OK, I put this off long enough… I promised a write-up so here it is.
Part 1 - The Cars
Why Audi? Why Lexus? BMW argues that Audi is the reigning AWD king and that Lexus is the new kid on the block. So doing a comparison against both covers the extremes.
Group 1:
- Audi A4 3.2 Quattro
- BMW 325xi
- BMW 330xi
- Lexus IS250 AWD
Group 2:
- BMW X3 3.0i
- BMW X3 3.0i with M sports package
- Lexus RX330
The match-ups:
- 325xi vs. IS250
- 330xi vs. A4 3.2
- X3 vs. RX330
None of the group 1 models had a sport package. All were 2006 models and had 17” rims with practically new OEM tyres (The A4 had Continental’s and the IS had Dunlop’s Sport 9000, the 3ers had runflat Bridgestone’s… all tyres were pretty new and had a lot of threading).
Part 2 - The Presentation
Objective: To educate buyers on the difference between 4WD/AWD systems on the market, as well as to compare the system among the manufacturers present.
In a nutshell: The presentation started by explaining technical differences between 4WD/AWD systems. It followed by a technical specifications rundown and detailed information of the AWD systems of the various models in the comparison.
I took some notes so here goes:
xDrive (all BMW models):
- Normal torque split: 40/60 (front/rear)
- Limits of torque split: 0/100 or 100/0 (goes to either extreme)
It was also mentioned how BMW attempts a 50/50 weight distribution to enhance driving dynamics and to reduce stress on breaking. The X3 has a weight distribution of 50.4/49.6, while the 3er w/xDrive has 53/47.
Quattro (on the A4)
- Normal torque split: 50/50 (front/rear)
- Limits of torque split: 75/25 (manual) or 67/34 (automatic)
I took the torque split numbers down pretty quickly and I might have inverted the numbers, so it could be 25/75 and 34/67 (someone confirm please). The A4’s weight distribution is 54/46, which is pretty much the same as the 3er with xDrive.
Lexus IS250 AWD
- Normal torque split: 30/70 (front/rear)
- Limits of torque split: 50/50 (front/rear)
Lexus RX330
- Normal torque split: 50/50 (fixed… yuk)
Note the IS350 is not available in AWD in Canada at this time. The IS has a 58/42 weight distribution while the RX’s weight distribution is 57/43.
Part 3 - The Argument
BMW’s argument that their system is superior to both Audi and Lexus (and others) is because it is more flexible as it can transfer torque to both extremes, meaning all to the front or all to the rear, depending on the requirements. They said that no other system currently on the market can match that kind of flexibility. Furthermore, they added by saying that BMW always attempts to make a close as possible to a 50/50 weight distribution further improves cornering stability.
Part 4 - The Circuit
The closed circuit was composed of several driving exercises testing the cars stability and driving dynamics. Note that it was a very hot day and thus making the road slippery was very challenging, so this was NOT a test to see who has better traction!!!! The whole circuit was delimited by lines and cones to show us were to go.
I] Roundabout
Objective: to test the car’s body roll.
Target speed:40 km/h
II] Steer (avoid) and brake
Objective: to test the car’s steering capabilities under breaking (ABS). The surface before and around the object to avoid was slippery. The point was to avoid the object and while turning to engage the ABS (but not to the point of stopping).
Target speed: 45 km/h (until breaking point)
III] Tight handling
Objective: to test the car’s handling dynamics (high stress on suspension), steering/dry-traction capabilities and power steering reaction. It was a hard left, hard right, hard left and finally a hard right.
Target speed: 40 km/h
IV] Loose handling
Objective: to test the car’s handling dynamics (progressive stress on suspension) and steering/dry-traction capabilities and power steering reaction. It was a hard left, easy right, easy left and finally a easy right.
Target speed: 40 km/h
V] Steer and avoid
Objective: to test the car’s steering capabilities and reaction time without breaking. We had to maintain our speed and essentially simulate avoiding a car by quickly changing lanes (to the right) and then tucking back in (to the left).
Target speed: 50 km/h
VI] Braking
Objective: to test the car’s breaking capability and stability. Once we hit a line, we had to slam on the breaks until completely stopping.
Target speed: 70 km/h (until breaking point)
Part 5 - Performance ratings
I’ll give each car a 0-5 rating (0=crap, 5=excellent) for each segment of the circuit and for general characteristics. Many know that I have a bias towards BMW, but many also know that I don’t like to bull****, so I’ll try to be as honest as I can.
Group 1
__________325xi_ 330xi___ A4 _____ IS250
GENERAL
Interior __ 4 ____ 4 ______ 3# _____ 5
Exterior __ 5 ____ 5 ______ 5 ______ 5
Comfort __ 5 ____ 5 ______ 3## ___ 4.5
Handling __ 5 ____ 5 _____ 5 ______ 3.5###
Power ____ 4 ____ 5 _____ 5 ______ 4
# Hated the center console, too much clutter. Plus it was harder to get into a comfortable driving position.
## Slippery leather, annoying when cornering
### Very loose steering with so-so feedback
CIRCUIT
I] Roundabout _____ 5 ____ 5 _____ 5 _____ 3.5*
II] Steer and brake _ 5 ____ 5 _____ 5 _____ 4
III] Tight handling __ 5 ____ 5 _____ 5 _____ 4
IV] Loose handling __ 5 ___ 5 ______ 5 _____ 4
V] Steer and avoid __ 5 ___ 5 ______ 5 _____ 4
VI] Braking ________ 5 ____ 5 ______ 3** ___ 5
Overall ___________4.5 ____ 5 ____ 4.5 ____ 4
* Tires were not well suited for the car
** Weak under breaking, not so bad at the beginning of the session, but deteriorated quickly (the A4 was the first and last car my friend and I drove)
Group 2
_______________ X3 _____ X3-M ___ RX330
GENERAL
Interior _________ 3 ______ 3 _______ 2.5
Exterior ________ 3 ______ 3.5 _____ 2
Comfort ________ 3 ______ 4 _______ 3
Handling _______ 4 _______ 5 _______ 0
Power _________ 4 _______ 4 _______ 3
CIRCUIT
I] Roundabout ______ 4 ____ 4.5 ____ 0*
II] Steer and brake _ 4 ____ 4 _____ 2
III] Tight handling __ 4 ____ 5 _____ 0**
IV] Loose handling __ 5 ____ 5 _____ 2
V] Steer and avoid __ 4 ____ 4 _____ 2
VI] Braking ________ 5 ____ 5 _____ 2
Overall____________ 4 ____ 4.5 ____ 1
* Horrible body-roll. Although we were taking the turn 40 km/h with all other cars, the RX struggle and performed horribly at 30 km/h
** At the third tight zigzag the power steering locked and my friend lost the steering and we went straight and ran off the circuit and hit some cones
Part 6 - The Comparison
I truly believe if all the cars weren’t AWD, the results would be pretty much the same, so as an AWD comparison, this was pretty crappy. The exercises were more aimed to test driving dynamics (with typically favour the 3er). So I can’t conclude which AWD system is better.
Part 7 - The Final Verdict
Even if the comparison as far as AWD was bogus, this gave me a chance to pin the 3er against some of its competition. And I must say that it’s pretty easy to see the 3er is the leader in this segment. I guess the only complaint could be about some of the interior materials, but although they could be a bit better it’s not enough to bother me all that much.
I was happy to finally drive the new A4 because I love the body and was (yes was) truly considering it as a next car. And although the car is really close to the 3er, it still needs some work, especially with the breaks which deteriorated rapidly. I was also disappointed with some of the interior ergonomics and the center console (but that’s very subjective). And although beautiful and top-notch, the leather was a little annoying as it was very slippery (too smooth?!). But I’m sure if it had sport seats, it would have been a different story.
The IS was somewhat of a surprise as I found it very comfortable (although a bit cramped) and very appealing inside and out. But with 204 hp and torque that kicks in much too late, the car is underpowered. The IS350 probably takes care of that problem. The big problem was with the loose and a bit imprecise steering. I was convinced the car something like active steering because it felt too loose at times, but no, it was just loose.
The X3 was a pleasant surprise as well. Normally I was never a big fan of it but with time I stopped hating it as the design grew on me (plus BMW finally put some painted bumpers). Although I recently drove the X3 for the first time since my friend bought one, I didn’t really get to abuse his to the levels I of which was achieved on that circuit. What really impresses me about the X3 is the car-like characteristics. It rarely feels like a truck (except under heavy breaking where it’s height is felt) which is good in my book, since I’m not a huge fan of SUVs. Now although I like the X3 more than before, I still think it’s the ugliest model of the family.
Finally we get to the RX330. This car can really be summed up in one simple acronym: P.O.S.!!!! I mean it’s ridiculous how technologically retarded this car is compared to the X3. From minivan-like seats (high and no lumbar support at all), to crappy braking, to awful handling and worse body-roll… there’s nothing good I can say about this car. What was hilarious was the reaction of horror and disbelief of every single person that drove that car. It was nicknamed the deathmobile, because you weren’t sure if we going to survive the circuit.
The end.
I corrected it. 
