2009 Acura TL vs. 2009 Audi A4: Part 2

Joe Bruzek and Kelsey Mays, Cars.com

Yesterday we introduced our latest comparison, between the redesigned Audi A4 and Acura TL. In our comparison, these competing luxury cars are similarly priced around the $40,000 mark, which made for a perfect matchup of which car offers the most for the money. Perceived value will of course be in the eye of the buyer, and both cars we tested had their own merits. In the end, though, there can be only one Highlander … er, winner. 

The A4 provided an upscale interior experience with finer materials and more precise build quality. While our preproduction TL lacked such finesse, it offered more gadgets, interior room and a sportier performance for less dough, earning the value-winner nod.

Throughout our Audi A4 and Acura TL drive, we kept bringing up “what ifs” for the Audi’s somewhat lackluster driving performance compared to the sporty TL SH-AWD. What if it had the optional sportier tires, or what if it had the optional stiffer suspension, or what if it were the S-line model?

Comments

Obviously those pictures can't be recent! Sounds like a tough decision to make. Acura has always captured the value nod, but with the sportier driving experience afforded by the gee-whiz SH-AWD system, it sounds like it was an easy decision. I have to wonder if the TL will sway more than a few potential A6 buyers as well since it is close enough to compete on size.

I am a Honda fanatic, but the new TL no matter how good the performance is, is a big bloated piece of ugly. Give me the handsome A4 anyday.

i looked up dimensions -- the CTS AWD w/ 1SB (aka DI) is surprisingly similar in interior passenger volume (actually exactly the same per cars.com), and both "start" @ $40k!!! i'd love to see a comparison here.

both the TL and CTS seem to appeal more to the "luxury-oriented" than "performance-oriented" buyer; both seem bigger than the European "sports sedans," and both have edgy styling that you would not mistaken for another brand (Lexus take note).

i looked up dimensions -- the CTS AWD w/ 1SB (aka DI) is surprisingly similar in interior passenger volume (actually exactly the same per cars.com), and both "start" @ $40k!!! i'd love to see a comparison here.

both the TL and CTS seem to appeal more to the "luxury-oriented" than "performance-oriented" buyer; both seem bigger than the European "sports sedans," and both have edgy styling that you would not mistaken for another brand (Lexus take note).

i looked up dimensions -- the CTS AWD w/ 1SB (aka DI) is surprisingly similar in interior passenger volume (actually exactly the same per cars.com), and both "start" @ $40k!!! i'd love to see a comparison here.

both the TL and CTS seem to appeal more to the "luxury-oriented" than "performance-oriented" buyer; both seem bigger than the European "sports sedans," and both have edgy styling that you would not mistaken for another brand (Lexus take note).

wow, the TL's ass is so big. How on earth is it eclipsed by the smaller A4 in trunk space!! My pick would be the A4- it'll look better in 5 years, even though the TL will probably be cheaper to maitain.

Broq

In the "back to back" pic the TL looks like stealth jet fighter next to a sad frog.

The TL looks much better than the boxy Audi. Sedans shouldn't be just 3 boxes with wheels. The TL's profile is that of a truly sleek luxury sedan. I prefer the TL's nose over the Audi's, and the TL's rear end is much more futuristic and modern than the bland vanilla Audi rear.

Cj, come on boxy Audi? Where does that come from? I mean other than the fact that you are a Honda fanatic. The Audi is all about style, the Acura is about being different. But being different doesn't mean looking good. I would say the Acura is actually more boxy looking than the Audi, it has much more the appearance of a bunch of squares put together than the Audi. That TL is truly one ugly car, its just too bad since it probably drives so nice.

I understand the comments about the TL's styling. It is almost unianimous that this car isn't the best looking. However it has certainly grown on me. Two things I would like to point out:

1. This car looks much better in Black than the silver, gray, or dark red other car sites have tested it in.

2. The A4 looks amazingly conservative in this trim level, compared to the TL. I Personally think the TL looks better in the first picture than the A4 does.....but that changes in the second shot.

