Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Audi A6



  • Do you have an opinion on Honda's S2000 with respect to marketing, innovation, and reliability? I find both the S2000 and the TT to be interesting, although neither meets my needs.
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    We, on this forum, seem to be often of a "mostly common" mind. As we have said, we do want our Audis to be more reliable. But frankly, I want everything I spend my hard earned money on to be more reliable. And, indeed, it is -- my father in law told me how 30,000 miles used to be the "top end" you could count on from cars -- today triple that with "routine" maint and repairs is very likely.

    But one more emphasis on my earlier post pertaining to my friend's Acura -- he accepts a level of performance, materials, fit and finish and drivability that most Audi owners (and apparently many if not most on this forum) would find unacceptable. He trades reliability for just about everything I consider of paramount importance -- his number 1 is reliability, everything else is a distant second. So, if you ask him for his response on a CR poll or a JD Powers poll or any other consumer research survey -- he will answer virtually every question anchored to reliability.

    Q: "What do you think of the performance of your Acura Mr. Smith?" A: "Performance is fine for me, but this thing sure is reliable." Q: "Does your automatic transmission shift smoothly?" A: "The transmission shifts fine, but it sure is reliable." Q: "How would you rate the fit and finish of your Acura?" A: "The finish is fine, but it almost never needs any maintenance of any kind!"

    And so on.

    So, the point about the reliability responses may be totally incorrect from "our" point of view.

    We might answer the questions, about the Acura, in a very negative fashion, until they actually asked the one about reliability.

    The difference is that some car owners would like to visit their dealers twice, once to pick up their new car and once to turn in their old car. And, don't get me wrong, service intervals of 50,000 miles or never would be nice -- but our technology for the prices we pay just isn't there yet.

    The Audi products in my friend's opinion, I'd bet, would be "too much trouble" because they do indeed visit the dealership more often than his Acura -- even though for the Audi the first 50K miles worth are "free" -- well he just doesn't want the hassle.

    This does not make him or us wrong. I would not tolerate the car he has for the reasons cited in my earlier post. He would probably not tolerate my Audi because it might remind him too much of his Saab story (couldn't resist).

    So again, I do want my Audi to be MORE RELIABLE (and I do find Audi reliability to coin a phrase "adequate" or perhaps even better than adequate) -- but do not sacrifice the traits that make them enoyable, safe and satisfying. Like everyone else, I want both.
  • timcartimcar Posts: 363
    I've been following Mark's discussion concerning A6's, Acura's and other Japanese luxury makes. And while I generally agree, I can't agree entirely because I drove a '92 Legend for 5 years and my experiences were different than those he described. I suspect Mark's experience was in an RL, which is actually a neutered Legend.

    The RL has been around forever. It was built on a Legend Platform when Acura decided to kill the Legend name. They softened it up, and allegedly made it more luxurious. A worthy successor for the Legend was supposed to be introduced years ago, with much more power and much better handling. Rumor even suggested AWD. This was being reported in various publications. Evidently Honda made a decision to kill this car with the over-whelming success of Accord based Acura TL. Last I heard Honda was going to try to stretch the Accord platform even more to fill the RL product niche. Honda doesn't seem comfortable trying to compete with the larger cars from Toyota/Lexus and Nissan/Infiniti. Too bad.

    The '92 Legend was a nice car. It's ergonomics and dynamic qualities were superbly thought out, and the fit and finish both inside and out were exceptional. My '01 2.7T's interior is the finest of any auto I've had, and about as good as any I've seen. The materials and fit of my '92 Legend were about as good, and the interior finish a close second. The exterior finish of the Legend was equal to my A6's. That is to say both are exceptional and flawless.

    Driving the '92 Legend was a wonderful experience, particularly the first 30K or so. It was not as fast or capable as my '01 2.7T, but it WAS fun! Unfortunately, the roads in Japan are evidently very smooth. The Legend was engineered for these, and my roads aren't. Unfortunately, after about 30K the Legend's suspension had degraded significantly, and both ride and handling had been impaired. The car had stiff shocks, solid bearings and came with performance tires. One cold morning on a NY highway, I actually broke a shock going over a drop between pavement slabs. Strangely for a FWD car, it became a little tail-happy as it wore. While it had 200hp, it's performance varied greatly by load and temperature. It was pretty fast on a cold day, but on a hot one with four large people, it could have problems pulling a steep grade at slow speed. One thing few people rarely mention as a great advantage of Audi's and other German cars compared to their Japanese competitors is load capacity. The Audi's and other German makes perform much better when heavily loaded compared to Japanese luxury makes.

    The Legend was very refined, comfortable, luxurious and fast. The 2.7T IS faster, as comfortable, but not really any more refined. The Legend had a ride on a smooth highway that was even better than the A6's. The Legend's steering was significantly better than my 2.7T's. It had much better feel and weighting. As capable as my 2.7T is, the Legend was more fluid and tossable. I have no doubts that my 2.7T can be driven faster than the Legend, but on the right twisty two-lane, the Legend could be even more fun. The dynamics were marvelous, and most often, but not always, it was a delight to drive.

    Choosing between them, I'd pick the 2.7T hands down for its combination of virtues. There's no doubt it's faster and just generally more capable. It's also very comfortable and luxurious. Oh, and it's also more beautiful! But the Legend wasn't a dog.

    As to reliability, the Legend DID have its share of problems, and maintenance wasn't cheap either. To this point, knock-on-wood, there hasn't been a substantial difference between the cars.
  • cncarlsoncncarlson Posts: 26
    As you all know, I am on my second (Audi '02 A6 3.0 CVT) to some surprise based on the issues I had with my A4, but to the point of Audi reliability and to the question of reliable vs. enjoyable, I will say that I never had a problem with the Audi that prevented me from driving it. And unlike many other carmakers, all problems were correctly diagnosed the first time and fixed quickly. Now there were a few Audi design/manufacturing issues (recall on the timing belt tensioner, faulty airbag sensor light connection, CV boots after 20K miles?) that could stand some improvement. But as I sit here today I am trying to think of reasons to go somewhere, anywhere in the new Audi! Not something the Acura guy is thinking.

    I am waiting very impatiently for the Audi Quattro challenge scheduled for Memorial Day Weekend at Road Atlanta!! I check every day waiting for the event to be released so I can reserve my spot! Again, not something Acura, Lexus, Mercedes, Infiniti, etc drivers are thinking or even get to do.
  • tubeytubey Posts: 39
    This last group of posts has been very interesting to me. Up until the last year I thought I had the most trouble-free '99 A6 on the planet. However, so far this past year I've:
    -replaced the window guides in both front doors (they always failed in the rain, natch);
    -replaced a VERY LOUD auxiliary cooling fan;
    -replaced tie-rod end covers (a recall);
    -replaced fuel gauge sending units (a recall) although mine worked fine;
    -replaced a rear axle flange that was leaking; and now, today, she's in the shop because, over the past weekend, the brake pad warning light came on.

    The car has 27,750 miles on it. Never have I had to replace brake pads this early on any car I've owned. In all fairness I will allow that too much of my driving is in a very congested city (Seattle); it's very hilly here, too; and, the car is indeed heavy. In fact, I suspect that the brakes are no bigger than those on an A4, which would mean that Audi maybe went a little cheap in that regard.

    I'm in an interesting position, and I hope that I don't live to regret my intended decision. I plan to retire at the end of this year, and I plan to take the A6 into retirement with me when we downsize to one car. I plan to buy it from the leasing company when the lease is up this August, because we both love the vehicle's day-to-day comfort and other dynamics. And, being the world's most anal-retentive nitpicker, the fit and finish constantly please me. But, although I have already invested in a good extended warranty, the routine maintenance will be pretty dear, I'm told. Like $1,100 for the 60k mile, I was quoted today.

    However, I don't want to make payments of any kind in retirement so a new vehicle in the near-term isn't in the cards. I agree with one of the posts above that cited VW's "rent" mentality. We may be somewhat victimized by that if we intend to keep the car longer than the warranty. Too many lessees and not enough buyers. No incentive on the manufacturer's part to make things a bit more bulletproof.

    Hopefully, in retirement, moving to a smaller semi-rural community will be a new lease on life for the car. At least the next set of brake pads should last longer. Thankfully this current replacement is covered by the Audi Advantage.

    And, finally, I've been a CR subscriber for years, and always respond honestly to the annual questionnaire. Last year I had nothing negative to say. This year, if I'm indeed honest, it may be a different story. However, I also agree with one of the posts above: nothing that's happened to my car has ever disabled it or left me stranded by the side of the road and utilizing Audi Guaranteed Mobility. And, of course, it's all been covered by the Audi Advantage.
  • blehrlichblehrlich Posts: 92
    I recently sold my A6 4.2 for a Lexus LS430 (I'm getting old and neded something cushy). I had purchased an original Audi walnut trim piece which is standard on the 2002, but plastic on previous years. It fits around the cupholder, hazaerd switch, esp switch, etc., and takes NO tools to snap in (clips only). I've loved this forum and I'd GIVE this to anyone who would use it (it's currently being used as a paperweight). E- mail me and I'd be happy to give it a nice home.
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    I used the Acura with 80,000 miles on it (which is a real life example) NOT to pick on Acura, even though it may appear that I am. And, not having experience with the cars that so often are held out as examples of the meaning of reliability, I again offer no criticism of the car companies or the veracity of those who respond to CR's "owner surveys."

    The differences as I see it are based perhaps more on the priorities one places on attributes of auto ownership -- my friend places so much weight on reliability that virtually all other attributes even if they were graded as F's would not reduce my friend's (and others from what I can glean) enthusiasm for his car.

    To say, for example, "the transmission has always shifted this way since the day I bought the car -- it's OK, it's reliable" is something I could not say. The transmission was very clunky. I would not care for it -- and reliability can't mask that for me. It can for him.

    If I owned his Acura I would answer the reliability question truthfully -- the thing is very reliable, but I would also say it is not a car that I would enjoy driving.

    My "passion points" do include reliability and reliability becomes more important as each new Audi enters my garage -- because they do EVERYTHING else so well. I now am much more focused on reliability -- and you can bet edmunds forums have increased my attention to this attribute. But -- so far -- nothing has moved reliability above drivability -- but again that is just me.

    And the CR ratings will be only a very small influence on my decision -- but again that is my bias.

    In spite of the brake issues (which are basically the only issues I have had with my last two Audi's -- both 4.2's), I enjoy driving my A6 more than anything I have ever owned, and just as much as my friends 740i (2001) -- which is also a very nice driving car.

    Next Audi does need to have better brakes, however. Each one must be better than the last, or "Lucy--you got some splainin' to do!"
  • felixozfelixoz Posts: 4
    New to this forum and about to move to TX from Australia! Looking at buying a 1999 A6 for interior size (I'm 6'5" tall), comfort and handling. Scrolling through everyones discussion, seems there are quite some reliability issues! This was surprising. Most of the reliability problem models seem to be flagged in reviews (eg. some of the Jeep Cherokee models!) What is the consensus with '99 and '00 A6 models? It looks as if I'm better off leasing a newer model to capture some warranty. What do people think?
  • datsun2datsun2 Posts: 5
    I thought I would chime in. My Audi 99 A6Q has been in the shop more this month than on the road. I just had the steering column replaced, water pump and hoses replaced, camshaft and head gasket replaced, timing belt replaced, windshield wiper pump replaced and several vacuum hoses replaced. This goes on top of 3 sets of fuel tank senders, comptuer screens, switches for the windows, leather trim pieces, blah blah blah.

    This car has had so many things done to it I've written Audi to have them buy it back. If not I have found a nice Infiniti G35 to buy.

    My dealer told me to get rid of it because most of the earlier A6's have on going problems.

  • timcartimcar Posts: 363
    And, if you don't believe me, ask a Texan! I've got an '01 2.7T, and it's been pretty good. (Knock-on-wood.) My considered opinion is that the A6's problems have been exaggerated. Much of the discussion has centered around Consumer Reports Publication. (Do you get that in Australia?) It's reliability has been about average for a high end German car. There was a wide spread problem with the fuel tank sensor (for the gas gauge) which precipitated a recall and skewed reliability data.

    Having said that, I do acknowledge that early year cars tended to be more problematic as some specific A6 models. '98 was the first model year. '98's were among the more problematic. Don't know specifically about '99's. As production continued, succeeding model years became more reliable. The 2.7T was introduced in 2000, and that model year has proved problematic for that model. From '01 on they have been much better.

    Some of the discussion you've been reading about concerns the brakes that were fitted to the 2.7T and 4.2 model up until the '02 model year. In '02 the 2.7T got different brakes. I don't know about the 4.2. These brakes use a large front cast iron rotor and HP2 twin-pot floating calipers. They appear to tend to warp. They also trap moisture and cause rust spots, which give the impression of warping until they wear down. I've got 17.5K on mine, and sometimes they feel warped, and sometime they don't. They're very powerful, and I'm still satisfied at this point.

    Don't know when you're planning on getting to Texas, but many areas around the U.S. are incenting A6 leases right now. I've read of effective APR's around 2% with no money down and 15K miles a year. It makes getting an '02 very attractive. With a new car you get a 4/50 warranty, plus free maintenance for the same period. If you decide to buy used, it would probably pay to purchase an extended warranty. A good one will cover all but consumable items like pads, rotors, etc. and can be had to cover up to 7 years and 100K. A6's can be expensive to repair out of warranty.

    Good luck! Hope you enjoy Texas.
  • mpyles1mpyles1 Posts: 91
    Has anyone had any experience with an ECU chip upgrade in a 2002 A6 4.2? I know this engine is slightly detuned (by 10 hp) compared to the A8, and seriously detuned compared to the S6 Avant and S8, with some of that detuning residing in the stock engine control chip.

    A local Audi enthusiast told me that chip upgrades really do little more than raise the tuning to European levels and consequently do not reduce the reliability of the engine or drive train (assuming either the rev limiting stays intact or one is careful not to over-rev the engine). Is this true? Thanks in advance for any insights.
  • In the GS forum, post #1991, can I say BADASS! WOW! A cross between the Altima and Lexus ES! A real STUNNER! Warning all in this class that something wicked this way comes....
  • timcartimcar Posts: 363
    Mike, I'm not an expert but have read a bit on the subject from people who know more than me. I think your conjecture concerning the 4.2 output is somewhat accurate. I think I also remember reading that the exhaust in the A8 is less restrictive. Rather than being detuned in the A6, I'd rather say the 4.2 in the S8 has numerous enhancements. The 4.2 output in the A6 is what the original output was in the A8 when it was introduced in that auto.

    What I've read is that the increases available from the 4.2 via chipping are very minimal. Since there is no boost to manipulate, I doubt that chipping would approximate the output from either of the more powerful versions. Without a new exhaust, etc, my understanding is you won't get much at all. There's also a Tip chip, that has been used to improve performance via remapping the Tip. I don't know how these compare to the new sport setting. Could be redundant.

    Because to the negligible power increases available via chipping on the 4.2, (As contrasted to the 2.7T.) I doubt it would put any unacceptable stress on the drivetrain, or any other system. I think I remember reading that the 4.2 uses a different and more robust tranny than other A6's. Word is that too much torque can fry them. I don't the limits on the 4.2's tranny, but supposedly slightly more than 300 lb.-ft is the safe limit for those in 2.7T's and 3.0's.

    About the biggest major improvement in performance would be getting rid of the 130mph limiter via a new ECU. Want to drive your 4.2 at about 150+? You probably could. (Make sure you've got tires appropriately speed rated first!)

    Don't know if you visit AW. There are some very knowledgeable folks who could give you more and more certain information. Try this:

  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    As always you bring a different perspective to things. I really enjoy reading your post. Now when you say Audi and VW have "Speer" influenced design, do you mean Albert Speer? If so I'd be curious to know how you came to that conclusion. Good, interesting, thought provoking reading, you posts are, always.

    In fact the last few posts have really been extra interesting, due to the fact the A6 is my favorite car in it's class right now..

  • kirby2010kirby2010 Posts: 136
    My curiosity got the best of me - so I followed the trail to the site from the previous post (#2504) and took a look at the new Lexus. What an ugly automobile! Confirmation that Asian designers and European designers are drifting apart. A sure fire winner of the next Hyundai look alike contest. I'm sure it's reliable, though.
  • mpyles1mpyles1 Posts: 91
    Thanks, Timcar, for the helpful input on performance chips. Actually, I'm not looking for more top-end speed but for a bit more low-end grunt. Between the car's weight and its tall gearing, it's a bit slower off the mark than my last two cars, and I really enjoy throwing myself back into the seat a bit.

    Wetterauer makes a chip that they say increases horsepower from 300 to 318 (i. e., minimally) and torque from 295 to 345 (i. e., significantly) . . . exactly the way I'd like a little added oomph delivered. And your comments cut right to the chase -- will this added torque hurt any driveline components? I cannot find any sources of information that comment on the long-term reliability of chipped cars, other than one comment in MSN Carpoint that warns people off from buying used cars that have been chipped. (They were not clear whether this risk comes from removing rev-limiters or general assumptions about how hard people who chip cars are likely to drive them.) I do know that chipping is common in Europe but, again, I can find no credible data on reliability.
  • hoos1hoos1 Posts: 13
    Ran my A6 thru a "touchless" car wash after a heavy rain down here in Atlanta. I picked the NO wax option, however, got the wax. Now my windshield is all smudged and streaks when I use the wipers. Any suggestions on how to get this off my windshield??? I've been told to use vinegar as this will remove the wax??? Please help. Thanks
  • timcartimcar Posts: 363
    Mike, I again urge you to check out Audi World. There are a lot of engineers and speed freaks who live and breath chips.

    What I think I know is this: I seriously doubt you could that much of a torque increase on the 4.2 from a chip. In Europe, the auto manufacturers often work with the chip manufactures. If AoA learns that you have chip, they will void the warranty for any system they can claim was affected.

    If you could get that much increase, I suspect it would be unlikely to assure damage to any system. However, whenever you increase power, or go outside the design parameters, risk does increase. I.e., if your risk of damaging a particular component in the ordinary system is 1 in 50,000, increasing it could make it 1 in 10,000.

    If you want to look further into chipping, I'd also suggest a distributor named PES. They've behaved quite responsibly in the past. I think they may have both a 4.2 chip and a Tip chip. The 4.2 has long-legged gearing. That's a large part of the lack of low down grunt. If your 4.2 is prior to '02, just going to a Tip chip may give you more than new ECU mapping.
  • timcartimcar Posts: 363
    I'd start with washing it down with Dawn and water. I'd follow with a windshield cleaning lotion with a mild abrasive like Zaino's. Then finish with Windex.
  • jscatenajscatena Posts: 61
    I've also used the liquid abrasive cleaner that my wife uses on our sink at home. Come on, you know the name of that stuff.
  • jscatenajscatena Posts: 61
    OK, my QX4 lease expires in 60 days. I've driven them all, the BMW, the Q45, the Lexus, and I really prefer the A6. Now the struggle is 2.7t or 4.2. I like everything about the 4.2 but I'm concerned about the comments on here about the seats and I'm a little concerned about the "stiff" sport suspension. Any comments?
  • mpyles1mpyles1 Posts: 91
    Thanks again, Timcar, for the input. I will check Audiworld. My car is a 2002 model with Sport and Premium packages, to be delivered in June. (I ordered it a couple of weeks ago, holding off until the Telematics Phone System became available so I could have a voice-activated phone integrated into the car's audio system.)

    A good friend's wife has a 2000 4.2 with Sport Package, and I've driven it a few times. It does not, however, have the sport programming for the Tiptronic that is on the 2002. (He drives a BMW 540i with sport package, which includes a higher-ratio rear axle for more punch off the line. I wish Audi had taken a page out of that book. Otherwise, though, I like the Audi better than his BMW.)

    I'll probably give up on a chip. I finally got a phone call through to Wetterauer, and it turns out there is an error on their website. Instead of boosting torque from 295 to 345, their chip only boosts torque to 313 . . . hardly worth the $795 and all the other hassles of having a non-factory-spec car. And a couple of other chip suppliers finally answered my e-mails, all saying the same thing -- minimal power increases from chipping a normally-aspirate engine.

    I was at the Audi dealer today and asked about the new RS6. The Geneva Auto Show website said the car was not coming to the U.S. But this dealer said it is coming in mid- to late-2003, at a list of about $70,000. He says they have already taken 4 orders. (This may be true. They are in Greenwich, CT and claim to be the largest Audi dealer in the U.S. That may be true, too. I have lived all over the U.S. and have never seen so many Audis on the road as I see in the NYC suburbs of southwestern Connecticut.)
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 11,259
    You're talking about new country Audi. not only are they the largest Audi dealer in the US, but they are the largest Audi dealer in the world.

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2011 Pilot EX-L 4WD, 2015 Infiniti G37x Q40 AWD

  • timcartimcar Posts: 363
    Mike, I'd probably make the same choice regarding chipping and the 4.2. If the car you drove is a 2000, your '02 will have the new sport mode, and should offer a bit better acceleration in many conditions. Audi's tend to improve as they age if they're properly broken in and maintained. Knock-on-wood, my '01 2.7T is still getting better at 18.5K than when new. Audi engines don't seem to reach their full potential until somewhere after 20K. My point is, if you break-in the 4.2 properly, it'll get faster as you drive it. I'm convinced after driving several 2.7T's at the dealer, that demo cars don't always give you the best appreciation of a models potential performance.

    Auto Week reported on the RS6 in this issue. Said it's coming, with the first production scheduled for 5/03. Which means it's probably make it here in late summer '03 as an '04 model. (This also suggests next generation A6 may not come until '05 model year.) Says around $80K. If there's enough interest, you can be sure some dealers are gonna mark it up. I've read some people already have deposits down. Since only 850 are supposed to come, you'll probably need to make a deposit soon.

    If I had Jim's dilemma, I'd probably pick a 4.2, if cost weren’t a consideration. Based on looks alone, the 4.2 has a presence that the 2.7T & 3.0 can't match. The seats are wonderful. The sport seats are great too, IF you're not really wide. I am, hence no sport package for me. Everyone I've heard from who's gotten the sport package has loved it. However, it appears from a 3.0 loaner I got that Audi firmed up both the standard and sport suspensions for '02. I'd urge you to try to get a test drive in each variant. Seat-of-the-pants is the only real test. Even the non-sport suspension is a very competent and will out handle any of the cars you've looked at accept the BMW. So, if you like the non-sport ride, and maximum handling capability isn't a major priority, get it!
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    A fellow member of the quattro club of America told me that there are a few ways to get the non-Turbo Audis to have more "grunt" -- they all involve "breathing."

    Tim is correct, the gains from chipping are minor -- spend the money on a new cat back exhaust system, a "cone" air filter, and if all that doesn't float your boat, put a supercharger on the thing.

    The one that will give you the biggest bang and not require too much underhood work is, of course, the new exhaust and air filter. My friend says perhaps 15HP, but surely 10HP, and EVERY little lb ft of torque will be noticable, so if you could add 5 lb ft, you would feel it.

    I've often wondered why Audi doesn't offer a "high performance" sport package, like BMW. My friend bought a 2001 7 series and it came with sport suspension, sport final drive ratio, sport seats, 18" wheels and tires and beefier brakes ($67,000). This was above and beyond the regular sport package.

    Audi's improve the suspension and tires and seats, but there is no lowering of the final drive or oversizing of the wheel/tires with Audi -- I wonder why? Gas milage concerns?
  • aggie76aggie76 Posts: 266
    Well, after looking at all the different near-luxury models over the last 3-4 months (3.2TL-S, I35, G35, CTS, 300M, Passat, 9-5 Arc & Aero, C240, C320, ES300, IS300, GS300(current ride), X-type, 325i, 525i, Avalon, V60AWD) I am back at Audi A6 due to space, ride, and style.

    Now have to decide between the CVT FWD versus the quattro and could use some advice from both sides of the fence on the board. I know very well the value of the quattro system but I am more of the luxury driver than the enthusiast driver these days, well beyond my youth to say it nicely.

    Anyone gone between the two and missed or didn't miss the other??? I live in Austin, TX for now so winter driving isn't priority yet although company does move us around and Chicago isn't out of the question. Salesman said that unless I am in heavy rain/snow or blizzard conditions or really push it on curves, etc. I wouldn't really need the quattro system unless I just wanted to have it. CVT seemed quicker and quieter but maybe just think I am feeling the press clippings on it.

    I'm going to take both the CVT and quattro for long term test drives next so any ideas on what to really focus on between the two would be great.

    Any and all comments are welcome.
  • timcartimcar Posts: 363
    Welcome back, Bob! Near luxury!?!? Don't tell that to my 2.7T, it thinks it's a luxury car. CR thinks it's both, since they classified it as each in different parts of the same publication.

    Seriously though, I think you've got the right idea concerning a long-term test in each. I used to think that quattro was mainly about snow, but having driven with it for about 14 months, I know it improves traction and handling in many different conditions. But in fairness, I'd lived with FWD and RWD for 30+ years, without great problems. A case of not knowing what you're missing until you've had it.

    A more significant issue might be the ride in the FWD A6. The A4 FWD converted to IRS in '02, but I think this generation of the FWD A6 is keeping the solid rear axle. Some people have complained about its ride. You'll have a chance to see for yourself. And just so you know, production on the '02 models has ceased, and the '03's should be in the showrooms in 3 or 4 months.

    Whatever you do, DON'T test drive a 2.7T or 4.2! When the 2.7T was introduced, I stopped at a local dealer just to look at it. The sneaky saleswoman said, "How'd you like a test drive?" Now wasn't that an awful thing to do? I sweated out the remaining 10 months on my previous lease until I could get my hands on one. And I expect we're of similar vintages.
  • aggie76aggie76 Posts: 266
    Luckily, or unluckily, my company car allowance is stretched to get a 3.0 with the options I want since I end up with some $$$ out of my pocket as it is. Great advice, I will check the axle issue for sure.
  • aggie76aggie76 Posts: 266
    Just glanced at A6 specs and it says it has four wheel independent suspension for 2002. Well, the test drive will tell. Appreciate the thoughts on all driving conditions the quattro being useful. Time & driving will tell next week. If its the quattro maybe I can collect some cans & bottles or break into the kid's piggy banks for the extra $1,800 it'll cost. My son, only 11, loves the new VW Bug Turbo S so maybe will loan my some for it's cousin the A6.
Sign In or Register to comment.