2009 Acura TL SH-AWD vs 2009 Audi A4 3.2 quattro - Results - Comparison

Okay, now price. At $39,265, the TL packs a lot into its base price -- 305-horse V-6, 19-inch wheels, to name a few. Even with the tech package and summer tires, its as-tested price of $43,995 symbolizes strong return on the dollar. The A4, at $50,425, represents a different scenario, stuffed with over $9100 worth of add-ons. Spec the $41,225 3.2 to closely reflect the TL-Prestige trim ($3700) with S line ($2450) and navigation ($2500)-and it still commands nearly a $6000 premium. Is it worth it? Given its quicker acceleration, more chic interior, and more attainable limits, we say yes. Plus, unlike the TL's polarizing lines, the A4's smooth styling doesn't force people to love or hate it. Us? We love it-and virtually everything else about the A4.

FIRST PLACE: Audi A4 3.2 quattro
Premium cabin features, premium road sensations, and premium curb appeal justify a premium pricetag.

SECOND PLACE: Acura TL SH-AWD
Bang for the buck proves out of luck due to controversial looks, somewhat sluggish acceleration.

ENTRY LEVEL HEADED
Sending top of the line to the back of the line

Decked-out flagships can be enthralling, but often the more Spartan offerings are just as exciting, certainly if their cut prices don't mean cut performance. We tested both a standard front-drive TL and an A4 2.0 TFSI quattro (a front-driver was unavailable), with each delivering similar levels of power and performance for thousands less. The $39,445 TL Tech, with a 3.5-liter, 280-horse V-6, costs $4550 below the SH-AWD Tech HPT, yet is quicker to 60 (6.2) and the quarter mile (14.6 at 96.9). Sure, the SH-AWD, with its stickier summer tires and more aggressive suspension, is superior in braking and lateral acceleration, but the standard TL is no slouch (125 ft, 0.83 g), delivering crisp responses and only the slightest smidge of torque steer. Plus, fuel economy, at 18/26 mpg, is superior.

Similarly, the A4 2.0 TFSI quattro, which opens at $33,525 with a six-speed automatic, sips less petrol (21/27) than its V-6 sibling. But, with a stout turbocharged four churning out 211 horses and 258 pound-feet, it zips to 60 in 6.5 and the quarter in 15.0 at 92.0. While the 3.2 is slightly quicker in both respects, it doesn't feel speedier away from the test track; in fact, the torquier 2.0 seems stronger launching out of turns and sprightlier when tackling a twisty road. At $46,675, our loaded tester doesn't scream bargain, but it nonetheless embodies a $3300 savings compared with the comparably equipped 3.2. Add in the advantage at the pump, and the 2.0 makes a compelling case. Ditto for the TL. Unless all-wheel drive is a must, the front-driver seems the wiser buy. It's quicker, handles like a legitimate sporty sedan, and punches a smaller dent in the pocketbook. So while big engines often put out big power, sometimes it's the smaller mills that deliver the biggest rewards.