Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Lintoronto
I have heard of the legendary Japanese car reliability, but frankly have never known anyone who actually could PROVE that all he/she did was routine maintenance -- but I have seen the posts, so I believe it. My Honda, Toyota, etc driving friends all seem to have "issues" with their cars, just like us Audi owners (and thank god for the Audi advantage, or I bet the cost of these issues would be breathtaking).
Yet, some of these same posts that tell of the high reliability of some of the Hondas,Toyotas, Nissons, etc, etc, also say their cars are "boring." My friends' Camry and Avalon are very reliable, true, but these friends also claim their cars are dull to drive.
Different strokes.
Audis will "engage" you as a driver and as an owner -- you might notice from this board, that Audi driver/owners seem to have a "passion" for their cars -- the A6 2.7T and 4.2 are fantasitic drving machines -- many of us think they are unrivaled for the price.
Audis improve in subtle ways especially during the first 6 months or 10,000 miles -- and it is only when you have been driving an Audi for this time and then drive something else that you really understand what great driving cars they really are. Then, you get hooked for good.
But, they are not "loved" by all -- and that is ok too.
It would seem that most of us on this board, despite some reported issues, are satisfied or delighted customers of the A6 (especially the 2.7T and 4.2 -- and this is not because of any problem with the 2.8, it is just that the 2.8 is, well . . . a trifle underpowered -- but even this is mostly cured with the 2002 A6 3.0 with 220HP).
All of the Audi owners that I know either are or plan to be REPEAT Audi owners -- that, IMO, is the best peace of mind going.
Vorsprung durch Technik.
selling price and the residual)."
The "Payment basis" in really simple terms (but mostly accurate terms) is made up of the Selling price of the car MINUS the residual (which is usually a % of MSRP, not of the selling price). In your example, if the car sells for $42K and has a residual of $20K, the lease amount will be based on $22K x the money factor (and of course this is calculated to arrive at the MONTHLY payment -- at a # of months term (plus tax)).
For years companies (GMAC for example) would fool around with the residual as a way to decrease the monthly payment -- but of course an artificially high residual would make it virtually impossible to "get out of the lease" early. Today, leasing arms of the mfg will manipulate both the money factor (i.e., interest rate) and/or the residual, in an attempt to lower the monthly price (and by the way, virtually NEVER put any money down on a leased car -- it is as was said above a "false economy.")
A very high residual or a very low mf? -- I'll take the lowest mf possible -- this way you can get near the end of your lease (3 - 6 months) and have the possibility of walking away without being upside down, especially if you are buying another [Audi] car. Now, if they offer you a really low mf and a really high residual, beware of the upside down monster -- but if your lease is less than or equal to 36 months (NOT 39 months) and you KNOW you will not exceed 50,000 miles in those 36 or fewer months, you are probably ok (upside down wise) because you can keep your car with full service and warranty coverage for the full term of your lease (i.e., no $$$$$$ surprises).
Funny thing, the 39 month lease option has been, for Audi, the best deal -- my only advice is to check out the residual, because if you "get close" to your 50,000 service and warranty limit and you still have 4 or 5 months to go, you may be in for a four figure surprise if something goes "bump" or if you "have to get out of the lease" at, say, month 35.
My current Audi Financial lease is 30 months, no money down and Audi made the first month's payment for me and waived the sec dep. I will begin the shopping process around month 25 and probably have a new Audi no later than month 29 (if history repeats itself) -- and I won't be upside down.
The Audi loyalty program will -- I hope -- be continued.
As they say, a word to the prudent. . . or wise.
I stopped by Tom Wood and they said that the advertisement only applied to "certain" A6's which they sold out of months ago, even though they had several 2.7T's on the lot. They tried to quote me for $635 a month plus tax with nothing down and 15,000 miles per year. This car was even $1,200 cheaper than the advertisement. They mentioned that Audi USA ran the advertisement in the local paper. The ad did of course have Tom Wood's name on it like they were supporting it.
Does anyone out there know of any dealers in Cincinnati or Chicago (I'd hate to pay the sales tax in Chi Town) that may be honoring the great lease deal's talked about in the ad and on this message board? Thanks for the help.
Also, why would a trade-in not reduce significantly the cost of the lease payments. AND, have you heard of the one-time lease payment?
I would most likely buy more miles, as I would hate to be having to pay the super tab for going over the limit. When I talked with the guys in Louisville, the deal they quoted me just didn't add up, so I went to see Ralph in Cincy.
An alternative would be to wholesale my Land Cruiser, and put the money in a CD. Whatcha think??
BTW Audiworld released more info on the '02 A6 yesterday in their news.
jk
Sales tax is based on where the location of where the vehicle is registered, not where it is sold. So, if you live in Cincinnati, you'll pay Ohio sales tax.
Monthly Depreciation Payment + Monthly Finance Charge
where...
Monthly Depreciation = (Net Capital Cost - Residual)/(lease term in months)
Monthly Finance Charge = (Net Cap Cost + Residual) * Money Factor
This is not a matter of opinion. This is a fact. I went online to see if I could locate the formula elsewhere. Please go to...
http://www.leasetips.com/calculating.htm
You will find that, aside from some differences in terminology, my formula is identical to there formula. Their explanation for the calculation of the monthly finance charge (i.e., the plus sign) is similar to mine (though much more clear than what I posted):
"The plus sign in the formula in step 2 for the monthly finance charge is not a typo. The finance charge is based on the sum of the cap cost and the residual, not the difference. People are used to hearing that in a lease you only "pay for only the part you use" and hence should only pay interest on the depreciation (difference between cap cost and residual). This is not the case at all. Instead, the best way to think of a lease is like a balloon loan where the principle is the cap cost and the balloon payment is the residual value which is made by turning in the car."
They also have a good general lease guide at:
http://www.leasetips.com/leasing_university.htm
1) Reducing the net cap cost will reduce the amount to be depreciated over the term of the lease and the amount that will be subject to a finance charge (see previous really long message).
2) It will also reduce the amount of sales tax you are paying. In Illinois this a really big deal.
MarkCincinnati is correct, however, when he says that money factor (interest Rate divided by 24) plays a bigger role. The only problem is that you (to my knowledge) cannot negotiate a money factor. Those figures are supplied by Audi Financial services or whoever owns the lease.
My dealer was then kind enough to show me a place in the Audi leasing software where they can hide a pre-sale profit. It will not change the published money factor (though it will show an adjusted money factor that is for dealer's eyes only). In other words, they can give you the published money factor, agreed upon term, agreed upon sales price and published residual -- and still screw you by hiding a profit that will raise your monthly payment. That's why you need to be able to check their figures.
Other than that, I'm religious about staying within the break-in rules.
In my statement, I said, no the payment is not calculated on $62K. In your statement, chicago27t1 #1458 (and your previous statement, which apparently mbnut1 did not understand and was seeking clarification of) you say: "Monthly Depreciation Payment" as a term. You define this term as "(Net Capital Cost - Residual)/(lease term in months)."
We are in complete agreement, if not in identical use of terms. My unitentional error was that I left out a step, as I was "assuming" that mbnut1 was going to calculate the monthly depreciation incorrectly. For my "rush to simplify" I apologize and stand corrected. For those wading through to this point the web sites suggested are great tools.
The point I was trying to make (as were you) to mbnut1 was that the Residual was SUBTRACTED from not ADDED to Net Cap Cost or selling price (to calculate depreciation).
If I somehow seemed to be arguing in favor of the ADDITION of Residual (to the selling price) instead of the SUBTRACTION of Residual (from the selling price) in the algorithm loosely discussed (by me), I want those who are just becoming aquainted with leasing to know that we are in agreement as to the calculation of the monthly payment.
I said, in post #1453, "The "Payment basis" in really simple terms (but mostly accurate terms) is made up of the Selling price of the car MINUS the residual (which is usually a % of MSRP, not of the selling price)." This is the same (in spirit) as your post. I have no disagreement with your thorough explanation whatsoever. My statement ". . .in really simple terms" was my way of "correcting" the perception that the payment basis (monthly depreciation payment) for mbnut1's question was in the amount of $62,000. Again, my error was in the mf calculation, it should have said mf x $62K not $22K. Again, I apologize for my [hasty] error. Note: "selling price" is my term, Capitalized Cost or Net Cap Cost is the term the finance guys/gals generally use.
This statement was to further explain (with the risk of oversimplification) the difference between leasing and owning, by agreeing that a lease is fundamentally "renting." Leasing is neither owning nor a "finance to own contract" (generally, and I am referring to a "closed ended" lease, which we may wish to explain in a further post and perhaps in that post contrast it with an "open ended" lease) -- and is therefore based on the payment for the use of the car not the ownership of the car.
