LexusLuver

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....rticle_id=8682
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=5

geez they really hold the fact that the C55 is a 5spd auto against MB.
Looks like the CTS-V's top gear is pretty much useless (judging from the top gear pulls) except improves mpg, and reduces engine noise.

C55 gets hammered again for its lack of space in the scoring category.

Am I missing something, is bigger better w/sport sedans???
Is having a manual better???
Is 245mm front tire appopriate for a sport sedan, or a sports car.

SecPole14

Transverse Audi V8 > your soul

mmarshall

For the majority of driving that most people do, most of the time, an automatic..or at least an autoshift manual...is better than a conventional stick.

Sixth gear in a lot of cars is not very flexible...it is put there ( as you note ) mostly for MPG on higher-output engines....and to make closer gear spacing.

Lack of space CAN be an issue with sports sedans....they are often bought by people who either don't want a pure sports car or who have outgrown them.

245's are not considered that huge on today's sport sedans.....you sometimes see them on BMW M's and Mercedes AMG's.

D2-AUTOSPORT

I also think the MB should have faired better than the CTS, but I guess value played a large part as well. Did anyone notice that the C55 got a 10 of 10 in the styling department? That car truely does have great proportions.

There is a guy that lives about 2-3 blocks away from me and he has a S4, the sound of that V8 is a truely beautiful thing! I really wish Audi did not change this car's shape after only 2 years, its too has great proportions.

Although we all ridicule the "Bangle-Bimmer", the "shock-factor" design treatment is really sweeping the Euro styling scene. For reference, see the new Audi grille, and the new M/B "hang-tooth" whoops I meant grille! LOL

LexFather

I can agree 100% with this call. The C55 is not worth more than 9k for either. The CTS is great but that interior=bah. The S4 combines the best of both worlds and adds AWD to boot. The S4 has been winning like crazy in multiple magazines.

Gojirra99

mmarshall

The S4 is indeed an excellent car....and is available in sportwagon versions too. It may become the new standard bearer among sports sedans under 50K, taking over from the long-running BMW 3-series. While it doesn't have the Bimmer's classic neutral / lift-throttle marginal oversteer dynamics and handling feel, the Quattro AWD gives all kinds of cornering grip. Unfortunately, neither of these two cars come anywhere close to the IS300's Lexus quality.

LexusLuver

R&T is such a vastly superior mag than C&D
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....ber=5&preview=
notice they don't appropriate pts stupidly, intentionally rigging the results

plus subpar chassis aren't invited because Cadillac "deserves" to compete with the Germans.

C&D seems to think it's acceptable to harm MB sales (which already are down), even though MB worked hard to aquire their standing.

Last I checked the C-class is its own platform, not some STS/CTS/SRX Infiniti style G35/M35/FX35 one size fits all hack job.

mmarshall

I read them both cover-to-cover every month...along with AUTOWEEK, AUTOMOBILE, and the local auto weeklies. AUTOWEEK sometimes prints my comments.

Road and Track is set up more as a serious, no-nonsense publication that focuses mostly on testing, the personal opinions of the guys doing the testing, like Dennis Simanatis and Patrick Hong, and racing and competition events, though Egan's column often shows what you go through on a day-to-day basis restoring and caring for cars.

Car and Driver, on the other hand, is more informal, much more editorialized, and tests cars in a less formal, simpler kind of way. I personally like its comparison tests much more than R&T's...they are more basic and down to earth. Patrick Bedard, Brock Yates, John Phillips, and Csaba Csere not only do driving and testing but all write columns in the magazine every month.