Audi A6

blehrlich · April 2002

The Lexus is great, and I upgraded the tire from 225/60 16 to 245/55 16, which results in a pretty good handling improvement, especially with a tire with a relatively firm sidewall.
The Audi was great to drive aggressively and toss around, the sacrifice being what I call "luxury", which obviously means different things to different people. The quietness of the Lexus is a little odd after the Audi, but the silence of the cabin (no creaks, etc) is also nice. The biggest improvement for me, other than the obvious cushy ride on my hips and back, are the creature comforts of an unbelievable stereo and easy nav. system. For me, the trade-off was necessary.

nyccarguy · April 2002

I'm 26 and prefer my cars to have a stiff & punishing suspension, as long as it corners well...LOL! Different strokes for different folks.

My Parents just turned in their 1998 CLK 320 Coupe (it was leased) for a 2002 Audi A6 3.0Q. My mom says the Audi feels much softer than her Mercedes.

timcar · April 2002

I have no doubt the Mark Levinson sound system is wonderful. I'd love to have one in my 2.7T. But, isn't the Mark Levinson sound system part of a $14,045(!!!) package? The Bose is only an extra $750. While admittedly Lexus has also bundled a lot of other desirable things in the $14,045, I doubt ANY difference in a sound system would convince me I wanted to pay that much more. I haven't checked recently, but I think the premium sound systems in MB & BMW are also MUCH more than the A6's. That perhaps proves Mark's point that Audi should make such a high-end system available also. I think though that part of it may be German disdain for things unrelated to "Go." What, you want CUPHOLDERS?!?!

blehrlich · April 2002

The Lexus stereo upgrade is part of the rediculously priced "Ultra Luxury" option, but is also available alone or with the nav system (that's what I got). The nice thing is that the option is available at all.

markcincinnati · April 2002

I have no problem that my Bose system is available in my -- at that moment in time -- topped out top of the line A6; my problem is that nothing else is available.

To have the choice of an ok, good or great option -- within reason whatever its nature -- is the point that we are, I think, all making. Choices sell cars -- and with more and more and more options coming on the market uh, er, every Tuesday, so it seems, what is up with Audi.

I own my own business, I have never not offered (within my niche) "more" if the paying customer wanted it. Hmm, isn't that business 101 -- "if the customer wants to buy something from you that you can provide and it is not illegal, immoral or fattening (unless you are a chef) -- sell it to them!"

Check out the Audi Konfigurator on the German Audi web page -- the options that actually are marketed to customers are plentiful -- compared to what is brought to the US, that is.

Check out Mercedes and BMW (US and overseas web configurators), too (even VW for pity's sake) -- so many choices, if you've got the will and a stack of hundred dollar bills, these companies seem more than willing to shorten the stack. I may not want to buy the Audi Navigation Plus TV receiver option -- for example -- but we either can have none or lightweight. And, why not use a DVD nav system? The tough part has to be the maps and we know they already exist, just ask the Lexus or Acura customer who owns one.

And, for you Tim, on the other Konfigurators, you can order a sport package with comfort seats, sport seats or "recaro like seats." The willingness of the US consumer to -- CONSUME -- (at 66.7% of our economy) is well known. Audi needs to increase the menu of choices.

As they say in "The Search for the Holy Grail" -- "help help, I'm being repressed!"

davking · April 2002

Which comes first the chicken or the egg? Audi may not offer many options in North America because of small market share, relative to Europe. But one way to increase market share might be to increase the number of options available to potential buyers. I suspect more options will become available as sales volume increases. Keep buying Audi's for the general good.

timcar · April 2002

I'd have paid extra just to get the standard seats with a sports suspension. I think AoA is still working its way out of being almost out of business. Unfortunately, I think the unintended acceleration fiasco left them with product selections that are dominated by lawyers. Anything that can possibly be deemed a provocation to litigation gets a knee-jerk reaction: NO! Want your car programmed so you can open the windows and sunroof with the remote: NO! If you had a more extensive Nav that used a central screen, someone would probably rear-end the car in front of them looking at it, and so the thinking goes. Don't know when this is going to change.

jonnyj · April 2002

For those of you who think the sound systems, standard or upgraded, are better in BMWs, go have a listen. The standard system in my 2000 328 is by far the worst I've had in any car, including Hondas. The upgraded Harmon Karden system isn't that much better, especially for an extra $1,200. I drove a 2002 A6 and while the system comes up short, it is better than what BMW offers. Markcincinnati -- I can't believe your friend chose the BMW for the stereo. There had to be other reasons.

markcincinnati · April 2002

My friend's BMW -- a 3 series (not M anything): black metallic (pearl), black leather interior, fancy wheels (upsized I presume) power everything, sunroof, etc. Little button on the transmission tunnel with the treble clef on it. Push the button and it was as if a thin veil was lifted from the mid and high end and a bottom end was added.

It was better, maybe not $2,500 better, than my Audi Bose system. But, as we have all noted, when it is optional, the Audi audio option is between $650 and $750. Perhaps you do get what you pay for -- again not THE point. The option to throw $2,500 at a "factory" sound system (which, for the record, I probably would NOT do) doesn't exist. Now, also for the record, I probably would consider (over the current "top o the line Audi Bose offering") an additional $650 to $750. But if Audi also offered an ML system for yet an addition $X, I am certain they would have customers.

