Close

Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,918
    Rep Points
    31,886.9
    Mentioned
    2093 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No

    Audi robbed? MotorTrend picks the 2013 BMW 650i Grand Coupe xDrive over the Audi S7 and Mercedes-Benz CLS550 4Matic

    This is kind of an odd result. Lately, BMW has been losing a lot of comparison tests. Based on the numbers in this one as well as what the author writes, the Audi S7 should really be the winner. It's the quickest and fastest through the 1/4 mile. It is the best handling of the three with the highest skidpad number (tied with the 650i) and the quickest through the figure eight test. And with a price just under $30k less (yes $30k!) as tested than the 650i why in the world did it come in second?

    Click here to enlarge

    Seriously, read this: "If this test were just about pure, back-road capability, the S7 would get the nod. But as the BMW is about 95 percent as capable as the Audi (identical 0.94 max g, too), but offers so much more in desirability, craftsmanship, and that all-important X-factor, we're calling it the winner."

    What? If the test were just about back road capability and driving pleasure the S7 would win? But the BMW is 95% as capable (so MotorTrend directly states the BMW is not 100% as capable as the Audi) yet at a 26% price premium. So $30k more to get within 5% of the overall driving capability? Shouldn't it be the Ultimate Driving Machine that is the more capable drivers car? Hey, you make sense of it.

    The BMW gets the win based on the "X-factor" whatever that means. I'd keep the $30k and tell BMW to keep their X-factor. Especially as I pull easily away and lose the 650i on a nice curvy road enjoying the driving pleasure the S7 offers for a 1/4 less money. Seems someone at MotorTrend thinks the 650i X-factor is worth another $30k. Do you?


    2013 Audi S7 2013 BMW 650IGran Coupe xDrive 2013 Mercedes-Benz CLS550 4Matic
    POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS
    DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT Front-engine, AWD Front-engine, AWD Front-engine, AWD
    ENGINE TYPE Twin-turbo 90-deg V-8, aluminum block/heads Twin-turbo 90-deg V-8, aluminum block/heads Twin-turbo 90-deg V-8, aluminum block/heads
    VALVETRAIN DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl
    DISPLACEMENT 243.7 cu in/3993 cc 268.2 cu in/4395 cc 284.6 cu in/4663 cc
    COMPRESSION RATIO 10.1:1 10.0:1 10.5:1
    POWER (SAE NET) 420 hp @ 5500 rpm 445 hp @ 5500 rpm 402 hp @ 5000 rpm
    TORQUE (SAE NET) 406 lb-ft @ 1400 rpm 480 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm 443 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm
    REDLINE 6400 rpm 7000 rpm 6300 rpm
    WEIGHT TO POWER 10.6 lb/hp 10.3 lb/hp 10.7 lb/hp
    TRANSMISSION 7-speed twin-cl auto 8-speed automatic 7-speed automatic
    AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO 4.09:1/2.12:1 2.81:1/1.88:1 2.47:1/1.80:1
    SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Multilink, air springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, air springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, adj anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, adj anti-roll bar Struts, air springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, air springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar
    STEERING RATIO 16.1:1 18.0:1 16.5:1
    TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.7 3 2.6
    BRAKES, F;R 15.7-in vented disc; 14.0-in vented disc, ABS 13.7-in vented disc; 13.6-in vented disc, ABS 14.2-in vented, drilled disc; 12.6-in vented disc, ABS
    WHEELS, F;R 9.0 x 20-in, cast aluminum 8.5 x 20-in; 9.0 x 20-in cast aluminum 9.0 x 19-in; 10.0 x 19-in cast aluminum
    TIRES, F;R 265/35R20 99Y
    Yokohama Advan Sport
    245/35R20 95Y; 275/30R20 97Y Dunlop SP Sport Maxx GT DSST 255/35R19 96Y; 285/30R19 98Y Pirelli P Zero
    DIMENSIONS
    WHEELBASE 114.7 in 116.9 in 113.2 in
    TRACK, F/R 64.7/64.4 in 63.2/65.8 in 63.9/63.2 in
    LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 195.6 x 75.2 x 55.9 in 197.2 x 74.6 x 54.8 in 194.5 x 74.1 x 55.8 in
    TURNING CIRCLE 39.0 ft 39.2 ft 37.0 ft
    CURB WEIGHT 4435 lb 4603 lb 4318 lb
    WEIGHT DIST, F/R 55/45% 53/47% 56/44%
    SEATING CAPACITY 4 5 4
    HEADROOM, F/R 36.9/36.6 in 40.6/37.0 in 36.9/36.1 in
    LEGROOM, F/R 41.3/37.0 in 42.1/35.3 in 42.1/35.0 in
    SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 57.2/55.9 in 56.7/54.6 in 57.1/56.5 in
    CARGO VOLUME 24.5 cu ft 13.0 cu ft 15.3 cu ft
    TEST DATA
    ACCELERATION TO MPH
    0-30 1.2 sec 1.4 sec 1.7 sec
    0-40 2 2.3 2.5
    0-50 2.8 3.1 3.4
    0-60 3.9 4.2 4.4
    0-70 5.1 5.4 5.7
    0-80 6.4 6.9 7.1
    0-90 8 8.6 8.7
    0-100 9.8 10.7 10.6
    PASSING, 45-65 MPH 2.1 2.1 2
    QUARTER MILE 12.3 sec @ 112.1 mph 12.7 sec @ 108.0 mph 12.9 sec @ 110.6 mph
    BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 103 ft 106 ft 102 ft
    LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.94 g (avg) 0.94 g (avg) 0.88 g (avg)
    MT FIGURE EIGHT 24.8 sec @ 0.81 g (avg) 25.1 sec @ 0.79 g (avg) 25.4 sec @ 0.75 g (avg)
    TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1600 rpm 1500 rpm 1500 rpm
    CONSUMER INFO
    BASE PRICE $79,695 $90,395 $75,405
    PRICE AS TESTED $85,570 $114,845 $81,135
    STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL Yes/yes Yes/yes Yes/yes
    AIRBAGS Dual front, front side, f/r curtain, front knee Dual front, front side, f/r curtain, front knee Dual front, f/r side, f/r curtain, front knee
    BASIC WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 mi
    POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 mi
    ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE 4 yrs/unlimited 4 yrs/unlimited Unlimited
    FUEL CAPACITY 19.8 gal 18.5 gal 21.1 gal
    EPA CITY/HWY ECON 17/27 mpg 16/24 mpg 16/25 mpg
    ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY 198/125 kW-hrs/100 mi 211/140 kW-hrs/100 mi 211/135 kW-hrs/100 mi
    CO2 EMISSIONS 0.95 lb/mi 1.03 lb/mi 1.02 lb/mi
    MT FUEL ECONOMY 12.2 mpg 13.2 mpg 15.0 mpg
    RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium Unleaded premium Unleaded premium