We -- at great length -- would come to the "same" payment amount. Mbnut1 probably would have calculated a much higher payment based on his post #1451 -- as I assume he would have added the residual to Net Cap Cost to determine the depreciation figure.
On the other hand, maybe we're wrong and he understood it completely and now is really confused!
My guess is, he has got it and will -- armed with this information -- make the decision based on his circumstances, which is as it should be.
Personally, I decided to go with a 48 month lease (my previous lease was 39 months). Why 48 months?
With Audi's all-inclusive 48 month warrantee, I figured that it would make sense to match the lease term to the warrantee term. I drive around 9-10 thousand miles per year, so the mileage will also stay within the lease limits.
At the time I turned my A4 in, I would have happily driven it for another 9 months. So, in my opinion, the marginal difference between having the car in month 39 vs. month 48 was pretty small. The effect on payments was about $40 month, meaning a savings of around $1520 between months 2 and 39 (as a returning lease customer, the first payment is waived). Spreading this savings out to months 40-48 yields a savings of around $170/month for the final months. True, the car is also worth less in those months. However, the utility (i.e., fun) I gain from driving the car cannot be measured in economic terms. Though at that point in time, I may find myself gawking at a lot of the newer cars.
In very simple terms, a close ended lease means that your obligation ends at the termination of the lease (though you may have to fork out some bucks if you have mileage overages, if the car is damaged or has abnormal wear and tear). Aside from this, you get to walk away from the car.
In even simpler terms, an open ended lease leaves you on the hook for the difference between the residual and the market value of the car at the end of the lease. As an example, if the residual on the car is $20K, but the market value of the car is only $15K, you could be on the hook for the $5k difference. This is particularly a problem when you consider that residuals (as MarkCincinnati pointed out) are often exaggerated to reduce monthly lease payments.
I believe that open ended leases are illegal in Illinois.
Not to scare any potential Audi "buyers" off -- I must tell you that these German cars (and I am not limiting it to Audi -- and to CYA you might broaden this to be "European" cars) are or can be breathtakingly expensive to repair and sometimes just to service. The great minds at Audi coprorate came up with the term "The Audi Advantage" -- my first so advantaged Audi product was a 1988 80 quattro with the 5 cylinder engine. The Audi Advantage is simply free service and warranty for 48 months or 50,000 miles. Literally all you pay for is plates, gas, insurance and one or two sets of tires beyond the factory originals. (In 1988 they called it the Three year test drive, as I recall -- and it was 3 years and 50,000 miles or 16,666 miles per year for 3 years).
After the Audi Advantage expires, you are "running naked." This phrase I have heard used in relationship to cars and computers -- in that "you had better not be caught running naked" (because you probably can't afford it).
All my friends and co-workers and most of my family drive in excess of 15,000 miles per year. A thiry six month lease is "just about right" in terms of the Audi Advantage. Moreover, most of my friends and co-workers are under the age of 40 (I am 50, however) and have both the urge and the means to get new cars with reasonable frequency (around 3 years -- meaning they would lease a 2001, skip the 2002's and either get a 2003 or an "early" 2004). The "magic" term for these folks (not everyone of course) is a maximum of 36 months. Also they do hope to balance (as much as possible) having a reasonable residual factor with as low as possible money factor (interest).
My "upside down" comments previously effect people who drive greater than or equal to 15,000 miles annually if they run out of miles/warranty (Audi "Advantaged" miles, i.e.) before they run out of "term." SOME of the lease programs (including Audi's) got such a low payment number by overstating the residual (this is not done nearly as much as it was a few years ago, but it is still done). A very very high residual (unable to be supported by market demand for the "used car" -- any used car) factor used to arrive at the lease payment virtually "traps" you in the lease for the full-term (warranty or "new car lust" or whatever be damned).
Couple all these things together with the truth of European car repairs (if you are running naked) and throw in some "major" maintenance items or -- god forbid -- a breakdown, and you can see that you run a potentially serious financial risk (possibly within a few months of the end of your lease term). If you take a hit, from either a repair or the "cost to get out of an upside down lease" -- you will probably no longer be a fan of the car that you were hit by. Whew!
That is why if you get a lease that is 3 - 12 months longer than the liklihood of the "Audi Advantage" (or BMW or Volvo, etc.) remaining in force, you place yourself in a risk situation that, in my experience, is NOT offset by a slightly lower payment.
Put it this way -- if you think that in 36 months you will breeze through the 50,000 mile warranty (Audi Advantage) -- DO NOT get the 39 month lease. If you do (and you "enjoy" the lower monthly payment that a 39 month term affords you) be aware of the potential of a four figure service and/or repair bill within those extra three or four months. The extra premium of a 36 month term is insurance -- if the difference is $10.00 (and it WILL be more than that in all probability) -- multiply the term by that number and that is your "cost" to avoid an expensive "issue" near your lease term end.
Our chicago friend is safe --- at 48 months term -- due to the circumstances he described (i.e., he is not likely to run out of Audi Advantage before he runs out of lease payments (due to the 48 month term and the 48 month Audi Advantage coupled with his low milage expectations)).
I, on the other hand have chosen a 30 month term. At month 8, I am at 11,000+ miles. If I order a new Audi @ month 25 (when I will have 34,000+ on the car) and it takes 3 - 4 months to come it, I can "walk away from my 40,000+ mile car" with no upside down monster at month 28 or 29. My only cost will have been one new set of tires (which I replaced @ 8,000 miles) -- plus tags, insurance and gas. If they offered a 33 month term, based on my driving needs and history, that would appear to be "perfect." Hmmm, maybe, just maybe a 36 month term would work -- but then again I don't want to run out of Audi Advantage -- great as they are, Audi's are very expensive when you're maintaining or fixing them with YOUR money.
When you make a payment, part of the payment is to pay down the amount borrowed and part is to cover the interest incurred on the outstanding balance owed.
If we assume the depreciation is paid evenly over the life of the lease, the finance charge is the annual interest rate times the number of years times the average outstanding balance. The Average Outstanding Balance is the average of the amount borrowed at the beginning (Net Cap Cost) and the amount owed at the end (Residual Value).
The Total Finance Charge paid over the life of the lease is then
(Net Cap Cost plus Residual Value)/2 times annual interest rate times the number of years of the lease
which is also equal to
(Net Cap Cost plus Residual Value)/2 times monthly interest rate times the number of months of the lease
As we all know, the monthly interest rate is just the annual interest rate divided by 12, so the Total Finance Charge is:
(Net Cap Cost plus Residual Value) times annual interest rate/24 times the number of months of the lease
Therefore the Monthly Finance Charge is = (Net Cap Cost plus Residual Value) times annual interest rate/24
or
Monthly Finance Charge is = (Net Cap Cost plus Residual Value) times Money Factor, where the Money Factor is the Annual Interest Rate / 24
This is the source of the mysterious factor of 24
Her last "full" lease was 24 months and we were @ 40,000+ miles. We thought we could squeeze by this time -- well, Audi Financial does offer 27 months.
Another lease example for your contemplation and consideration.
Pat
Host
Sedans Message Board
Thanks thats the explanation I was looking for. It all makes sense now. I'm armed and dangerous now.:)
BTW: the Tip works just like a manual, no automatic upshift 1-2, can downshift to 1st. Not a 99.5, build date 12/98.
Thanks,
Ported
Please explain in detail how you terminate a 30 month lease on the 28th or 29th month. Also I thought Audio does not deviate from their fixed monthly leases, i.e. 12, 24 , 36 , 39 and 48 month leases. Please explain this to me.
Thanks,
Jeff
Leasing is renting the use of the car -- generally speaking the purpose of an auto lease is to use the vehicle with no intention of ever establishing any equity in it. It is, in many respects, like renting an apartment or staying in a long-term hotel. With the Audi Advantage (and other mfg's similar programs) coupled with a lease, "all you do" is pick the car, arrange for the lease, pay for the tags, gas and insurance (and tires if you wear a set out or want snow tires or something like that) and drive. Everything else is taken care of -- and for the term of the lease you have all the responsibilities of ownership and some of the rights of ownership.
For example -- you have to take care of the car AS IF IT WAS YOUR PROPERTY (or pay the consequences at the termination of the lease). Yet even this obvious responsibility is also a "right" of ownership (sort of). If you buy a car (in cash) or lease a car or finance a car and keep it for 50,000 miles and "abuse" it -- you will pay, one way or the other. If you lease the car, you are, however (in the case of abusing the car) REQUIRED to pay for your sins. If you buy a car and abuse it and do not sell it -- just allow it to die that is -- you will not be required to pay another entity (as you are when you lease). Of course, when you own a car outright and abuse it you will "pay" either because the car will have a shortened lifespan or, if you decide to sell or trade it in, you will take a hit on the value of the car.
The point of all the above is to say that in spite of the financial arrangement called leasing, you have virtually all of the rights and responsibilities of ownership -- it is just that the payment terms are different.
In the example above, I say that you "will pay" if you abuse a car during the term of the lease at the end of the lease -- perhaps it will be for "excess wear and tear" or high milage or the fact that you smoked in the car (which reduces the number of people who may consider buying it used), or other factors including perhaps "normal" wear and tear. The opposite is also true. That is, if your car is not abused and is "desirable" you may find that instead of costing (as it does when you abuse) it can pay -- you can "profit" by keeping your leased car in "better than expected" condition.
Here, after years and years of experience, are some suggestions that generally work to allow you to walk away from a lease early.
As has been discussed at length above, there are friendly and unfriendly leases -- a friendly lease has a "realistic" residual. If, for example, you lease a 2001 Audi today for 4 years and the residual at month 48 is 62.5% and the milage allowance is 60,000 miles -- well, you better plan on keeping the car to term, because it is virtually impossible for a four year old (actually 5 model years old) Audi A6 to be worth 62.5% of MSRP. The leasing company structured your contract to get you a low low payment perhaps by using this technique. The lesson here, if you even think you might like to get out of your lease early is to do everything in your power to get a friendly lease (friendly in terms of "getting out of it early" which would, in this example, mean a "realistic" residual).
Next -- keep your car immaculate inside and outside and under the hood. Perform all required service ON TIME at the dealer (a dealer). In my case I generally do 1.5 to 2.0 times as many oil changes as are required -- and I pay for them, and I have them done at the dealer. This (the immaculate inside and outside part) is really hard -- this means washing and waxing the car regularly and even detailing the car professionally at least once every 12 months (twice if you can). And, in our case, we always have the detailing done at the dealer (which costs about 20% more than elsewhere).
Get to know, by name and face both the service manager and the service advisor. When they do good work, tell them. When they do something special, tell them, tell the dealership ownership and/or management and write a letter (cc'd to the dealership) to Audi Customer Loyalty personnell here in America.
Keep in touch with the sales staff, especially the sales associate who sold you your car.
Remember your sales, service, parts, finance and management people at Christmas -- send them a card. Last year, my wife and I sent the various departments a basket of fruit from Harry and David -- thanking them for their committment to excellence.
When you get the call asking you how the dealership does -- give them 5's -- if you can't give them 5's, tell them NOT the telemarketers who call. It helps if you tell the people (about your picks and your praises) to their faces, not a nameless, faceless telemarketer. The net of this is, become your dealership's "best customer." You will be amazed at the level of service AND sales.
OK so now you are into your "I would like to get out early phase" of your lease. It may be 6 months early, for example -- make sure you begin the "alignment" process. You will need to know the "street value" and/or the "trade in value" of your car. You will also need to know the "payoff amount" -- the salesperson will usually be all too happy to get this and the trade in value for you (with a phone call).
All cars go through value cycles -- Audi's are neither particularly good or bad, although I have found that the later model Audi's seem to command a little more on the street value than perhaps a comparably priced (when new) non-Audi (Volvos, Jags, VW's and some BMW's, but generally NOT Porche's for example).
Assuming you have a friendly lease, you may be suprised to find (as have I) that the value of your Audi with months to go on the lease is within $1,000 of the buyout. Once, my buyout was less than the street price and I sold the car in the paper and pocketed several hundred dollars.
Assuming you are going to ORDER a new car at this point (for example 5 months out), you can ask your salesperson for a projection of the value of the car -- the buyout will be known in advance month by month. If the car you order takes 3 months to come in, and all of the above circumstances are "in place" -- the dealer will "make you whole" -- you will have a new car and be free of your old lease before the end of the term.
Now, however, notwithstanding, etc.: The dealer cannot, will not, "give the store away." Do not expect this, do not ask for "a favor." You will find, often, that because you are a "really good customer" (and a repeat customer) you will get the "best deal" possible both from the dealership and the mfg (the Audi Loyalty program is a great example: no sec dep and Audi makes the first payment for "repeat" customers).
Of the more than two dozen Audi's my wife and I have owned, we have bailed out early (even if it has just been a mo
By the way, I may have mentioned this to you before, but your posts would be a lot easier to read if you would put them in the message box, rather than the title line.
Pat
Host
Sedans Message Board
Jeff
Just my opinion.
I have called a company in Canada called KVR Performance, Inc. -- they claim they have a part number for high performance, cross drilled rotors for my 2001 A6 4.2 -- but they can't find a price for it. I have checked Joe Hoppen motorsports, APR and other companies -- so far no luck in finding anyone who actually has "A6 4.2" performance items (brakes, suspensions, spoilers, etc.). I am not particularly interested in "tricking out" my A6 (as I am optimistic about an S6 Sedan "coming soon" to the US or a V8 S4 ditto) -- but I am interested in getting a reliable, non-shuddering set of front rotors.
Where can I buy these things -- do they really exist?
The following quote from "timcar" over at AudiWorld A6 Forum is exactly descriptive of the experience's I have had and am currently having with ALL 5 sets of Rotors on my two A6 4.2's
The conclusions that it may not be rotor warpage are logical, and I agree with timcar -- as my experiences have been virtually identical.
(the following is a direct quote from a message board participant, named "timcar")
"My 2.7T's brakes will "purr" when braking from speeds 80+. But, they will only do it
under certain conditions. I assumed it was warped rotors, but now I don't think so.
First, they normally only do it when I first apply them at higher speeds. Second, they
don't do it at lower speeds at all. This is inconsistent with any warped rotors I've ever
experienced on any other car. The other evening, I did a little experiment. When I knew
I'd be braking for an exit when I'd been driving 80+, I tapped the brake pedal a few
times before reaching the exit to "warm" up the brakes. Sure enough, no "purr." I did
this because I'd noticed that after significant higher speed use the "purr" seems to
vanish. Think it must be something other than warping. What? Maybe the pads are
grabbing then sliding very rapidly, producing the pulsing. How about this: partly glazed
pads, causing the above. I.e., when the glaze burns off, the slipping stops. Or, could it
be the calipers need to warm up to work efficiently. Does 4 pots, mean 4 pads? Does
heating up make certain that all points on the caliper are making contact with the rotor?
Don't know. But I don't think it's the rotors. I think that always driving these cars under
100mph may be a form of abuse."
Yet another poster said they had their rotors cryogenically treated and that solved the problem. I'm puzzled myself, and have just been living with them. Would love to learn of someone who has THE answer.
Maybe it's the pads, and the cryogenic treatment of the rotors helps the pads apply their force more evenly. Whatever it is I'm sure Audi knows about it and therefore is making changes for '02.
I called Audi and they said a set of front pads for my 01 4.2 is $257!
I called APR and they said "if they had them, they would be around $75 for Mintech (?) Red Box. KVR Performance pads are also in this range, but "none exist" -- no cross ref part number for my car.
So, let me see if I have this right -- new rotors, which are identical in fitment, even though they are "cross drilled" which should make them cooler MAY not solve the problem. Even if I could get new pads and new rotors in the aftermarket, the problem might not go away, unless I replaced the entire brake assembly which would include new rotors, new pads and new pad housings (calipers?).
This could be expensive and for no gain (cooler brake rotors, sure, but we are all coming to the conclusion that the problems are most likely NOT warpage. The entire Big Brake replacement kits I have seen (with no assurance that an A6 4.2 fittment actually exists) are pretty close to $3,000.
The service manager at Northland said he could probably get Audi to "buy" the new rotors and pads (but again to what end?). I cannot even imagine why they would buy the entire aftermarket brake replacement.
And we all seem to have come to the conclusion that Audi really goofed up this time (in the 00 and 01 model years) -- so they have put "improved front brakes" (from their announcement) on these cars.
By the way, while my car was in for some routine maintenance, I was given an A6 (2.8 quattro) to drive (2001 and it had about 3,400 miles on it) -- the brakes seemed fine, I could NOT replicate the shudder or purring sound no matter how I tried (at speeds of over 80 included). And, my wife's 2001 TT's brakes are fine at any speed apparently (and I have exercised them, fully and they have 18,000+ miles on them and they are "perfect.").