Finally, when I sit in my other friend's BMW (7 series) with it's built in center dash color screen for his Sat Nav, and notice his integrated/removable phone system, it just makes me wonder why an Audi lawyer would think that Audi would be singled out for litigation if they offered the Sat Nav Plus system that is available elsewhere in the world.

After my tour of the factory (6 times) in Germany, I also wonder why not bring a few more color choices to the US -- now maybe Purple Pearl would be foolish -- but to the previous point: if the customer looks at the color pallet and says "Purple Pearl" (and is willing to pay for it) who cares? It is (or should be) both revenue and income to Audi AG and Audi of America.

Now on the color issue, I guess it could be argued that supporting that many colors would be a nightmare -- but why couldn't an authorized paint/ody shop order a part number and have it overnighted -- from Germany if that is what it took?

Brand differentiation is (or is becoming at the very least) in part becoming the availability to offer "mass customization." Check out audiworld -- quattro Gmbh is now offering (for a price) Audi's allroad in 10 colors with a "full paint" option -- the article says "due to customer demand [sic]."

Audi's own world web site offers the ability to customize their cars -- there must be a buck or Euro in it, or they wouldn't do it.

So, who knows if the stereo was the "real reason" my friend bought the BMW -- he claims it is, and he put his money in BMW's bank account, not Audis.

And, I agree, let's keep buying them (per the chicken and egg post).

Believe it or not, I do not think we are making this a "complaining community forum" -- most of us are supporters, passionate customers if you will -- and I, for one, want to see my favorite brand get better and better.

That's my story. . .

mpyles1 · April 2002

I share your view, markcinicinnat, that it is legitimate to use this board to discuss things we don't like about the Audi. My guess is that someone in Audi USA marketing reads this board to capture feedback for future design decisions.

I have read all the major car magazines for years, and I've noticed that certain manufacturers (almost always Honda, often Japanese, and very occasionally American) frequently make product changes based on observations made in the car press. I owned a 1998 Corvette which, among other problems, had chronic brake warpage. The car magazines said next to nothing about it, since the problem tended to develop under prolonged usage rather than in one-day test runs. But the Edmunds board was deluged with discussion about the Corvette brakes. Within two months, Car & Driver reported that Corvette was planning to upgrade the brakes in the next-generation Corvette because of customer complaints. Maybe these complaints came through dealers or warranty repair data . . . but maybe this board contributed. I have a 2000 Jaguar S-Type that has had transmission problems, despite a transmission replacement. Again, the Edmunds discussion board reported widespread problems with shift delays, ragged shifts, and so forth. Guess what? The S-Type now offers a ZF transmission option for those who don't like the Ford design. I also note that the 2002 Audi A6 is upgrading its front brakes. Once again, little mention of brake problems was raised in the car magazines, but this discussion board certainly had its share of complaints about A6 brake warpage.

This board is a form of car press and, as with the car magazines, it captures the voice of people who tend to be car enthusiasts rather than average customers. I think the manufacturers listen -- perhaps eventually to act.

I really like the Audi product. Otherwise I wouldn't be buying one. But that doesn't mean that we should not use this discussion board to lobby for continued refinement of the cars. That's one of the upsides to capitalism. Manufacturers eventually listen to the customer or pay the price.

buddybrad · April 2002

I'm new to this board so please humor me a little. I'm starting to get into the market for a new car and have driven the A6 3.0 CVT and 2.7T auto. They were both mighty fine, but I would lean towards the turbo. Presently, I drive a '99 GS400. I've also tried the MB C32, E320, and E430. The E430 was also a great car, but 1. I can't see myself in a MB and 2. A brand new E Series comes out in August which is suppose to be much better. Yesterday I drove a BMW 530 & 540i. I was hoping I'd be happy with the 530 and it was a fine ride, but once I drove the 540i - that was the one to get if I were to get one. The Infiniti G35 & future M45 also are interesting, but the A6 2.7T just seems like a lot of car for the money.

In 1985 I bought a new Audi 5000S and it was a beautiful car, but if I wouldn't have had an Extended Warranty, I'd still be paying off the repair bills. Consumer Reports shows the A6 to have a bad repair history and it sounds like folks on this site have had their share of problems.
Are they still a high maintenance vehicle?

timcar mentioned the little Nav system screen. What is that all about? I haven't seen a demo, but I have the full color screen in my GS and once you have Nav., you don't want to be without it, especially in Chicago. I'm just wondering if it does a satisfactory job?

Here's a bonus question. The Audi, BMW, and MB all require multiple disks (6) for their Nav systems. You swap disks as you drive through regions of the country. My '99 GS400 and '00 Honda Odyssey only require 1 disk for the entire country. Why do you suppose the Germans make you have multiple disks?

Thanks for the opinions.

audifox · April 2002

I live in the Chicago area. I have a 99GS400 w/nav. I drove all the cars you drove. Next month, my 2002 A6 4.2 will be delivered. It has all of the options. Audi's nav is not map-graphic. Arrows and street ID's come through an info center screen directly in front of your face, mid dash. There is voice assistance. While I enjoyed the Lexus Nav, the fingerprint smudging drives me crazy.
The Audi, IMO, has the best blend of Lexus luxury and BMW driveability. I prefer the V8 over the turbo--BUT get the 2.7 over the 3.0CVT. If you're staying in Chicago, get quattro AND snow tires. Audi has the BEST interiors. Audi, like BMW and MB included maintenance at no charge (4/50). The BMW 5's have a lot less room and the MB E series can option you over $60,000. The 3.2 V6 is a dog compared to Audi engines. Both the MB and BMW series you're looking at are being replaced for 2003.
I belive you'll find that Audi, BMW and MB will not be as trouble-free as your Lexus. I believe that the A6 is a vastly superior and exhilirating driving experience compared to my GS400.

timcar · April 2002

Thanks for crediting me with the remark regarding Nav, but I think I just commented on Mark's observations. I don't have the Nav, and I think Pete explained it well. Guess after 20+ years in sales, I take stubborn pride in reading maps, and remembering routes. A few more years and I'm sure I'll give in. Audi's Nav DOES sound more primitive than Lexus' & others, but I think I'd still prefer it's simplicity and having the display directly in front of me anyway.

Brad, I think you and Pete have already sorted out the most significant differences between the various makes and models. The 540 is a heck of car, but without quattro, and at a heck of price. I think you'll find an A6 to be much more of driver's car than your GS, as good as the GS is. Even though I've got a 2.7T, I'd urge you to drive a 4.2 also. It has a wonderful V8 and better looks with a presence that other A6's just don't have. If you're looking for comparable handling with the BMW, I urge you to try the sport package. It's not too firm, and gives you even better control.

As to reliability, (knock-on-wood) my 2.7T with about 19K has only needed paid for maintenance and an auxiliary cooling fan under warranty. There have been some specific A6's that have been problematic, but that's been true of all manufacturers, including BMW, MB and to a lesser extent, even Lexus. CR has knocked the A6. But to put this problem in it's true perspective, I'm sitting here with CR's 2002 Buying Guide. The last model year reported on is 2000. They report on 14 "Reliability Areas." In 10 of those the 2000 A6 has the best possible rating, with less than 2% of those surveyed reporting problems. In the remaining four, it was between 2% and 5% who reported a problem. And remember these problems can be as trivial as a piece of trim coming loose. These aren't bad odds, even if you accept CR's methodology, which I think is suspect.

Anecdotal reports suggest that early model year A6's were more problematic, and each year of production they've become less so. 2000 model year 2.7T's seemed to have more problems, and '01 far fewer. It's likely the '02's will be the most reliable A6's ever made. All high-end German cars can be very expensive to maintain out of warranty. If you're planning on driving much beyond the 50K limit, I'd suggest investigating a good long-term warranty.

markcincinnati · April 2002

I have two Audis in my garage -- both have the Audi factory Sat Nav "lite" (as I call it).

First, I must tell you that I have driven with the Hertz Neverlost system, I have test driven a Mercedes S class with the navagation system (a 2001 model) and one of my close friends has a 2001 BMW 740i with the navagation system.

I prefer my friends BMW system to all of them.

They all will get you from point a to point b with almost uncanny accuracy.

The Audi and the Mercedes systems are in every way bu one identical -- the Mercedes has a 16 x 9 color screen with a "moving map" and some other things that I would prefer having. However, the voice commands and arrows on the Mecedes were similar to the Audi's. And, in spite of my carping, the Audi system does the job and with annual map updates has been impressive.

My issue is that it doesn't fit in a $54K car -- the smallish, monochrome screen with arrows (but no map function) just seems out of place at this price class.

But again, make no mistake -- the Audi system works very well -- to me however it would be like a Rolex with a plastic Swatch watch band -- they don't "go together" (IMHO).

I wouldn't be without mine -- and I do hope the Germans go to the DVD system; who knows why they don't use that system currently (my friend's BMW is the same way -- 6 CD's for the country).

markcincinnati · April 2002

I agree with Tim virtually across the board -- while I have had nits to pick with my 2001 A6 4.2 with sport package (actually with every package) -- only one area has been a nuisance -- the brakes (and not from a stopping or safety point of view). I will not elaborate on my problems except to say that I have been very well treated by Audi of America and my local dealer.

Moreover, the brakes on the 2002's were changed -- I like to think it is because of the Internet and places like Edmunds and audiworld.com.

I cannot "put down" any of the cars mentioned in the recent posts that people are test driving.

I would gladly take a BMW 540i -- but with my own money I will buy Audi's for several reasons -- and these reasons make it difficult FOR ME to compare the BMW 540 with the A6 4.2 for example. Here goes:

quattro
content for money (value)
performance
safety
fun

I do believe the 540i will -- in a straight line under "perfect" conditions out drag the A6 (the performance numbers available from the mfg's bear this out.)

I, for one, rarely have perfect driving conditions -- and I suspect a 540i (under said perfect conditions) will also "out corner" my A6 4.2.

But as one Car and Driver (or other car magazine) writer said, the Audi is greater than the sum of its individual specifications -- it may be out accelerated or out "g forced" in a corner, but overall the Audi performs at or above its "peer group."

There is no denying a manual transmission 540i is awesome. But, here in Cincinnapolis USA, wait a day, the weather changes, the pot holes are born, live and die -- and the Audi keeps up with (and often passes) der Bimmers and Mercs.

When, not if, Audi brings its cars closer to a 50 -50 weight distribution and increases the power and torque and applies active handling technologies to their cars, there will be no explanations or summarizations like the one above needed.

Oh, that's right, they've already done that it is called an RS6 -- 0 - 62mph in 4.9 seconds and active suspension technology. Can't wait for the trickle down to the rest of the line.

Anyway the other Germans and some of the Japanese offer some mighty fine cars -- for me, however, they just can't be (currently) compared to the Audi's with quattro and the other "stuff" discussed on this forum.

To steal a phrase, Audi quattro -- nothing else even comes close.

mpyles1 · April 2002

One of the car mag's (I cannot remember which one) recently did one of their regular "shoot-outs" between 5 sport sedans. As much as they usually rave over the BMW (and justifiably so, based on the ones I've driven), the Audi A6 4.2 and the BMW 540i came out almost in a dead heat on handling. The conclusion was something like "the BMW nosed out the Audi today, but on a different day it could have gone the other way. They were just that close." Pretty damned good for the Audi, given the BMW beats it on most objective measures that affect handling in the twisties (curb weight, weight distribution, torque).

audifox · April 2002

If it's same one I'm thinking of, about 6 months ago, they rated it BMW540i, A6 4.2 and GS430 as 1/2/3. Surprisingly, it was a 2001 A6 with 20k miles vs a 2002 540i.Apparently Audi couldn't come up with a 2002 and Lexus couldn't find a GS with the sport package.

markcincinnati · April 2002

CAR magazine gave the 540i the nod by a nose, Motor Trend gave the honors to the Audi.

And so it goes. Car and Driver put the 2.7T and 4.2 on their 10 best list.

They are close -- but that sweet BMW engine is oh so nice. Sometimes I wish Audi and the BMW (4.2 A6 and 540i manual) would "breed" -- their offspring, it would seem would be unbeatable -- but again perhaps that is just what they (Audi) had in mind with the RS6.

kirby2010 · April 2002

buddybrad - I, too, looked at the cars on your list. I actually started looking at a Volvo. I've been very happy with the Audi (2.7T, 6 speed). I really did want a manual so that limited the field. I would have been happy with an automatic if any one of the cars in this class were even marginally better than Audi. For practical purposes performance is a wash where I live - lots of two lane country roads - and once on the highway it's tough to get away with much over 75 or 80 mph. Still, for me anyway, the excitement of driving this car exceeds that of others in this class. Every chance I get I push it as hard as I dare.

In addition the interior is very comfortable - I like the elbow room and passenger space over the BMW. I think Audi has a nicer interior than BMW and most of the others, too. Bottom line is I'm very pleased with the car. I've made several road trips and have begun to do some local travel as well. All the way around - a pleasure to drive and own.

jonnyj · April 2002

Markcincinnati brought up the issue of colors. I was looking at the 5 series brochure today and noticed that they have about ten shades of grey -- dark, light, bluish, greenish, beigish. I don't even think they're doing red in the 5 series anymore. Are Markcincinnati and I the only ones bored to tears with the color choices from Germany these days?

bjbird2 · April 2002

The German cars now have some serious competition with the Infiniti G-35. Check the postings on that site, and take one for a teat drive.

bjbird2 · April 2002

Sorry, that last message should read test drive.

buddybrad · April 2002

I certainly appreciate all the input. I've pretty much ruled out MB due to the fact (as someone pointed out) if you buy the E430 you're getting close to $60K wo/AWD. The new E Series will be out in Aug. and I can't see them being any cheaper. It's true I haven't driven the A6 4.2 and I really should to have an apples-to-apples comparison to a 540i. My hope was to be satisfied with the 2.7T and save the ~$5K. Maybe add a chip, low restriction air intake, and possibly different exhaust and come up with H.P. close to the 4.2 with less weight. What I don't want is a loud sounding car with a voided warranty. I will admit though - those 4.2's look awfully nice from behind with those fat tires and flared fenders!

I also agree with the person who said the Audi has a nicer interior and I believe the dashboard and gauges are nicer than the BMW. What jonnyi points out about BMW color selection is true too - they are very dull except for 1 shade of blue. As the BMW salesman put it, "our colors this year are very MUTED."

bjbird2 mentions the Infiniti G35 and that does look like a nice car for the price. Good interior room, V6 w/260 H.P. and auto-stick. They build engines for the IRL so they know what they're doing. You can even get an official Nav. system in it. I didn't drive it, but I did sit in it and the interior can't compare to the Audi. The M45 coming out in a few months will be a more fair comparison (I'm guessing). It'll have a V8 w/340 H.P. and start in the low $40's.

timcar and kirby2010, approximately what kind of discount did you get off of sticker for your 2.7T if I may ask? Is it the same % off for the 4.2's?

amarchan · April 2002

I own a tiptronic 2001 2.7. I did not get the sports package since the seats were too narrow for me. I just took in my car for the 10,000 mile service and was given a loaner, 2000 2.7, with regular seats but with a definite difference in the suspension - tighter, less roll in curves but with a softer (albeit tighter, does that make sense?) ride over expansion joints on the highway. The dealer does not know if the springs are different or not. First, is there a difference in the standard suspension between 2000 and 2001? I suspect this car had the sport springs. The wheels in my car feel "busier" in regular highway driving, and the steering not as precise. The loaner loved being tossed around curves while my car does not. Same wheels and tires. Tire pressure was the same.
Is the difference I experienced what I should expect if I go with the sport springs (which I believe are Eibach springs)?
Can you run me through what I should expect in ride quality and hanndling with the Eibach springs? After driving that loaner I feel I'm driving a GM sedan when I drive my car now.

Thanks for the input

timcar · April 2002

In January '01 I paid $1700 over DEALER invoice. This would be about $3000 off sticker. This is in a very competitive market. Have read that the discount depends on the market and dealer. If you have a number of dealers, it pays to shop. Had one offer of $1200 over invoice, but preferred doing business with a different dealer. Have read that many dealers want more over invoice on 4.2's because of the bigger sticker and comparative rarity. It's getting close to the end of the model year, Audi Financial has been incenting the 2.7T, and there should be good deals out there.

timcar · April 2002

I've got a non-sport 2.7T for the same reason. As far as I know, the 2000 & 2001 had the same standard suspension. For '02, both standard and sport suspensions were actually FIRMED. I was going to suggest different tires, which can make a lot of difference, but you said they're the same. I strongly suspect the car you drove was modded. You should be able to tell if the car you drove had Eibachs by the ride height. Cars with Eibach springs will ride about 1 1/2" lower than the standard non-sport suspension. If not, I'd bet on the car you drove having been fitted with the anti-roll bar from the sport suspension. This is an inexpensive mod that many have reported makes a significant difference, and improvement, in handling. There are various sources and prices to obtain one. People more talented than me can install one themselves, though it's a pain.

I haven't experienced Eibachs, but have read that it firms the ride quite a bit. I'd also try your question on AW, were the performance enthusiasts hang out:

http://www.audiworld.com/forum/index.html

amarchan · April 2002

Thanks for your input. The people at Audi put the car up on a lift and indeed the car has the sport springs from the Audi catalogue. One of the managers was driving this car and wanted to firm it up. Now it's a loaner. From what I was told by Audi the springs are made by Eibach but are in-between the standard springs and the Sportline Eibach springs in firmness. It REALLY changes the character of the car. It steers, corners and brakes better (much less dive). It also quiets the suspension, which now after driving my car again I find somewhat jittery, and it is not harsh at all over road imperfections. The car just begs to be driven harder.
Thanks for the Audiworld Forum suggestion.

postnobills · April 2002

What kinds of lease incentives are pepole seeing on 2.7T's these days/ Car_Man over on the financing board says Audi Financial Services has a .0005 money factor on 39 month leases in VA/DC/MD area, but the dealers are pretending like they never heard of those rates. I'm getting lease rate money quotes from anywhere between .0009 to .0021, all on the exact same lease supposedly representing AFS "official" terms.

kirby2010 · April 2002

In response to buddybrad (above) - I don't recall the actual dollars. I offered a round number - probably $1500 over invoice. Dealer countered with a slightly higher figure which I was happy with and accepted on the spot. When I got home I did the math - his figure was 4.5% of invoice. I'm guessing he had a floor - it was February, this is New England, the economy was good (still is). In the end I still paid less than $1800 over invoice. My personal view - directed at no one in particular - if $300 to $500 makes a difference in your decision you're looking at the wrong car.

Looking back - it was about a year ago or so when the discussion centered on gas prices and the pros and cons of mixing mid-grade and premium, or worse, running mid-grade gas in the car. Same comment as above: anyone not in a position to run premium in the car should look on. I'd hate to hear from CR that Audi owners were unhappy with performance, and in typical CR half-the-story fashion fail to mention that the data was collected six months after the Iraqis cut oil exports and drove up gas prices.

buddybrad · April 2002

I'm glad you fellows mentioned something about the seats being different as far as width goes between the standard and sports models. I might not have paid that close attention. Now I will have to give it the "thorough butt test."

A 4.2 pulled next to me and my GS400 today on the toll road on the way to work. On a normal day you have to do 75-80 mph just to keep up with traffic. I wanted to see how well the thing runs, but there were too many cars. Besides, I think he had a bowl of gold fish on the front seat.

mpyles1 · April 2002

Amarchan or Timcar, do you have any idea whether the sport springs in the Audi accessories catalog are the same springs used in the A6 Sport Package? I have ordered a 2002 4.2 with Sport Package, which the brochure says lowers ride height by 1/2", increases spring rate by 30% and damping rate by 40%, and stiffens the anti-roll bars. (I notice some car mags have described the standard A6 as "oversprung and under-damped.") This doesn't sound quite like the Eibach springs you described, Timcar, as lowering the ride height by 1 1/2". Are the Sport Package springs nevertheless Eibachs?

By the way, I just received the summer wheels I ordered -- SSR Competitions. People have been raving about them on the internet. They use a new proprietary forging technology that reportedly allows extremely light weight. My 17 x 8.5 inchers weigh about 15.5 pounds apiece . . .and they're beautiful to boot. Has anyone had any experience of these wheels on a 2002? (Most of the internet writers have put them on BMW's, Miatas, and some Audi's . . . but not a 2002 A6 with Sport Package that I can find.)

timcar · April 2002

I believe the standard sport package springs are NOT the same Eibachs sold as an accessory. I seem to remember that Eibachs are more aggressive. Most people seem to prefer the sport package, as an overall package, to just changing springs. Many who have changed springs have chosen to go back and add a thicker anti-sway bar, and sometimes new shocks.

amarchan · April 2002

For 2002 all the A6 springs changed to a firmer rate, and if you look in the Audi accessory list on www.audiusa.com you will see that the sport springs are not available for the 2002 model. I suspect that the stock springs are now the sport springs available previously as an option. As I posted before, I had the opportunity to drive an A6 2.7 with the optional springs and I found them to be better than the stock springs in my 2001 A6. Firmer but not harsher. Actually more compliant for the first couple of inches of travel.
I called Eibach and yes, the Audi sport springs are made by Eibach for Audi, but according to them the Sportline springs they sell as an aftermarket option are firmer than the Audi option springs (Audi parts #4B4071677DSP). Thay also told me that you don't really need to change shocks or sway bars if you put the sport springs in, even their own Sportline springs.
In your case, the stock 2002 A6 4.2 springs should already be stiffer than the stock 2001 (see post #2577 by timcar). The combination of sports suspension and low profile tires do firm up the ride significantly. However, unless you drive on roads with a lot of potholes you should not find this combination objectionable. Your gas mileage may go down, as you will be driving the car harder any chance you get

. What I did not like in the sport option was the seats, which I found too narrow for me.

buddybrad · April 2002

Stopped in the local Audi dealer this afternoon. They had a beautiful red TT sitting in the show room. It's a new, special Commemorative Edition in honor of a race Audi is sponsoring. It's a orangish/red (sort of like my '99 Prowler), and has a special color interior also. Mighty fine looking!

Anyway, drove a 2.7T 6-speed with Sport Package. I'm glad folks mentioned the fact about the narrow seat. Both myself and the salesman felt snug in the bottom. The back felt fine, but the sides of the bottom were tight. Other than that, the car ran great and even had one of those electric sun shades in the rear window which I thought was neat. After about 15 minutes with the 6-speed, I decided that the Tiptronic is probably the smart choice to go with here in the Windy City with 7 million people. If it wasn't my daily driver maybe I would consider the stick, but I just can't see fooling around with it everyday in rush hour traffic.

After that, I drove my first 4.2 and it did not have the sport seats. It was a fine car as well, but I don't think it is all that fast. I think that 2.7T just might embarrass it - and for $5K less. The bigger tires, flared fenders, heated steering wheel, etc. are very nice, but hard for me to justify.

Also in stock at this dealership, they have a dark blue A6 with the vanilla/blue interior. Has anyone else seen this combo? What is your opinion? I think I liked it, but would worry about keeping those vanilla seats clean.

Finally, if you skip the Sport Package to avoid the Sport Seats, but want the suspension, tires, and wheels - you have to buy and install it all a la carte'. Guess the good thing is, if you read a BBS like this you can pick out better merchandise than the factory might have given you. Those SSR wheels sound very nice! (Isn't that the name of Chevy's new retractable hardtop pickup truck?)

mpyles1 · April 2002

I, too, find the sport seats a little narrow. But I've had other cars with seats that felt like that new, but they "spread" enough after a few weeks of use to become comfortable (although there were a few episodes of numb thighs in the meantime).

Your impressions, buddybrad, about the 2.7T being quicker than the 4.2 are apparently accurate. Both Audi and every car mag test I've read show the 2.7T with Tiptronic running a tenth or too quicker. With the manual (which isn't available in the 4.2), the difference becomes more than half a second.

The 4.2 weighs exactly 100 pounds more than the 2.7T (according to Audi data), but the extra 50 hp and 37 ft/lbs of torque of the 4.2 should FAR offset its extra weight. Either the 4.2 has a different final drive ratio, or it must be because the 2.7T's torque peak comes much earlier than the 4.2's. (And I have seen some high-speed passing tests which the 4.2 wins over the 2.7T that would support this view.) Does anyone know for sure which it is?

markcincinnati · April 2002

The 2.7T equipped A6 is quicker (not faster) than the 4.2 A6. The torque, while less on the 2.7T comes on "immediately" which in the quickness world, is all the difference in the world.

In fact, the Audi literature I have says that the 2.7T is quicker than the S6 -- and this is Audi's own literature -- true it is .1 and it is between the manual 2.7T and the Tip S6 -- but at my dealer the S6 stickers at $66,000. Now, I know you get a lot for the difference -- but I would not market a 4.2 and a 2.7T without the 4.2 being able to better -- even if only by .1 second my $6,000 less expensive car. Or in the case of the S6 my $16+K less expensive car.

The addition of front and rear anti sway bars, sport shock and S springs (plus a set of "plus zero" tires) totally changed my 1997 standard A8 in to an S8 lite. FYI.

timcar · April 2002

As Mike already pointed out, I've read many posts from those that've gotten the sport seats and found that the lower seat bolsters do indeed loosen up and give you more butt room. I didn't get the sport seats because they're too tight through both my upper and lower back to the extent that my arthritic lower back isn't supported.

You can beef up a standard suspension to a degree that will exceed the capability of the standard sports suspension. There are lots of aftermarket mods being sold. There are more for the 2.7T than for the 4.2. There are three potential negatives in doing this: First, you may well have a harsher ride than the factory set up, but that may not be an issue for you. Second, it may void the warranty for some other items, depending on your dealer. Third, it will certainly cost you much more for springs, shocks and an anti-roll bar than the factory sport package. However, some have done this incrementally, starting with the thicker anti-roll bar, then springs, and finally shocks. Depending on the individual's preference, many have been satisfied without doing it all.

As Mark pointed out, the 2.7T makes most of its torque at 1750rpm vs. 3000rpm for the 4.2. AND, the gearing IS different. The 4.2's gearing is much longer than the 2.7T's. (I know that's not the correct term, but I can't remember whether that means the final drive ratio is higher or lower.) So the lower rpm torque peak and different gearing, rather than weight, are the things that account for the difference in performance. And if one lives in the mountains, that difference would become much greater.

I think the vanilla/royal interior in Ming Blue is the richest color combination offered for the A6. Most people who see it love it. I've got the same interior in my silver car. (This is a combination that fewer people like.) I don't want to have to keep a dark blue car clean. The interior in my car is easy to keep clean, and at almost 19K has shown very little wear. However, my car has different hides than the '02's. The '02's Buffalino may not be as easy to keep clean. I had an '02 loaner with 5K with the beige (?) leather and the driver's seat looked a little worn/dirty. I use Zaino leather cleaner and Zaino leather conditioner. I spray it on, scrub it with a soft brush, and wipe if off with paper towels. When I apply the conditioner, I just use paper towels. Literally takes less than 5 minutes.

markcincinnati · April 2002

As noted, I upgraded my A8 to an S8 suspension -- using Audi parts shipped to me from Germany via Joe Hoppen motorsports. When the following components were installed, the price including the labor was around $3,000+:

1. S8 springs and shocks (which was the first thing I did, because I was told that putting the stiffer anti sway bars on first would be problematic -- I don't know why, I just did what I was told)

2. Upgrade from factory 225 x 50 x 17" Goodyear GSD tires to 245 x 45 x 17" Pirelli PZeros AS (and a Porsche-style on-car wheel/tire balancing)

3. S8 front and rear anti-sway bars

2 full all wheel alignments 1,000 miles apart (obviously not covered by the Audi advantage).

The ride was virtually unchanged -- it got a little more comfortable in my opionion, the handling was transformed from OK to excellent.

It cost way way more than the "factory" sport suspension option Audi typically offers on its cars. I liked it so it was "worth it" -- yet, even though I feel that way, it was overpriced. I will order my cars with the suspensions and tires I want (assuming such things are on the option list -- hint hint) from the factory.

As I have noted and as Tim agrees, why not allow the customer to order the sport suspension, wheels and tires "as a set" -- and check off comfort, sport or Recaro seats (in any combination of fabrics and colors one wants) separately. Perhaps they could bundle the sport seats in with the suspension as a special deal and take a few bucks off (like they do with the leather and sun roof on some modles, etc)?

It seems Audi keeps making previous iterations of its sport suspensions standard and then improves the sport options -- I would see no reason they could not offer standard, sport and "agressive" (and pick an even better name) suspension offerings. And, with each one, why not offer 16 - 19 wheel/tire options and allow (gasp) standard suspensions, up sized wheels and tires and sport seats covered in alcantara? And the crowd cheered!

buddybrad · April 2002

Compared to other manufacturers, Audi has a fairly simple options list. You have your 3 or 4 packages and a few stand-alone options. It would be nice if they became more performance oriented and let you pick and choose speed and handling options while still keeping your warranty. This might be similar to the Lexus L-Tuned program or the Toyota TRD program. Some of that equipment is installed when the car reaches the US port.

It will probably fall upon the shoulders of the dealers to come up with these offerings, but the problem becomes - what do you do with the equipment that came on the car from the factory? The consumer doesn't want to keep it or pay for it and the dealer can only use so much of it.

Guess we'll have to hope for the factory to get more imaginative.

By the way, I appreciate the comments about the sport seats possibly becoming more comfortable after they've been used for a while. I figured they would stay tight forever. The Sport Package may still have hope.

P.S. I spoke to an old friend of mine in Scottsdale tonight who sells BMW. I asked him what a good deal would be on a 540i. He said, "If you can get $700 off a Tip, consider yourself lucky." Maybe a little more off a 6-speed. He went on to say not to expect any different on a 530i or 330i. I don't think pricing here in Chicago is any different. Damn those things are expensive!

timcar · April 2002

At Audi World Steve2.7T wrote:

"Audi is losing out in the A6 segment and to get more competitive for 2003 they are going to offer us better equipment levels for the same cost and reduce prices.

The 2.7t will come with sport package as standard! (Suspension/wheels and seats) Hurray! at last you say. But it will not cost any more, base price will stay the same. We are going to lose the passenger memory seat and tip in the steering wheel to help pay for it. Audi reckon that nobody uses the passenger memory seats and that you cannot steer and change gear at the same time. Bi-Xenon's will replace the dip beam only Xenons.

The A6 4.2 base price will drop from just under $50k to $46,900. They are also fine tuning prices lower down the range on the 3.0 A6 and on the A4's. Including leather as standard on the base A6 with very keen option packages on the A6 and the A4.

As reported earlier the RS6 will cost $81K. They will be built in two batches, early and mid 2003. Dealers have to commit to 8 cars - and they have to be pre-sold!!!!

My lease is up early 03 and it looks like I will be able to get into an 03 2.7t with better equipment and some usefull improvements over my '00 for the same price! Not too bad I think."

mpyles1 · April 2002

According to my dealer (New Country Audi in Greenwich, CT), they have taken four orders for RS6's at about $70K each. Given the fact that BMW sells a lot more 540i's . . . at a higher price . . . than Audi sells A6 4.2's, I find it hard to believe Audi would try to compete with the M5 from a higher price point. What was the source for the $81K? Thanks.

nosho · April 2002

If you look up chip vendors, you'll find that dyno results show that the stock 2.7T actually generates 275 lb-ft of torque and the torque "peak" is wider that what Audi states. This helps explain the better performance of the 2.7T in 0-60 runs.

If you care to risk reliability issues, the 2.7T can be chipped to have some 340+ lb-ft of torque with 0-60 times of ~5.9S for the Tiptronic and ~4.9S for the manual. If you change gears mostly before 2500RPM, there is only a small additional boost so reliability will be the same as un-chipped.

icermark · April 2002

Hello, I own a 1988 Coupe GT in excellent condition and a 1999 Passat. I am considering purchasing a preowned A6 quattro between the years 1998 to 2001. There seem to be many recently returned leased vehicles currently available. AutoTrader.com has an extensive number listed on their website. I have read
Edmund's reports, Consumer Reports and some others, but I have been very impressed with some of the postings here and therefore I would welcome any advice that you experienced A6 owners might be able to provide to me. Thanks!

morphie · April 2002

We leased a 1999 2.8; the current vehicles are a 2002 3.0 (Avant) and a 2001 2.7t. Accordingly, I derive my opinions as to your purchase of a 1998-2001 from this experience.

The 1999 models were a major transition: body style, engine and content. Not surprisingly, there were a number of warranty problems; we experienced some electrical difficulties. There were also several recalls, of varying natures.

When purchasing any used vehicle, especially a German brand, it is essential to insist upon seeing the maintenance records, including the recall repairs (fuel sensor, etc.). Next, have a mechanic, familiar with Audi's, thoroughly examine the car. Finally, purchase an extended warranty from a reliable (solvent) company.

I would eliminate the 1998's, for reasons stated, above. Even though the 1999-2001's had their share of problems, a vehicle that has been well maintained should have most, if not all, of its difficulties cured.

Good luck with your search.

timcar · April 2002

I'd only add that I think Carfax sounds like a useful service. I haven't been in the market for a used car for awhile, but this added information sounds potentially invaluable.

datsun2 · April 2002

Check out consumer reports on the reliability of the 98, 99 & 00's. I have a 99 A6Q and have had so many problems.

Wait...I'll sell you mine, it runs great. Over $8,000 in warranty work already done. It's like a new car.

Tom

marleybarr · April 2002

Has anyone heard when Audi will incorporate the "multitronic" tranny in the quattro models?

Thanks-Max

markcincinnati · April 2002

I read that it already is a done deal, but that they were "stress testing it."

I assume they do not want something on the market that has a proclivity to break under the torque some of their new engines put out.

Perhaps that means ready for some of the 2004 model cars. . .I am guessing.

mpyles1 · April 2002

I read in one of the car mags that the Multitronic (CVT) was 4-5 years away from production for the high-output quattros (I assume that means the 4.2 and possibly the 2.7T).

markcincinnati · April 2002

We have, on this forum, discussed the "take it or leave it" all-season vs summer tire "options" presented to us by Audi, among others. Some of us were unaware of the incredibly short life span of most Ultra high and Maximum performance tires (Audi's summer tires that come with the sport suspension and up sized wheel options they offer).

Others of us (me included) were unaware of some of these very high performance tires proclivity towards high (relative) levels of road noise. My 2001 A6 did come with Pirelli P6000's size 255 x 40 x 17" -- at just about 8,000 miles I gave up tolerating the road roar these babies created and put on a set of so-called "all season" Ultra high performance tires (there are no Maximum performance tires that are all-season listed over at www.tirerack.com) as Cincinnati rarely has more than a day or two of significant snow. I figured that quattro+ESP+ABS+all-season tires would get me through any winter (except 1) that I have ever lived through in my almost 30 years in the Queen City.

On that last point, I was correct, even though this was an even milder than normal winter. I had lived with the P6000's through December 2000 and Jan - Mar of 2001 without incident, and their replacements -- Yokohama AVS db's -- were even better. The Yok's were virtually silent for about 10,000 miles and I noticed that they were "only" very good in the handling department over the summer of 2001. Now, April 2002 and another 7,000 miles and the noise at low speeds had crept up to relatively high levels (17,000 miles on the tires).

So, knowing that these tires were $144 each and had 17,000 trouble free miles on them (and remember my expectations on these ultra low profile and Ultra high performance tires were for a maximum of 20,000 miles of useful wear), I decided I would replace this set on my 25,000 mile total car (also knowing I have now 12 months left on the lease). I wanted the last months in this car to "be all that it could be."

I spoke with my dealer -- I told him I did not want $250+ tires, I did want Z rated tires and I wanted a quiet tire that did not give up too much in the performance department (I did consider another set of the Yok's). Since we are coming to the "best part of the driving year" I elected to go with his suggestion: Falken Azenis ST115 255x40x17" Z rated ($139 each and "free shipping") dealer mounted and balance and a four wheel alignment.

Now about 300 miles later, the tires I am happy to report seem to be just as quiet as the Yok's were on day one but they do handle better (of course this is subjective, as I am recalling the handling of the "old" tires compared with new ones). They also seem smoother and more forgiving around some of my favorite sharp curves.

The dealer (the Audi dealer, not the tire dealer) service rep said these are the tires he uses and feels that they are comparable to "mainstream" brand name tires that cost 20% more. I don't know about that -- my favorite tires, to date, are still the Dunlop Sp9000's which came on my 2000 A6 4.2 with wheel upgrade to 17" from Audi.

Perhaps such "cheap" tires (the Yok's and the Falken's) would not be ideal on the autobahn or in areas where sustained high speeds (over 90mph) and agressive cornering were a regular way of life. Here in our small city, traffic rarely permits such flights of fancy if one wishes to respect other's rights to go slow in the left hand lane, be safe and minimize speeding tickets -- all of which I do try to do.

With these qualifications, then, I can -- thus far -- endorse these new shoes on my A6. I got them on line a tires.com -- first time user of this site, as I generally buy from tirerack.com, but they don't carry Falken's.

That's a full report.

Happy motoring!

Audi A6

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles