Audi A6

bertram60 · April 2002

http://autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat_code=carnews&loc_code=&content_code=09225827

mpyles1 · April 2002

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.

laysmackdown · April 2002

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....

timcar · April 2002

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:

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

merc1 · April 2002

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..

M

kirby2010 · April 2002

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.

mpyles1 · April 2002

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.

hoos1 · April 2002

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

timcar · April 2002

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.

timcar · April 2002

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.

jscatena · April 2002

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.

jscatena · April 2002

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?

mpyles1 · April 2002

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.)

nyccarguy · April 2002

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.

timcar · April 2002

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!

markcincinnati · April 2002

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?

aggie76 · April 2002

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.

timcar · April 2002

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.

aggie76 · April 2002

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.

aggie76 · April 2002

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.

timcar · April 2002

Glad some of my opinions might have been useful, Bob. Just checked the AoA site, and it said that FWD still uses the whatever they call their solid rear axle. The 3.0 quattro gets an independent rear.

http://www.audiusa.com/features_specifications1

But who knows, it's been wrong before. Anyway, after driving each for a while, you'll know what's important anyway.

It should be fun. Good luck!

aggie76 · April 2002

Thanks for checking on AoA site and you are correct. Wonder why Edmunds site is wrong. Oh well, that will be something to actually look at when I drive.

markcincinnati · April 2002

The quattro versions of Audi's cars have always, I think, had rear ind suspension -- the 2001 A4 fwd's were the last of the A4 line to go with a solid rear axle. All the A6's quattros of course have f+r ind suspension -- and it is my "guess" that the next generation A6 will go to that configurtion on both FWD and quattro versions.

With respect to quattro, for the suspension differences plus the quattro advantage, if at all possible go with the quattro.

Tim, I read your comment about how you got along without all wheel drive for years -- I catch myself saying this from time to time; but; at age 51 the cars I grew up with didn't always have seat belts, dual braking systems, airbags, ABS brakes, ESP with brake assist (I don't have the brake assist on my ESP) four wheel disc brakes, etc etc. Yet, I will "never" go back to cars without these and other features that facilitate safety, performance and fun. I suspect you feel the same way.

On other topics:

My dealer has been having a heck of time getting '03 product information out of Audi of America.

This is strange since the May issues of all the prominent car magazines have test reports and previews of competing cars. Nary a hint about the configurations that will be available for the Audi family. I did get the Audi Telematics brochure and I will have that on my next Audi!

He told me that Audi is working on the telematics option for the '03 TT, but that the combination portable and in-car phone is available today for the '02 TT's.

No one seems to know if there will be any A6's (including the allroad and S6 Avant or S6 Sedan) with manual transmissions or if there will be any changes under the hood -- also I noted that the quattro quarterly claims the RS6 is coming in 2003 (spring?) yet Car and Driver, Automobile and Road & Track have wiggle room in their announcements saying things like, AoA hopes to see the first of the 860 US bound RS6's in late 2002.

I did find that AoA now offers the allroad, if you ask, in more colors and with a "full paint option" -- the cost at msrp is $1,700 and Audi Telematics is $1,200.

This (the lack of 2003 information) is so odd as I got the order guide for my current 2001 A6 4.2 in March of 2000 -- which is about when I ordered my car (it was delivered in December of 2000). The car took over 8 months to come in since I ordered, sight unseen, Nemo Blue, which was delayed in the US. Normal order times are 10 - 20 weeks in my experience. Anyway, my dealer as of April 5th does not have the order guides for the '03's yet -- as I said, odd, since the last order for a 2002 (to be built in Germany, ie not already in the AoA system somewhere) is mid-May. The factory apparently shuts down (in late June) for some engineering changes and then in week 26 or 27 starts cranking out '03's.