Pat
Host
Sedans Message Board
or 'purring' brakes. I had all the discs turned, and the problem persists!! I think timcar is on
the right track. I'm gonna try to heat up the brakes and see if that solves the problem. Of
course, the TLC weighs over 5k #, and, I'm sure smaller rotors, but it shouldn't do that!!
jk
I think I would take a 2002 A6 if they would let me walk away from my 2001 -- but after only 8 months and 9 payments (the first one they made) on a 30 month lease -- bzzzz sorry, no way. The brake "purring" is just plain annoying in an other wise fantastic car. I wonder if the S6 has the same brakes (in other words, if in December of 2000 when I got my 2001 A6, there had been an S6 available, would it have had the same brakes or different? -- The S8 for example supposedly has different brakes than the A8 "Brembo's" as I recall reading in a test report of a US S8).
The press release for the 2002 S6 Avant makes no mention of anything relating to special brakes.
Inquiring minds.
I am a first time poster to this board and a potential Audi buyer. This board is great and I have learnt a lot glancing through the posts. Was wondering if I could get some help.
I am thinking of leasing a 2001 A6 2.7T. I understand from the posts on this board that:
- there are some issues with the brakes on this car.
- the 2002 model will be much better than the current model.
Is it worth than waiting for the new model year to come out? What are possible changes? Are the break problems very widespread?
Also, if someone can recommend a dealer in the Tri-State (NY/NJ/CT) area that has a good sales and very importantly service department, it would be very helpful.
Thanks a lot everyone.
1. Brakes have been problematic on some 2.7T's and 4.2's. 2.8's have had different brakes that come from the A4. Some consider the 2.8's brakes inadequate. I would get my 2.7T again in a minute, not withstanding it's purring brakes at speed. The 2002 will have redesigned brakes for the 2.7T and 4.2. Don't know about 2.8. My bet is they won't have this problem.
2. This is a URL with a list of changes for '02. I can't swear it's complete. I've seen other lists which show Bi-xenon's and I don't think they're on this list.
http://www.audiworld.com/news/01/2002changes/
3. Whether it's worth waiting for '02 is up to you. There are tradeoff's. I would wait for '02's, but I don't want to spend your money. Dealer's have been having some fantastic financing on leftover's. I also think some color combo's may have been dropped for '02, so, if you're in love with any of them, this is your last shot. That said, the sport mode option on the Tiptronic alone would make me wait for '02. The better brakes with Brake Assist is another biggie for me. Ditto the dynamic changes, stiffer structure, thicker glass. Maybe if you don't drive an A6 every day they might not be a big deal, but I would have to think they'll make a wonderful car even better.
4 My wife and I each got an Audi from Audi of Mendham in NJ. We're well satisfied with the dealer, and Bonnie Manniello is very nice to do business with.
He also stressed that breaking in the rotors was very important (but near impossible for me to accomplish). He said to take the car to 40mph, come to a gentle stop, back to 40 and repeat three times, then park the car and let the brakes get cold. The more times you do this the better.
I am taking the car back next week (Nav system failed) and going to have them look at the rotors again. My service rep was sick the day I was in, and said he wanted them to change all four rotors, but only the front were done, so that's his fix.
I have to say this is a hugely annoying problem and I understand how you all feel. The big brake kit for my car (996 Porsche brakes) is $3,400 plus installation, and is only for the front end. I'm torn (not that I want to spend the money) but I want this problem solved. Audi seems content to replace the brakes every few weeks, but I don't like having to mess with it. It's also pretty embarrassing to take clients out in a $60k+ car and have to make excuses for the brakes.
Thanks
Rich
Chicago, IL
When I look at the enhancements to the 2.7T for the new model year and weigh them against the probable savings for a 2001 model it seems clear to me that a 2001 model is the way to go. This is already a great car and the improvements are - and I don't mean this critically - marginal in light of the overall performance and comfort of the current model year. I bought my car a few months ago in part because I wanted as wide a selection as possible from dealer inventory. When I made the decision to go Audi I didn't want to wait. It's been a great summer so far and I've made two very enjoyable car trips.
By the way - I have encountered one "problem" I'd like to survey the members on. Twice while having my car re-fueled at a full service station (two stations - one in MA and one in NJ) the nozzle failed to shut off. Both attendants were apologetic and discounted the sale. One of the attendants told me that this happened to him once before while re-fueling an Audi. This has never happened to me at self serve. Does anyone have any experience with this?
Back to the 2001 versus 2002 debate - my recommendation is if you find a 2001 with the trim you're looking for - go for it. I have no regrets at all.
Looking forward to conversing on this board.
I'm sorry that I didn't find the article either very informative or entertaining. With the greatest respect, I don't think it was very well done. Audi AG released an extensive English language press release that detailed the many changes that went into the '02 A6. If I'd only read the First Drive, I'd think the only things that have changed are that it has a new base engine, a new radio and the wonderful Multitronic. Unfortunately, most people aren't going to get to enjoy the Multitronic for quite awhile since the vast majority of A6's in the U.S. are sold to people who want AWD.
Indeed, the lengthy First Drive article has only one small paragraph that describes actually driving the new A6, and that tells me almost nothing. Ninety percent of the article is a technical discussion of the new CVT. The remaining paragraphs tell me about the engine line up, some appearance changes and that the new radio controls have been simplified and made more ergonomic, as if a serious short coming is being addressed. As a driver of an '01 2.7T I can assure everyone there's nothing difficult or complex about the present sound system controls. And that's coming from a technophobe who has difficulty figuring out which end of a screwdriver to hold.
Because of the remarks about the radio, reliance on rehashed technical information on the Multitronic CVT, and no meaningful description of what it's really like to drive the new '02 A6, I regretfully have to conclude that the reviewer has probably never seen an '02 A6 except in pictures. Speaking of which, the German publicity shots included show a German A6 with black matte lower body panels. I don't think that's coming to the U.S. U.S. Audi's have always had body panel colored panels, however this week's Auto Week showed a new A4 test driven in Vermont that also had black matte lower body panels.
I purchased my loaded a6(everything but GPS and rear sensors) for under $35k. it has 25K miles and came with an ext4ra set of two piece 17 inch rims and tires. I have the stock 16' sport rims for the winter. I Love the car and have had no problems! The brakes are spongy and take getting used to. I had a a4 2.8q I/5sp., and sport susp, and thought I couldn't be happier, but the a6 with all it features and extra room has been a blast. Now I can fit three kids in the back and leave the caravan at home..
As we have been discussing on this board, KVR performance has cross drilled or slotted or cross drilled and slotted rotors (pick one and the rotors are $275 each, pick both and add $40.00 for the additional labor -- each). I WAS excited about getting new rotors (even if I had to pay for them) if my purring brakes would be vanquished. Then, I read timcar's post and bertram60's post and kind of figured that these new rotors wouldn't do any good, since the problem appears NOT to be warped rotors after all. Then I went to www.goapr.com and found information about the Big Brake Replacement kit (also mentioned by bertram60) -- they are over $3,000 for the fronts! But, they claim that the entire brake set up is replaced and that true high performance braking capability (with fine street manners) will be the result.
Now, I am on (in 2 4.2's) my 5th set of rotors and pads (front only for the rotors and they did replace the rear pads, too). The pads (front only) are listed at the dealer at $257.00 -- even with a 100% markup, it seems to me that the folks who have been discussing this issue on this board and the AudiWorld board have cost Audi (either "of America or AG") a "ton" of money, as I can only assume that the rotors (at dealer selling prices must be at least $1,800 to $2,000).
If I keep going back to the dealer for new rotors and pads as many times as bertram60, timcar and others have or will, I know I will blow through $3,000 worth of parts in a matter of a few months -- again to what end?
The question I ask and the clarification I seeking is this: are "you" convinced that the KVR cross drilled rotors, plus another new set of Audi OEM pads all installed by the dealer will be any improvement (beyond the obvious improvement in braking and disc cooling that such rotors claim and that cross drilling inherently affords?). In other words, regardless of WHO is paying for this "fix" should I even bother?
Part two: if the answer is ". . .well if it is "free" what could it hurt?" I then ask the question, suppose I do get the KVR rotors, Audi pads and suppose that it really is free, then suppose it doesn't work because as we have all agreed, it doesn't sound like warped rotors -- should I respectfully request that Audi spring for the Big Brake Kit?
If I have to put out $3,000+ for parts and another $600 for labor, versus dumping out of my car and spending the same money towards a 2002 (with improved brakes) -- based on my (and your experiences) shouldn't I just pay my money and take my choice (and get the 2002)?
What would YOU do -- and what would you do if it was free vs what would you do if it was "fee?"
Thanks all.