"That TL is truly one ugly car..."

Bloke,

everyone likes different color and has different taste.

I don't see anything ugly about TL. It is well executed from sides and rear. Front is questionable, unusual but far from ugly. I see little disonnect between its angled front and rear, and rounded sides. But it looks like a predator, a cat that is ready to pounce on its prey. Great profile!

A4 is simply conventional from every angle. There is nothing you can tell about this car. And the interior is Huyndai-sh looking, with that lowly placed stack of buttons. I don't say TL's is much better.

Bloke,

I was referring to the side profile. The Audi is more of a 3 box shape, while the TL is sleeker.

http://blogs.cars.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/12/01/a4tl3.jpg

The TL (and Acura in general) has always had a more angular theme in it's design, than Audi, but I don't see how it's boxy or blocky like the A4.

Audi style is plain and bland (except for it's gaping fish mouth), so it's not revolutionary. Of course there is always a place for simpler styling, but when compared to the competition from BMW, MB, and even Lexus it disappears. Acura took a different approach than Audi, in order to be recognized amongst the crowd of established premium names. This new TL will not disappear in a crowd of 3 series or C classes.

In what ways do you find the TL ugly. It actually has many styling elements common with the Audi, they are just, in my opinion, more modernly done. Both have large grills that are used to identify their respective brands. They both have simple side profiles, and are not slab-sided. And they both have distinctive rear ends that contain numerous brand identifiers.

They are more alike than different so what makes one ugly and the other a masterpiece? Note, that I never said the A4 was ugly. It's just IMO bland.

Okay so let me explain a little what I don't like about the TL. I think there are ways of modifying a car that can be evolutionary and revolutionary (each can be done to a certain degree) and I don't think either is necessarily a bad thing. The CTS was a revolutionary design step for Cadillac at the time, and I really liked that one. One that was more revolutionary was the previous Maxima. I thought that one was the ugliest rendition of that car since the very original. The problems I see in the TL are not of "breaking the mold" or something, but more of issues with disproportionality. The grill is just plain bad. I think the current Lincoln Navigator suffers the same way. I think the wheel arches are too pronounced in front without be balanced out by the back. I find the back end to be pretty much a confusing design exercise. The way the roof meets the trunk does not seem to flow at all for me. I saw the same thing in the previous Maxima. It had a similar profile to that of a Saturn Ion (a pretty ugly car in my opinion). Also the back end of the TL looks like the front a concept for something like the MDX I saw years ago. It just doesn't look like good to me. The trunk opening also seems so small and the back end in whole seems very large, as evidenced by the second picture. I do think the black color improves the look of many cars, but that still doesn't make it a good design - in my opinion. So here's hoping the next time they remodel this they fill in the missing link between this one and the previous generation. The Audi on the other hand flows from front to back, top to bottom. It has a smoothness that few other cars have. It may not be as ground breaking as the TL, but I would definitely take its look over the current TL any day.

As for more similarities than differences I don't understand what you are talking about CJ. They are cars, sedans for that matter, they will resemble each other in some regards. While the TL won't disappear in the crowd, neither will the Audi. I don't think any luxury make would, except possibly for an Infiniti G37, I find that car to be as bland as a luxury car can be. I also don't see how the Audi is boxy and the TL isn't. The TL looks much bigger - the overhangs are larger, the back end looks huge - and doesn't look sleek except for the front possibly, because the headlights are drawn back. I go back to what I said originally about looking different doesn't mean looking good. I thought I read somewhere that the TL appears to look like a Stealth fighter. I've looked at that plane many times and I think it is a horribly ugly design to graft onto a car.

Thanks for expressing your opinion, Bloke

Styling is subjective so neither of us will likely convince the other that one car looks better than the other car.

What I was pointing out by comparing the similarities of both car's designs was that you can't fault either car of being ugly without being hypocritical. For those that don't like the TL because it has a "big grill" and prefer the A4 are hypocritical because the Audi has an equally big (if not bigger) grill. I'm not referring to the fact that both have 4 doors and 4 wheels. I'm pointing out that they carry a similar philosophy in design. Both cars goal is to be instantly recognized as either an Audi or Acura respectively. From all angle you can tell that the A4 is an Audi and the TL is an Acura. They both do a superb job of carrying their distinctive brand styling identities.

What I meant by the A4 would "disappear in a crowd" is that the design is rather basic. Even non-luxury autos have similar profiles. The basic 3 box shape (ie the front, greenhouse, and trunk areas are 3 seperate boxy chunks) is classic, but dated and has been used on even plebeian vehicles like the Sebring.

http://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos.yahoo.com/izp/chrysler_sebringsedan_lx_2008_exterior_sideview_640x480.jpg

The 3 box shape isn't a bad concept, but it has been much better executed on luxury vehicles like the C class and 3 series.

The TL has a sloping roofline that is much smoother front to back. It has the appearance of being a more 2 box shape than the Audi's traditional 3 box.

What I was referring to when I said the Audi is "boxy" is the fact that from the profile view the front end is a square shape and the tail end also ends in a squared off fashion. Also from the the head on view the A4 is essentially a square with little definition (maybe it's the grill?). Just because the TL is bigger doesn't mean isn't "boxier". Big does not equal boxy. Also the fact that the TL has larger overhangs doesn't mean it's boxier.

The look of the TL has to be seen in person to be fully appreciated. No amount of photos online are going to convince you that the TL truly is a beautiful car.

I wouldn't have said any of this if I didn't see it in person. I think it looks worse in person. Also I think I stated why the TL looks boxy, and its not because of its overhangs or size.

Like I said styling is subjective ;-)

And like I said it is ugly.

subjectively ugly?

Nah, I would say obviously ugly, but in my subjective opinion if you want.

the TL has a more impressive presence than the A4 in the pictures, but I have to agree with Bloke- it's UGLY. There is too much going on. And the rear looks like an Accord that is flexing its muscles.

Broq

Subjectively sexy ;-)

Yikes Cj, you like a really large square shaped butt, with a giant shiny nose, with the rest of the features just being out of proportion? Where do you find such an interesting mate?

lol Bloke, I didn't know you could be so comical.

I'm not going to argue with you how the TL's butt is less square than the A4's. Angular yes, Square no.

I have always been comical, it was just at your expense CJ.

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

Deborah

http://termlifeinsurance2.com

Bloke, you sir are correct. I loved the previous TL's styling: the current one would not be out of place with a Pontiac symbol and the word "AZTEK" on it.

And some people dug the Aztek too. Doesn't mean it wasn't a mistake.

I disagree!! Overall winner is Audi all the way!

The TL is superior in technology, performance, and most importantly lower cost of ownership and nearly 20% higher resale value. I don't need good looks to get laid.

It's pretty odvious that the tl was ahead of its time. It's now 2012 and unfortunately Acura has sucome To the narrow minded thoughts of its critics. Now every tl from 09-11 has tremendous resell value and people love the styling. Oh well. Most great new car styles take awhile to be understood. That's why the designers are getting paid and the critics are just critics. The tl sh-awd is rediculous, and you know this. You just weren't ready for it.

The high resale vale is in spite of the styling, not because of it. A baffling reality is that Honda Civic styling (circa 2011-12) is more appealing than the higher end Acura TL. The A4 remains consistent in true German spirit, yet I sense the Japanese have the ability to one day create a slick looking TL model car that is on par with its already high performance. One day...one day...but not today. :)

Having owned a 2010 A4 and now a 2012 TL I can report first hand the TL is superior in just about every way. The TL is a beast just like my 2004 G was only refined. My A4 was a nice car but frankly better suited for young college grads or admins who like to lease.