Anyway this apparent secrecy is a new phenomena.

postnobills · April 2002

I am trying to decide between a new BMW530 vs A6 2.7T. I prefer the handling (on dry roads at least) the the BMW, but really like the inside of the A6 a lot better. One of the things that seems disappointing however, is the BOSE system. The radio sounds fine, but I can't say the same for CD performace. On a test drive today I brought along one of my favorite CDs (the new Telarc CD of Tchaikovsky's 1812 overture and other music by the master ... tracks 3 and 4 are particular excellent for auditioning sound systems, btw) and popped it in for a listen. I had to really crank up the volume - almost to max level (30) to get a full orchestral sound. With it turned up that high there was a very noticeable amount of hiss and other objectionable background noise. This is not a problem with the CD, which sounds absolutely stunning at home and in my current car (Volvo s80).
Do others find the Bose system as lacking as I did, or is it possible the car I test drove was an isolated problem?

theremin · April 2002

I'm with you all the way. I have a '99 A6 quattro (lease is up in Oct.) and one of my prerequisites for getting the car was that I had to be able to put in a different sound system. I'm an audiophile and as far as I'm concerned Bose car audio systems suck! It always sounds to me like there's a layer of mud between the speakers and my ears. At first I was told by several car audio places (and even one Audi dealer) that it was impossible to replace and rewire the sound system etc, but just before I was about to give up on getting the car I found a place that did an expert job of installing a killer sound system--and you would never know by looking that anything was different. And when the lease is up, they'll put the old stuff back in. If you really want an A6 (it's a great car) AND you require superior sound--fear not, it can be done! You need not be stuck with (ugh) Bose.

theremin · April 2002

I came real close to getting a Volvo S80 last time around--in part because of the quality of the sound system. But I really like the A6 (esp the interior as you mentioned) and am ecstatic with the sound system that was installed. I'm in the LA area--if you happen to be, I can give you the name of the car audio place that did the job.

morphie · April 2002

I have not posted a message for several weeks; I have been reading the posts, however. I must admit, the usual dialogue of German vs. Japanese, and Quality vs. Feel no longer stirs my interest ( I went through that with Triumph motorcycles and Alfa's). On the other hand, sound systems and classical music.... there is something worth talking about.

I have been an "audiophile"/Hi-fi hobbyist for some years. It is a very subjective field (just read Stereophile or Absolute Sound: if you think car nuts are arrogant and opinionated, read one issue.) Having built some of my own equipment, and had both custom car and home systems, I may have some perspective.

The Bose system is probably a "6" on a ten point scale. Its frequency response, dynamic range and distortion levels surpass the average home system (that is not saying much). As to a subjective analysis, I will not go near that one (see: 6 out of10, above). However, the problems you are experiencing, with the "1812" are an anomaly even for the Bose/Audi. I suggest that you try both another CD and a different Audi. There is no way that you should have to exceed 16-20, for a volume setting. Unless, of course, you are desirous of destroying the anatomical structure of the inner ear.

The best "stock" system I have heard is the Mark Levison/Lexus. It is truly an "8". If, however, you wish to enter the rarefied atmosphere of the "9+", custom is your only alternative. I have have seen friends spend more on a car sound system, than on the vehicle itself. I am not kidding. These are not Saturns or Hyundai's; we are talking about "S" Mercedes and A8's. Sometimes the results are spectacular; occasionally, disappointing.

In any event, your problems with the Bose system appears to be an anomaly. Clearly, it is not "high end"; however, I would test it, again. If you buy the Audi, live with it for several months before customizing (if that is your intention), then deal with someone who knows what he/she is doing.

postnobills · April 2002

Michael - I live on the east coast, so your dealer can't help me. Would like to know brand of equipment you installed so I can look for it here. And be glad you didn't get the S80 back in 1999. That's when I got mine, and while in many ways it is the best car I have owned, it has also been the biggest disappointment I've owned since my 1978 Plymouth Horizon (which was the first car I ever bought and a real piece of s***). The Volvo has had unending electrical problems, numerous recalls, a blown turbo and earlier this year I had to replace the transmission. The warranty expires in a couple of months and I have vowed NOT to own the car by then. But the sound system is first-rate!
Morphie - funny you should mention the ML system on the LExus. I test drove the new ES-300 a few weeks ago. Although the interior is quite nice and the ML system is the best I've heard in any car so far, the vehicle just seems to lack any real performance spirit. I find myself in a real dilema -- I spend perhaps 400-500 hours/year in my car, so I want a top-notch entertainment system, but I want it in a car that is at least somewhat performance-oriented and exciting to drive. (And yeah, it's got to have a back seat - I've got kids!) Is there no car under $50K that can fit this bill?? Hard to believe, but I'm still looking!

