A7?

I bought a new 2013 A6 premium plus last September. Thought about the A7 but wanted more isolation from the boot. Compared to ALL the equivalents and the Audi won hands down. (Benz E350, BMW 535, Lexus GS350, all loaded with the options) The 7 is just a hatchback 6, the extra cash is for the "exclusivity" of not many on the road.
the HUD and night vision are great.... saved my butt already in a quick fogbank (nightvision is awesome in fog)
 
SOmeone on another forum replaced his e90 M3 with an A7. He was quite taken with it at first but recently wrote a pretty damning review of it. I'll see if i can find it for you.
 
Mowflow said:
SOmeone on another forum replaced his e90 M3 with an A7. He was quite taken with it at first but recently wrote a pretty damning review of it. I'll see if i can find it for you.
Click to expand...
I think I can almost relate to this having the option to drive an Audi or BMW, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out with marque delivers the better driving experience! :driving:
 
I saw a couple of A7 on my drive upto Cumbria at the weekend. I thought they looked really nice certainly had a presence on the road.
 
Mowflow said:
SOmeone on another forum replaced his e90 M3 with an A7. He was quite taken with it at first but recently wrote a pretty damning review of it. I'll see if i can find it for you.
Click to expand...

That would be helpful.

I'm not expecting BMW drivability. I'm looking for luxury and comfort in the A7. Having now driven it, I'm not sure its worth the money. While the drive was comfortable enough, looks were good, toys were good etc. I was expecting more on the quality of materials front. a) because everyone bangs on about audi interiors and b) because its a £55K car.

As it turns out, I found a window seal that wasn't fitted properly, the plastic on the central dash was well, nasty chintzy, and some of the plastic I knock BMW for (that smooth stuff around the windscreen) was to be found centrally on the audi dash. It wasn't bad, don't get me wrong, but I simply was expecting a bit more.

Having slept on it, I think I'd rather have the GT86 I test drove at the weekend. That really did put a smile on my face. More so than my e89 or the A7. The e89 looks fantastic. I still walk out of the house in the morning and go 'wow that looks fab'. But then I drive it, and its harsh ride (run flats) plus a general feeling of fragility (perhaps born by bits that have already broken like the 296 wheels) put me off.

I think the GT86 appeals due to simplicity rather than it being made of fancy materials. Legendary japanese reliability etc. All I really need is something that I feel is more robust and practical than the e89, with emergency seats (seats for the dog in the back or people I need to give a lift to now and then) plus a larger boot. All while still giving me some fun factor. The gt86 did that this weekend alright. The A7 didn't really.
 
For the money your thinking of paying for the A7 you could get a GT 86 for weekends and a second hand saloon to do the hard miles
 
Wouldn't getting the GT86 be a bit of a contradiction for you though? Losing the big engine with the 5s 0-62 and swapping it for a car with the equivalent performance of a Z4 s-drive 18i? Makes sense financially, because as you've paid the finance off on the Zed, you wouldn't need to add a lot to get the GT86 and that £600/month the A7 would cost could be put in a savings account to buy something really good in 3 years time.
 
Not for me: too big and too "business"
I can appreciate the looks of it though, wouldn't mind having it as a company car, but not private held.
 
I think the A7 has some serious road presence... much more then say a z4.

But its def more of a cruiser.. wont be fun to drive...

I drove a GT86 a few weeks back (the dealer which sold me my celica invited me to give it a go) And i thought it was awesome... like a little go kart, feels much faster and more nimble then it looks on paper.
 
Yep.. people do that 'on paper' thing a lot, and the GT86 is the most exciting car I've driven in ages. No way does it feel 18i/20i quick, feels quicker and is just so much more fun to drive. Especially with that sound track, sounds like a rocket. It really has got my attention.
 
It might be fun, and feel quick, until the first time you find yourself trying to out do someone (be it traffic light getaway or whatever) and you find that the diesel sales-rep barge leaves you for dead.

My standard Fiesta RS Turbo I had as a 22 year old back in 199x was as quick to 100mph as one of these.
 
I don't know. I remember when i had my 205 GTi I used to regularly get thrashed in a straight line by all kinds of rubbish. I once remember getting absolutely hammered at the lights by some kind of Vauxhall people carrier thing. Although a bit embarrassing at the time, especially if you had friends in the car it really didn't bother me that much as the feeling of connection, driver involvement and reward as a driver was just so high.

Initially i suffered from performance statistic blindness with the GT86 but i now appreciate the brave approach that Toyota have taken with this car. They have concentrated on feel rather than winning the paper war. I really think it will end up going down as a truly great car as it's a breath of fresh air.
 
I think the car will become tiresome over a long ownership period. It has little torque and you'll constantly have to drive it with the rev-counter in the upper range to extract what performance it does have.

It's one of those cars that the journos love when they are testing it on some remote Welsh mountain road, or on some Spanish launch or around a track. For most people that kind of motoring represents a tiny percentage of everyday use.

It's too slow (and too expensive). Period.
 
original guvnor said:
I think the car will become tiresome over a long ownership period. It has little torque and you'll constantly have to drive it with the rev-counter in the upper range to extract what performance it does have.

It's one of those cars that the journos love when they are testing it on some remote Welsh mountain road, or on some Spanish launch or around a track. For most people that kind of motoring represents a tiny percentage of everyday use.

It's too slow (and too expensive). Period.
Click to expand...

You really need to drive it, because that first paragraph, I'm sorry to say, is entirely wrong. One of the major surprises to me was the torque, there's actually quite a bit of it for an NA engine. It has both torque and the revs in its favour. I agree on your last point though, it is too expensive IMHO, but its a well fettled car.
 
Well admittedly I haven't driven it yet but Autocar got a 50-70mph time of 10.6s in top gear. That's gutless, which a torque figure of 157lb/ft suggests it would be.
 
Its not a performance car in terms of power, that's for sure, but it felt plenty just driving around, which lets face it, unless you take the car on track, you're never really going to be able to put lots of power down for significant time. Its the overall package that just works well.
 
original guvnor said:
Well admittedly I haven't driven it yet but Autocar got a 50-70mph time of 10.6s in top gear.
Click to expand...

Just to put that into perspective, the Z4MC was timed by Autocar at 6.9s in 6th gear for the same increment. That's a helluva lot of overtaking power given up.
 
But aren't you comparing a car made for the track with 340bhp costing over £40K with a car thats got 200bhp and was made for the road costing £25K?
 
Maniac said:
original guvnor said:
I think the car will become tiresome over a long ownership period. It has little torque and you'll constantly have to drive it with the rev-counter in the upper range to extract what performance it does have.

It's one of those cars that the journos love when they are testing it on some remote Welsh mountain road, or on some Spanish launch or around a track. For most people that kind of motoring represents a tiny percentage of everyday use.

It's too slow (and too expensive). Period.
Click to expand...

You really need to drive it, because that first paragraph, I'm sorry to say, is entirely wrong. One of the major surprises to me was the torque, there's actually quite a bit of it for an NA engine. It has both torque and the revs in its favour. I agree on your last point though, it is too expensive IMHO, but its a well fettled car.
Click to expand...

+1

I would say in a traffic style drag it would be as quick as my Z.... and wont kanagroo like mines does when driven hard.

That being said though... most diesels give my Z a run for the money at the lights.. so its probably more down to my drivers skill :roll:

interior wise thought it was basic, and no real tech... i know thats its appeal... but didnt appeal to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom