is an E36:



OP is talking about the E46 though, which looks like this:

JHMEG wrote: »

Boll*x. For some reason the A6 is the weapon of choice for the "accomplished" boy racer. Pref white (some sort of homage to Japanese motor racing I presume) with tinted windows and smoked tail lights. And then there's the A4 with 18" wolfrace alloys. I've even seen one with 18" on the back and 16" on the front. Obviously he didn't know it's FWD...

to E92 i wasnt giving out about boy racers i was hust saying what i see

To the gentleman who said bollix, take it easy pal your entitled to yours im entitled to mine, just because your obsessed with the make and model u drive doesn't mean you should redicule my post.

Audi just have that class about them, a better drive, looks reliability etc.

Bmws just dont cut it with the boyracers driving round in"supped" up models with ugly spoilers and alloys and exhausts hanging off.

I'm glad to say u just dont see that with Audi---Class

cancan

yayamark wrote: »

I'm glad to say u just dont see that with Audi---Class

So driving a jumped up skoda is what counts for class in ireland these days..

Haha - sometimes I hope for a recession!

Both cars are as boring as paint drying.

If you sell photocopiers, go get either or - you'll be equally disappointed with both.

There are much more interesting cars out there for less money.

As for reliability and being a better drive, do you know anything about cars?
Both german marks score at the bottom of their class for reliability in every JD power survey out there.

An A4 is about as limp a handling car as you'll find, and with both cars mentioned both having weedy engines, a sit down lawnmower would make for more driving pleasure.

E92

yayamark wrote: »

Audi just have that class about them, a better drive, looks reliability etc.

Bmws just dont cut it with the boyracers driving round in"supped" up models with ugly spoilers and alloys and exhausts hanging off.

I'm glad to say u just dont see that with Audi---Class

Audis have the class of unreliability alright!

If you believe that Audi's reliability or indeed any German cars' reliability(with the honourable exception of BMW, Porsche, and Opel, but BMWs too have problems, like a tendancy to overheat, and iDrive getting "stuck"; they suffer from other engine problems too, but that is because their owners interpret the marketing slogan of "the Ultimate Driving Machine" literally, and therefore drive them enthusiastically too often!) is something to be pround of, then I'm afraid you're stuck in the past.

There was a time when Germany made cars that were second to none for reliability, as good as if not dare I say it better than even the Japs. Old Mercs in particular were bulletproof. A new Merc would nearly be as bad as an Alfa! A 90s VW Polo is supposedly more reliable than a 90s Starlet. A new Polo is supposed to be plagued with electrical problems.

Audi, like most German makes have been resting on their laurels for the best part of a decade now, when it comes to reliability.

Mercedes are the most guilty, they decided back in 1999 that their cars were too reliable(the cars were very expensive to build, because every Merc up to then was quite considerably over-engineered, so that mewan that they would go forever), and surprise surprise, after years of their cars being woefully built, having all sorts of problems, electrical, mechanical(there was even the case where an SL's suspension literally colloapsed), they are now saying that soon their cars will be built the way they once were again, for all future models, and the way they always should have been built.