    Source

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    2,280
    Rep Points
    936.0
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    i would definitely take the s7 as well, that thing is a beast

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Jerzee
    Posts
    2,306
    Mentioned
    82 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Considering the test is subjective as are all road tests I dont consider the result crazy. Its not uncommon for the best performer to not place first. That being said the A7/S7 is as ugly as the Panamera for me. The 650 is much better looking I for one would choose the 650 or CLS on looks alone over the S7.

    Clearly the Audi is a stout performer and cheaper, however if I recall the C&D Lightning Lap they were highly disappointed with the A7 on track but loved it on the street.
    We stay swingin...
    Click here to enlarge

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,918
    Rep Points
    31,886.9
    Mentioned
    2093 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Best performer does not equal victory but all other tests chose the S7 and pricing seems to have been overlooked bog time....

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    26
    Rep Points
    38.4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Sorry , But the 30 grand difference is based on options. I would really say it a $10,000 difference going off base Price. We don't know what options were in each car etc so that number really is not accurate. Either way that audi is quite the performer but I would take the BMW personally any day even though it is slower.. Audi Is just not nearly as pretty. And at the end of the day no one is going to be tracking these cars so the difference is minimal on the road. So for daily duties BMW all day for me.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,918
    Rep Points
    31,886.9
    Mentioned
    2093 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by mpowerct Click here to enlarge
    Sorry , But the 30 grand difference is based on options.
    The 6 Series base pricing AND options are insane. Look at the S7 and CLS options, base, and final pricing. It's very valid to point out the huge gap.

    The M6, Gran Coupe, etc., is simply way more expensive than the competition. BMW really priced the 6 way too high.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Naples, Fl
    Posts
    750
    Rep Points
    861.8
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Yes Reputation No
    Notice the curb weights as well, the 6-series is a pig, as usual.
    Click here to enlarge

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,918
    Rep Points
    31,886.9
    Mentioned
    2093 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Eric335 Click here to enlarge
    Notice the curb weights as well, the 6-series is a pig, as usual.
    Can't believe I forgot to mention that. Wrote this one in a hurry but I've been hard on BMW's weight gain and rightfully so.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,918
    Rep Points
    31,886.9
    Mentioned
    2093 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Oh and take a look at the awesome 50/50 BMW weight distribution. Oh wait a second...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    761
    Rep Points
    380.2
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Yes Reputation No
    Pretty close to me but frankly SPEAKING AUDI would be the winner on this except the fuel consumption!!

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,655
    Rep Points
    -192.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Stupid segment with stupid cars..

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •