> a better writer

That's highly subjective. I reckon his audience and admirers found him an excellent writer.

Nah, Kant's considered a notoriously poor writer among philosophers. Obviously opinions may differ, but Derek Parfit [0], for instance, wrote:

“It is Kant who made really bad writing philosophically acceptable. We can no longer point to some atrocious sentence by someone else, and say ‘How can it be worth reading anyone who writes like that?’ The answer could always be ‘What about Kant?'”

(Kind of relevant to this thread actually! Hah!)

In the preface to the second edition of the Critique, Kant himself acknowledges that "a talent for lucid exposition" he "cannot regard [himself] as possessing".

FWIW I suppose I am in Kant's audience, as a (long-since graduated) philosophy student.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Parfit