theremin · April 2002

I've heard of similar problems with the Volvo S80, and I must say my A6 has been mostly problem free (any problems I had were minor, and were always taken care of by the dealer free of charge--it's been a great car). The other car that I seriously considered was the Saab 9-5--I found it really fun to drive, and I found it's stock sound system to be one of the best I've heard...not as good as the Mark Levinson perhaps, but right up there with the Volvo and MUCH superior to the Bose. Here's what I had put into the Audi:

--an Eclipse single CD in-dash head unit which fits perfectly behind the now lamentably discontinued open & close wood panel
--An Alpine MRV F353 amp and subwoofer driver mounted onto the left side of the trunk (very unobtrusive)
--2 JL Audio subwoofers mounted onto the top of the trunk, just behind the back seats. They do cut down a little on the usable trunk space, but not too badly...I can still fit lots of things in there.
--I replaced the front door speakers only with MB Quart PSC 216's. (I left the back door stock speakers in)

I am overjoyed with the way this system sounds--crystal clear and even if you turn it up to ear shattering levels...no distortion. I can't remember the exact cost, but it was actually fairly reasonable--around 3K I believe. Good luck, I'll be interested to see what you decide to do.

mpyles1 · April 2002

Re the Bose sound system . . . I've never heard a good one. I had a Bose in a 1998 Corvette, and it's high range was very muted. I have read in stereo magazines that Dr. Bose holds the view that high frequencies are tiring over extended periods and therefore attentuates high-frequency output. When I switched to a 2000 Jaguar S-Type with premium sound system, it was a HUGE improvement . . . much clearer high end, far better dynamic range, etc. (I, too, took my own CD's when I test drove the Audi. And I, too, had to crank the volume way up to even approximate the dynamic range of the Jaguar. And, in keeping with other Bose systems, the midrange overpowered the high end. Let's face it . . . Bose made it's name by marketing to teenagers and college students who confused muddy, boomy base and punchy vocals with a "killer system." And they're still at it.) Just before I ordered my new A6, I actually put a deposit down on a Lexus 430, simply to get the Mark Levinson system. (I commute almost an hour each day and my car, unfortunately, is where I do most of my music listening these days.) In the final analysis, though, I just couldn't deal with the lack of sportiness of the Lexus. If I find I cannot abide the Bose system, I may go aftermarket.

Re Telematics phone system . . . if anyone can get any reliabe data on it, please let me know. My June-delivery car has the option (although it cost me $699, not the $1200 mentioned in an earlier message). The dealer told me that the system used Motorola's new V60 phone, which I could purchase either from Motorola or through Audi. When I dropped my a Motorola store to buy one, the salesman told me that I should get the Audi unit, because the Motorola unit was not compatible. So I called Audi of America's service line. They told me that the phone came with the Telematics option. I checked back with the dealer, who assured me the phone would have to be purchased separately. But they insisted the factory rep had told them the new Audi phone and the Motorola V60 were interchangeable. (However, when I examined the V60 in the phone store, I did not see any contact pins or any other way that the phone would pick up external electrical signals.) I've just decided to do nothing until the car arrives and I can see for myself what I need.

aggie76 · April 2002

I am in final process of buying my '02 A6 and also enjoy my music. Anyone replaced audio system in the '02 A6? If so, what did you find to fit?

nosho · April 2002

Must admit that I find the bose system dissatisfying. Muddy is a good description. I'm curious if the main culprit is the speakers or the amp or the headend unit?

Installing the trunk CD changer yourself, from a post on January 9, 2001 by rwish:

The one at Clair.com (a Panasonic), and two at autotoys.com all work fine. For a third option, www.panasonic.com also sells the same one as Clair. In case that was slightly confusing, here's the cliff note version:
Clair.com - Panasonic 6 changer - $299
Panasonic.com - Panasonic 6 changer - $279
Autotoys.com - OEMAUDI8 8 disk changer - $195
autotoys.com - OEMAUDI6 6 disk changer - $233

The two at autosys.com are also Panasonic changers. The most important thing is that they are compatible and in fact the part description says:
"AUDI 1998-2001+ COMPATIBLE CHANGER OEM TYPE II"

nosho · April 2002

The quattro will have better balance (front/rear weight distribution) so better cornering but is 200 lbs more weight so less gas mileage (17/25) than the CVT (19/25). The CVT is faster off the line, not just less weight but no torque converter so same acceleration as a manual transmission and same fuel economy.

The FWD Audi's have 2 cubic feet additional trunk space if that's a factor.

Ultimately the test drive is the deciding factor....

timcar · April 2002

I'm not an audiophile, but enjoy jazz very much, particularly while driving. The Bose in my 2.7T was a disappointment and seemed inferior to that in my prior '97 ES300, which in turn, was significantly inferior to the Bose in my '92 Legend.

My understanding is that the use of the name Bose in a stereo system entails varying degrees of involvement, from simply engineering, to providing actual components. I've read that in the A6, they provide the speakers and amps, and that Panasonic manufactures the head unit. I'm not sure what has changed for '02, but the head unit is obviously different, and I've read negative comments about in comparison.

I have no desire for the audio in my auto to be perfect, but only that it allow me to pleasurably listen to the jazz artists I enjoy. I too noticed that the fidelity seemed to improve as the volume increased. Since I don't like listening to excessively loud music that wasn't helpful. The sound system seemed to rob most soft vocals of their resonance. An ideal example would be Sarah Vaughn's recordings. If anyone is familiar with this vocalist, she had a marvelous instrument. Her voice was resonant, full of harmonics and she had a 3-octave range. The problem seemed to be that the system magnified the louder notes, and curtailed the softer ones, thereby robbing her voice of resonance and making it sound flat. This Bose system was marketed as having a very "Clean" sound. Perhaps this effect was intended to get a more abrupt cessation of sound to achieve that.

Pre-model year '02 cars with the Symphony Sound System have some hidden features. I don't believe the new sound system does. One of these features is an 8-band graphic equalizer. The default setting for each band is 5. I accessed this feature and set it up as "67766776" This has substantially improved the fidelity of the type of recordings to which I listen. The vocals now sound much better with more of the fullness and richness that I obtain from other systems. I've had the chance to listen to Stacey Kent, a favorite contemporary singer, live. Using that live performance as a baseline, I'd say that my adjusted system is about 90% satisfactory.

If you have a pre-'02 Symphony system, you may want to experiment. This is a site in which someone kindly provided instructions for the hidden features:

http://e-audi.tripod.com/eaudinewsarticles/synfhead1.htm

aggie76 · April 2002

Well, today may have made my decision for me here in Texas. Rainy weather and took family to church and brunch in MDX with AWD. Had to do some evasive manuevers due to idiot Texas driver demonstrating how to lose control in wet weather and felt the AWD really grab hold as I evaded him and save what could have been real disaster with family in the car. My thoughts are that it may have turned out differently in a FWD CVT only so I may have just answered my question without even a test drive.

Audio question -- is the standard system a Bose, I thought it was just the upgrade that was Bose.

markcincinnati · April 2002

After what I thought was a completely objective (ha!) series of visits to European car dealers all involving test drives,my friend had pretty much decided on an Audi. A few weeks later when I next saw him he said come see my new car -- another Audi convert I thought to myself.

Lo and behold a new metallic black BMW (330, I think -- RWD).

The car is very nice -- but I thought for the money he could've had an A4 3.0, and when he told me his lease payments, I know he was in A6 2.7T range (within $10-15 per month on a 39 month lease -- and come to think of it the 2.7T was LESS money per month).

Anyway, I said "why?" -- or "at least why not get the 330xi?"

He said, "listen to this!" He proceeded to push a little button on his console that had a treble cleff graphic on it -- the sound inside the car had much more "presence" certainly more bass without the coloration of some cheap sub-woofers. "I bought it for the sound system." Now, I have not researched this, but I am 99% certain he told me the sound system was a BMW system and that it was (don't ask me if I am on drugs) list price $2400! Two things, now I know why the A6 2.7T would have leased for less for sure and shame on Audi for not offering another "step up audio system."

Most of the folks I know, erase that, ALL of the folks I know who have the Audi's, BMW's, Mercedes, Jaguars, Lexus and other "high end" luxury sporting cars have very nice home theaters -- most of them do not have receivers, they have full out separates with names like Theta, Proceed, Thiel, Mirage, Velodyne and Runco. Talk about early adopters, most of them have rooms in their houses that better most theaters. One guy built his basement to look like an English castle, complete with a suit of armor (his house has been showcased by Runco for the past 3 or 4 months in all of their print advertising in all of the Home Theater magazines.)

My point is this -- the expectations (with respect to audio systems) of people buying cars that at a minimum start in the mid $30,000 range to over double that amount are very high. And, with my friend as an example, could actually sway customer's buying decisions.

When I got my first A6 4.2 in 1999 (a 2000 model) I really thought the Bose system was a great improvement over my 1997 A8's sound system (it was). But I went from perhaps a 5 to a 6 (on the 10 point scale mentioned above). My 2001 A6 Bose system is "OK." It does not match the rest of the car -- and neither does the sat nav, but that's another story.

I would say that the optional Bose system would be a very good and appropriate "standard" system across the Audi line. At least one additional optional sound system needs to be made available.

Another friend of mine who works at a high end home theater store here in River City (and he has an A4 quattro) shared this phrase with me "no highs, no lows, must be Bose." Has a nice ring to it, eh?

For the life of me, I can't figure out why AoA or Audi AG doesn't want my money -- I have to go aftermarket for things and it is frustrating.

Why not offer more wheel options, more color and interior options, more audio options, a step up (good, better, best) sat nav -- heck, the list of things we would probably plunk down our money for is probably eye popping. Tire pressure monitor? Rain sensing wipers? Sure why not.

I rented a Buick LeSabre to drive from Boston to Providence RI -- it had tire pressure monitoring and a compass in the mirror. On the allroad and the A8 you can have both of these "features" -- for a price (a price that I would pay -- and many others would pay too). In 1997 I rented a Mercedes in Munich and the darn thing had "magic" windshield wipers -- 1997! C'mon Audi, take my money -- please.

Audi withdrew the Pearl White Paint for a time -- it is now a $1,200 option -- my dealer says he keeps at least one in stock all the time becuase even if they don't want the one he has on the lot, it increases the number that are ordered.

The allroad can be had in pearl black -- for a fee, if I get one of these allroads, I will probably pay for the pearl black. Once the car reaches over $40,000, an odd $500 - $1,500 here and there do not change my buying decisions, and I suspect most of us on this board would love the OPTION of chosing a better sound system, glitzy-er wheels, ultra high performance all season tires or alcantara seat inserts, etc etc.

=====

I have the official Audi On*star brochure -- which contains information about the system, the various subscriber packages and the Audi combination in-car and portable phone. I checked yesterday and the dealer said On*star was $1,200 (he said that included the phone -- but that the phone was dealer installed -- BTW I told him that is what I wanted, so perhaps he just quoted me the price with the phone.)

If you have a specific quesiton pertaining to the On*star brochure, I will be happy to respond to your post(s). Of course, the brochure does not mention price, but it is quite detailed.

One thing it says is that all 2002 Audis except the TT have the On*star system available, but that the Audi in-car/removable phone is offered for 2002 TT's.

=====

Again, Audi, take my money, please -- end of rant.

mpyles1 · April 2002

I, too, would like to know whether the Audi Bose system attenuates the high frequencies in the electronics or in the speaker design, or both. (In Bose's early days, he made only full-range drivers that were inherently treble-limited.) If in the speaker design, one easy way to improve the sound might be to change out the speakers. A few years ago, I had a Mazda pick-up with a decent head unit but distinctly subpar speakers. I dropped a set of Polk speakers in, and the sound improved considerably . . . saved me from having to scrap the whole system. In almost any audio system, the biggest per-dollar improvements usually come from speaker upgrades. Any info out there on where in the Audi system the treble attenuation is handled? Thanks all.

timcar · April 2002

Just a guess that it's in the amps. People, who are knowledgeable and have researched this, said having the Bose option prevented the installation of an aftermarket sound system. From an earlier post, that should obviously be amended to creates difficulty in the installation of an aftermarket sound system. This suggests a degree of integration that might preclude just dropping in some speakers.

mpyles1 · April 2002

You're probably right, Timcar. I found a report on Audiworld about someone's attempts to change the amp in a 2000 A4 with the Bose system. He said the equalization was in the amp, not the speakers. Once he got the amp changed, he encountered a string of problems. The worst was that the rear speakers, by design, had been wired out of phase with the front speakers in order to affect the sound stage. Long story short . . . the Bose system was completely integrated and could not be piece-mealed to improvement. So he tore the whole system out and started from scratch. My guess is a newer A6 would play out pretty much the same way.

jdbtensai · April 2002

lol!
i got nothing against a good sound system. but,... well, i actually don't know what else to say.

mariobgoode · April 2002

I'm an audiophile, but not a perfectionist. I like my A6 with the standard Bose just fine. The pleasure of driving such a wonderful car sold me, and the Bose system is not so bad. Would I have opted for an update if it were available? If the price was reasonable ($ 500 to $ 1,500), maybe. Otherwise, I'm fine. Get whatever works for you, and enjoy the ride.

gearman · April 2002

Sorry for the long delay; I've been traveling a bit.

The little data i've picked up on the comparative reliability of these two specific cars is thin and somewhat anecdotal. However, a couple of observations are possible.

In general, Honda's products have a better maintenance / reliability reputation than those of VW, and the VW 'parts bin' character of the TT suggests that the reliability history of other VW products using the same mechanical components is probably transferable to the TT. As noted on this and other threads, VW's products generally don't have as high an assembly quality (as opposed to component quality) reputation as that some of the Japanese and selected domestic marques.

There are a couple of other points to consider, however:

1) Many of the TT body structure / interior components are TT specific. The body structure should carry forward the usual bulletproof VW reputation (except for panel rust and paint problems in some beach areas), In the same vein, the interior components that vW installs in the Audi brand products are typcially of the highest order of quality. Check out some of the small detailing, such as the wonderful roller-cam door positioners (rather than the cheapo / squeaking / creaking sliding bar design used by many manufacturers). I suspect that the TT specific interior stuff should also be very good.

2) The S2000 is not a mass-produced Honda product. Many aspects of the vehicle are hand-assembled, the vehicle is highly biased towards lightness v. component size, and the engine in tuned in classic Japanese racing bike 'artillery shell' fashion. Tiny torque numbers down low, with an explosion of power at really high revs. The other honda car that is somewhat hand built is the NSX, and I've picked up general comments that the engine / drive train are very reliable, but the body structure, interior, and suspension bits are on the fragile side, thus requiring regular (and sometimes very expensive) attention.

Like the VW / Audi products, I've noted that the S2000 and other Honda/Acura products are somewhat more subject to beach area body panel corrosion in my area that some other brands. Honda's paint seems to particularly suffer in this regard,

Conclusion: comparative reliablity is probably not going to be as big a factor in selecting between these two cars as is their vastly different character.

The front wheel drive TT is a front weight biased touring coupe with all of the directional stability advantages of that configuration (but with some high speed aerodynamic stability problems, due to the TT's wing-like shape). It's not a 'sports car' in the traditional sense.

The awd quattro versions of the TT use the slippery road acceleration traction advantages of awd to partially overcome the TT's basic dynamic characteristics.

The S2000, on the other hand, is an entirely different kettle of fish: lightweight everything, zero storage space, etc, it's a fun low polar moment of interia go-kart for flinging down Mulholland drive on a sunny Saturday morning with the revs up there in motorcycle-land. It's completely entertaining in that context; it's clearly not an all-weather touring car.

The basis laws of physics and the S2000's very crushable structure clearly show that it's not the car of choice for safely commuting in dense urban traffic populated by distracted lawyers on cell phones wandering down the road in tall heavy cars such as Lincoln Navigators, Escalades, or BMW x5s. Miata, Boxster, and SLK drivers of my acquaintance are regular sources of commuting fright stories on this topic.

Two good cars designed for two very different purposes.

Let us know which one you chose.

markcincinnati · April 2002

aggie76 · April 2002

I'm confused on this point. Is the Symphony II system a Bose since it is the standard system in base A6 or is the Symphony made by someone else?

timcar · April 2002

Symphony is simply an Audi marketing name for it's sound system. There used to be two, Concert and Symphony, with Symphony being an upgrade. They may have employed different head units. The Concert was discontinued. The Bose system was a Symphony type system that was a premium extra cost option. It contained Bose speakers and amps, and was engineered by Bose. I'm not familiar with the nomenclature, Symphony II, but think it may be for the '02 model's system.

I too enjoyed Dan's comparison of the TT vs. S2000. One thing that Dan alluded to that I've read in other reports on the S2000 is that it is apparently pretty unforgiving in it's handling characteristics. If true, this would be a major difference between the TT and S2000. Everything I've read suggests that the TT in both FWD and AWD is fun, but fairly idiot proof. I've read reports of S2000 drivers losing it big time when they tried to push their cars beyond its limits without the necessary skills. Doesn't sound like the kind of car for someone who doesn't have, or want to take the time to learn to exploit its limits.

mariobgoode · April 2002

Symphony II is standard on all A6 sedans, according to the Audiusa website. When the radio is turned on, the word "Bose" is displayed first and then the frequency or station call letters are displayed. I don't know who makes it. It's not that important to me. The sound I get is decent; as I said before, I am not a purist. It was nice to have, but I wouldn't let the quality of the audio decide my choice of a car. If it were not good enough for me for any reason, I'll just get an aftermarket that suits my taste. No big deal - I'll spend what I want to spend. Others may disagree or have a different opinion. But that's me: simple life, simple tastes, simple joys, easy to please. I try not to make life too complicated. Life is too short. Aggravation can cause stress, which oftentimes lead to poor health. Life should be enjoyed rather than endured. Cest la vie. Mario

P.S. My opinion could be influenced by the fact that I don't spend too much time in the car - I use the subway daily. Perhaps the longest I ride is about 5 hours straight, every two weeks. I'm going on an extended trip in the next few days, running about 2,000 miles in 4 days. I'll post my experience when I get back, if we're still on the subject. BTW, I did hear that Lexus' Mark Levinson is the best audio system available, but I'm no expert.

mpyles1 · April 2002

The Mark Levinson sound system in the Lexus is everything it's cracked up to be. I test drove an LS 430 and test played several discs, from country (The Derailers) to classical (Jessye Norman singing Strauss' "Four Last Songs".) The sound was stunning on every point: soundstage, vocal timbre, bass, dynamic range. Norman hit several high notes at full power that I have heard strain some home systems -- nary a hiccup from the Lexus system. The good news was that when I got back in my Jaguar with its "premium" factory system, it still didn't sound too bad. The bad news was that I took the same CD's straight to the Audi dealer and listened to the Bose system. Not terrible, but very reminiscent of the way vocals sounded years ago through the old horn speakers -- lots of volume and punch, but not much accuracy.

Mario's point about not getting too wrapped up in the wrong things in life is well taken. And I'm sorry my life relegates most of my serious music listening to a long daily car commute. But it does and, when crossing north of $50K to buy a car, one's tolerance for trade-offs begins legitimately to recede.

markcincinnati · April 2002

For me, once I cross over $35K for a car, I have certain expectations that frankly I just don't have in a lower priced car. My quality expectations -- materials and fit and finish don't change, it is just my expectations of "content." My $54,000+ A6 4.2 does not have a sound system or sat nav system appropriate (or commensurate) with the rest of the car. It is not that I think the systems I just mentioned are made of shabby materials -- the quality of the parts is, I am certain, very high. The content -- which in this case means (to me) design and function -- is lower than a car costing this much should have. Perhaps having my Bose system and my sat nav lite declared "standard" might (might) make me happier, assuming I was given the chance to upgrade.

While I can appreciate the sentiments of those who claim they are not audiophiles (to each his/her own, I say) -- I hope that these non audiophiles also have an appreciation that some people (like my friend who bought the BMW over the Audi "because of the stereo") want high end sound or different leathers or alcantara or different (read -- more expensive) extras.

The market has changed so much since I got my first A6 4.2 -- yet even using the 2002's as an example, the market (in certain areas, sound systems, sat nav, interior combinations and permutations, etc.) has seemingly passed Audi by. Blasphemy you say -- you may also say, you thought I was a huge Audi fan or bigot -- all true, all true; but, I just hate to see Audi lose customers -- especially when there are willing prospects who, for the lack of a better, more expensive option program, buy other brands.

blehrlich · April 2002

Having just traded my A6 4.2 for a Lexus LS430, I agree with Mark (I traded due to the need for a cushy ride, but I do miss the sportiness) regarding content. The MSRP of the Lexus, at $61k, is higher than that of the Audi, but not by that much, especially if leasing. The "content" of the Lexus is far superior, at least with the upgraded Nav system and Mark Levinson Stereo.
I COULD have chosen to go without the upgrades....the point being that I had a choice. My guess is that, in the future, Audi will have to offer more quality options.

nyccarguy · April 2002

Interesting to see you traded in your A6 4.2 for a Lexus. You say you had a need for a cushy ride, but miss the sportiness...any regrets? Care to elaborate on your comment? Im just curious.

Audi A6

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles