Howdy, Stranger!

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

Audi A6



  • bobcatmanbobcatman Posts: 51
    Man, almost fell asleep reading that. Joking aside, I know your passionate about Audi but I know that they have alot of work to do to get my business aside from purdy interiors. I've read your past posts on the VW boards and people bitching about their nearly new VW or Audis having problems like this morning on the Passat board. You've stated that you would never keep them past warranty which kinda validates my impression to begin with. You can harp on Honda, but Honda still builds a better product then most VW's and is defintely held in higher regard than VW. When Honda can give an 800lb gorilla like Toyota a headache you know they've got it.

    Now, CR never states that Japan manuf. kickin the Germans butt only points out their comprehensive survey of 600,000 plus owners and results of testing. You can easily draw what you want from this, but any intelligent person can see the big delta of difference between the two.

    The reason I'm tough on the Germans is one, they have a mature auto industry and should know how to build it right the first time and not have problems years later reoccuring with the same model. Secondly, they cost more that comparable Japan brands and domestics and have these issues(gotta love that socialism).
    Thirdly, either their super stubborn or living in serious denial like when Lexus was released of problems sweeping low-end VW to high-end Benzes and not jumping on it right away like the Japanese do.
    That their being challenged from all angles by the Japanese is not a surprise to anyone in the know.

    I'm also an equal opportunity basher, as in Lexus could use alot more passion in their products too. The LS430 is one hellva car but I feel it's so well made that they've engineered any passion out of it, but it has a ton of followers. This is the last of me since I sense strong topic drift from the title..
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    . . .thus far my mode of car ownership has been and will TFN continue to be -- never to keep any car from any manufacturer beyond the warranty.

    In part, that is becuase a new car every other model year (sometimes sooner sometimes later) keeps me up with the technology.

    The only reason both my wife and I traded in our 2000 Audis on 2001 Audis (that were virtually identical) was to get ESP. This feature became compelling after our third visit to the Audi driving school in Seefeld, Austria and our 5th plant tour in Ingolstadt, Germany -- we made similar moves trading in late 1980's model Audis for slightly newer ones in order to get cars with ABS.

    We "justified" such trades on safety -- perhaps "rationalized" is a better word.

    I think CARS -- all CARS -- are "breathtakingly expensive" to have fixed (or maintained, for that matter) out of the warranty period. But I have direct first hand experience with German cars -- my 1988 BMW 325ix had $100 oil changes, no matter what I did my Bimmer was a money pit.

    But, I guess I would consider it reliable, since nothing broke on it -- but it sure needed lots of expensive "routine" maintenance.

    I tend to agree with the prior posting about the CR reporting methodology, etc.

    Again, I say, the Germans kick butt -- in the driving department.
  • aggie76aggie76 Posts: 266
    Markcincinnati - would you share whether you purchase or lease since you never keep past warranty?
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    Of the cars since 1977 we have had, we leased the majority of them -- longest term, as I recall, 36 months, shortest 12 months (I leased a 1999 A6 for 12 months when I was coming upon 50,000 miles on my 1997 A8 while I was waiting for my 2000 A6 4.2 to arrive).

    My last Audi I leased for 30 months, the current one 36 months since I was "preplanning" the next model acquisition and wasn't enitrely sure if it would be in calendar 2004 or 2005. My wife's last TT was also a 30 month lease and her first one was a 24 month lease since the dealer told us that we could lease a 1.8T 180HP TT quattro (MY 2000) and trade into a 2002 1.8T 225HP TT quattro. When the 2001 TT had 225HP, the modified suspension, spoiler and ESP all standard, he "forgave" the lease and we moved from the '00 TT to the '01 TT painlessly.

    We never put money down, no sec dep and the last few times, not even the first month's payment (various Audi Loyalty Programs always seem to kick in just when you need them).

    My first real business boss out of grad school, a CPA, told me "buy what appreciates, rent or lease what depreciates." At the time, I was renting an apartment and making car payments. I quickly reversed this and now lease cars and own real estate. Zero percent financing, if it is still around and available on my next new Audi (A6 or S4) MAY make me reconsider this, but I kinda doubt it -- I just don't keep em long enough for this to make sense.

    Cars, to me, have short shelf lives technologically speaking. I "need" a technology refresh about every 30 months or so (sometimes sooner rarely longer).

    Hope that helps. . . .

    P.S. even the "owned outright" 1987 5000 CS turbo quattro, I only kept 'til end of warranty (~ 49,999 miles).

    P.P.S. I am into month 19 of a 36 month lease, currently. This translates into a new car order probably by next March or April depending on the cut off date for the 2006's -- since my dealer has shared with me that there will be a 2005.5 A4 series and that the 2006's will begin production (as far as we're concerned in the US) in month 6 -- which may translate to an order date for an '06 as late as May 2005 or as early as March 2005.

    With rare exceptions -- the used '87 and the 12 month lease on the 1999, my wife and I always order our cars about 5 months ahead of the time we plan to take delivery. I can't remember the last car we "bought off the lot" -- and, frankly, wish they would quit this practice altogether since it seems to force people to buy what is on the lot rather than EXACTLY what they want.
  • aggie76aggie76 Posts: 266
    Thanks, that does help a lot. I have debated this even though I tend to turn cars at the 3 year point - wanting new technology and getting antsy about new cars. Have mostly bought due to something about ownership vs "renting" from my parents. Have one vehicle now we bought - 7 yrs on it and the other is coming up on end of 3 yr balloon lease in August if that makes sense. Most likely will lease two new ones before the end of summer.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 11,042
    A reporter is hoping to interview a recent car-buyer who participated in an overnight or 24-hour test drive and then purchased the vehicle. Please respond to 248-890-8582, or by 5pm Eastern Wednesday, March 24, 2004. Thanks, Jeannine Fallon PR Director


    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • I am on my first Audi - A6 - 15K miles - love it, other than the one oil change, it is perfect!. Have had in order: BMW 528 (fussy but FUN), Volvo (zzzzz), Acura Legend (1st yr - very reliable, fun, all around nice car), Infinity I30t (Maxima in disguise - reliable and fun) and now my A6. Wife has a newer Acura as well (it is clunky and heavy I think). When I looked at my A6 I weighed lots of noise about reliability against a very very fun driving experience in the A6 vs. reliability and OK fun in the Acura and Infinity and Lexus (though the G35 is pretty cool). My rationale for the A6 was ... (women close your ears) ... sort of like a really hot 'high-maintenance lady' vs a very reliable solid citizen woman. I figured keep the A6 until Audi won't fix it anymore for free then toss it. I am very satisfied - note .. all those other cars I had all had their share of 'issues' to work out, lets just say I met the dealer mechanics a few times in each case.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Good post. I tried to suggest that different owners and people expect different things from brand xyz, but that notion isn't easily explained or accepted.

  • bretaabretaa Posts: 130
    You're quite correct, in part because that notion is so hard to objectively prove. I read a book several years ago on the design of the late 90's Taurus. They mentioned that Ford's internal teardown teams were shocked at the number of defects and increased cost they saw built into the new Camry and Accord of the time. The defects were so much more numerous than what CR and J.D. Power were reporting that they bought additional models to do more teardowns and found the same thing. The only thing they could conclude was that people were reporting less than reality due to their perception of the brand. Their own internal studies and teardowns of their own models showed people were reporting more than what was there. Since there is no "consumer group" that does teardowns, we'll never really know...

    There was a Detroit News article recently (does anyone remember when?) that had a study comparing *actual* vehicle quality in more objective studies to more subjective studies of what people *thought* of brands. The results were interesting. I think the biggest gap was VW, and Audi wasn't far behind. Mercedes also had a large gap.

    This is the first year in a long time I have seen people start to question VW and Audi purchases since they're saying, "I have friend X or relative Y who have had their VW or Audi in the shop every week so I'm thinking of looking elsewhere." Same with Mercedes. BMW seems to be stable right now at "average."

    Unfortunately, the only one benefitting from this is the Japanese, I think. Detroit still has years of improved quality to demonstrate before they can overcome the effect of their real quality demons of the 60's to 80's.

    - Bret
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Can anybody help this person in this new discussion: car_lover1 "Audi 100" Apr 5, 2004 1:58pm?
  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHPosts: 18,887
    If you live in the Boston area where they charge big bucks to repair cars ($85/hr), and Audi parts aren't cheap. It's not the car for someone who doesn't know cars.

    BTW-it only snows four months of the year in Beantown.

    2000 BMW 528i, 2001 BMW 330CiC

  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Andy, why don't you click on my link and respond to the person directly.
  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHPosts: 18,887
    Automotive News 4/5/5/04--

    Audi defend's A6's massive grille

    Visitors to describe the (grille)design as overdone, excessive and reminiscent of the Ford Edsels of the 1950s. "Does Bangle have a brother?" asks one visitor--a reference to BMW design chief Chris Bangle.

    The article quotes Audi's surveys with 70% in favor of the new look and 30% against.

    2000 BMW 528i, 2001 BMW 330CiC

  • boomsamaboomsama Posts: 362
    since it was released...has anyone driven it yet?
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    . . .Japanese cars "on the rise" European cars "on the decline" American cars also "on the rise."

    Two days ago in the Money section of USA Today (the highest authority don't you know?) -- the article claimed that [sic] the pecking order for cars "used to be" European, Japanese and American (and everybody else).

    Now, with the improvements in both the American and the Japanese cars and the declines [in quality] of European cars, the Americans have risen to number 2 while the Europeans have simultaneously fallen to number 2 (yes they are essentially tied).

    Couple this, currently, with a strong Euro and the apparent "constant railing" against the European (mostly German) car companies and its no wonder American cars have gained ground.

    With a stronger dollar (or weaker Euro), I can only wonder if this would continue -- for I suspect that some of the issues are perhaps not as much quality related as they are price, content and quality related.

    As noted above, there is much (anecdotal) evidence that suggests Japanese car owners -- by sheer "force of will," perhaps -- rate their cars' quality higher than might otherwise be factually substantiated and are more prone to be more critical of European cars, placing American car owner's expectations somewhere in between.

    As was said above, wouldn't it be interesting if there could be an independent "tear down" of cars to determine if the quality was as is so often reported?

    On the other hand, perception is reality -- and I can certainly attest that those who have Japanese cars generally brag about the fact that their cars are bullet proof and seem to be immune from maintenance intervals.

    I usually just avert my eyes when an Acura or Toyota or Honda pulls in, just in case.

    Now, funny thing, one guy who I work with, just turned his 39 month old Chrysler 300M in as the lease concluded. He claimed total maintenance costs (only excluding insurance, gas, washes and plates) of "under $300" -- he had less than 50,000 miles on the car, but not much -- and rotated all 5 OE tires -- so no, he didn't even replace the tires and they passed at lease turn-in time.

    Hmmm. Even with the Audi advantage, I seem to be unable to boast such low maintenance (including tires) costs on any of my (almost) 30 Audis (over the years). Heck, I'm at 28K miles and already on my second set of tires. . .

    Now, I know the other side of the story, for I am a proponent of "no boring cars" -- and as fine as the 300M was to my friend, it wasn't what even he would call "high performance." Indeed, to underscore the point, he is hoping that his next car witll be a new BMW 5 series.

    If the Americans and the Japanese "crack the Da Vinci code" so to speak and build in more and more performance into their new offerings (and they apparently are -- see the New Acura, Chrysler 300C AWD and Cadillac STS AWD to name just 3) the Europeans may find themselves slipping to 3rd place.

    Shocking to read that 40% of VW owners trade for Japanese cars, as do Mercedes owners (at 22%).

    Food for thought.

    Shoes for industry.

    Underwear for the deaf.

    Idle hands are the devil's phonebooth.

    Beam me up.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,955
    Traded my '02 VW Passat W8 for a Lincoln.
    - Ray
    Just one point(-ey head?) on the curve . . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 11,042
    ...and I traded my 2000 Jetta for a Chrysler - both of which have been reliable, for the record.

    Mark, your mini-slogans crack me up.


    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 11,042


    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • boomsamaboomsama Posts: 362
    wow, sounds good :D
  • mariobgoodemariobgoode Posts: 114
    as in person. I went to the NYC Car Show and saw it for myself. It doesn't look half as bad, and with all other makers (both local and foreign) coming up with similar designs, you'll get used to is after a short while.

    Just found out the -04 A6 doesn't come in a stick, and there are no plans for a manual in the new A6 for next year, either. If the S6 costs too much, I'll be going over to BMW, if they have an all-wheel drive in the 5 or 6 series. I simply prefer to row my own. Enjoy. Mario
  • bjbird2bjbird2 Posts: 647
    Actually, I've read some articles that place the Japanese cars in first place for quality, the American, and Korean!! cars in a tie for second, and European cars third. I'm starting to believe it with my 2002 Passat having been in the shop, first for the notorious coils, and then a water pump, temperature sensor, and replacement of all the front tie rods. I love the car, but it kind of takes all of the fun out of driving when the car won't run. My old Infiniti was passed down to my son, and he's still driving it with 130K problem free miles, just scheduled maintainance, and I can say that it was also a kick to drive.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081

    Just not pretty anymore. I have to see this car in person to confirm this. Has anyone seen what the U.S. version will look like when our license plates have to be fitted inside that grillework?

  • andys120andys120 Loudon NHPosts: 18,887
    our license plates are not very compatible with that frontal styling, are they?

    2000 BMW 528i, 2001 BMW 330CiC

  • carnaughtcarnaught 'zonaPosts: 2,405
    off the grill at or near the beltline, it would improve the looks immensely, imho.
  • mbnut1mbnut1 Posts: 403
    Ok guys lets make some bucks. Aftermarket bumpers and grills.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Posts: 1,681
    Absolutely gorgeous

    NOTHING even comes remotely close to it.

    Yes...need EU plates
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    You know grilles are a tricky thing. If done right they say all the right things about a car, if done wrong they are like sores. I guess I won't get to see this car in person until this fall. The autoshow season around here ended in Feb.

  • will the 2005 be a lot slower than the 2004 2.7t? will it even BE slower? what will the accelerating (0-60) times be? thanks
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    . . .on the current state of the A6 level Audi's.

    Just for the record the current Audi lineup:

    A6 3.0 quattro 0 - 60 = 7.9 seconds (Tipronic)
    A6 2.7Tquattro 0 - 60 = 6.0 seconds (6spd manual)
    A6 2.7Tquattro 0 - 60 = 6.6 seconds (Tiptronic)
    A6 4.2 quattro 0 - 60 = 6.7 seconds (Tiptronic)

    A6 2.7Tquattro 0 - 60 = 6.4 seconds (Tiptronic)
    (Sline = slightly boosted 2.7T, increasing both Torque and HP from 250 to 265 and 258 to 280 respectively)

    Now, there are SOME difficulties in moving forward. The reasons for these difficulties are that much of what is published is WORLD information, not US/North America information.

    We'll muddle through using Audi press-kit information where possible.

    Two NA A6's for 2005 (initially):

    A6 3.2 and A6 4.2(6spd Tiptronic/quattro ONLY):

    - 4.2 V8 - 246 kW (335 bhp), 420 Newton-metres
    - 3.2 V6 FSI - 188 kW (255bhp), 330 Newton-metres

    "The new A6 4.2 [6 speed Tiptronic]quattro accelerates to 100 km/h (62mph)in a mere 6.1 seconds."

    But, no such apples to apples information is published for the A6 3.2 FSI equipped version. Instead we get:

    "The A6 3.2 FSI with six-speed manual gearbox and front-wheel drive accelerates to 100 km/h in 6.9 seconds."

    By extapolation, but this is subject to many different factors, such as, final drive ratio, added weight, gearing differences between the 6spd manual and the 6spd Tiptronic, the A6 quattro 6spd Tiptronic should come in at .6 seconds slower (using the current A6 where there is both a manual and an automatic reference point with the same HP and torque for comparison).

    The new A6 3.2 quattro will be rated @ 7.5 seconds -- unless Audi lowers the final drive ratio (meaning making the final drive higher numerically). Audi, historically, has done just the opposite -- that is they have made the final drive ratio of the manual transmission equipped cars higher (lower numerically meaning slower acceleration but higher fuel milage). Perhaps, this would translate -- considering lower torque at higher RPM for the incoming A6 than the outgoing 2.7T S-line -- into at least a full second drop in quickness for the incoming A6 over the outgoing comparable (2.7T) model.

    And, the price of the new A6, will, almost undboutedly be higher than the outgoing A6 2.7T S-line.

    Of course, finally, the incoming 4.2 model will be .6 seconds quicker than the outgoing model and, for the first time will translate into a car from Audi that actually rewards the owner who paid more for the bigger engine with higher performance, where it counts -- in North America -- which is, of course, the off the line performance.

    While many attributes of the current Audi A6 4.2 recommend themselves over the current Audi A6 2.7T S-line, accerleration has been a casualty of Audi's choice of transmissions, engine designs insofar as torque curve is concerned and gear ratios.

    Imagine if, BMW, for one, would bring out a 530 and a 545 and imagine the 530 being quicker -- wouldn't there be some pretty major howling going on?

    What was Audi thinking?

    Of course, having said that, they have handilly corrected this with the new A6 4.2 variant -- which is both quicker than the outgoing version and quicker than the "lesser" A6 3.2. Yet, one has to again ask, what Audi is thinking by apparently sending us the new for 2005 A6 3.2 with less impressive performance than the 2004 A6 2.7T S-line with which it will undoubtedly be compared.

    It is possible, however, that this apparently unhappy state of affairs will be corrected by the simple expediant of lowering the final drive ratio of the A6 3.2 6spd Tiptronic to produce at least 0 - 60 times of 6.6 seconds, or, if they are wise, 0 -60 times of 6.4 seconds (which would equal the outgoing model in S-line clothing).

    Hope this helps.

    It still makes me echo the sentiments of my Audi salesperson who says, they boost the power of the A6 2.7T, boost the content via the S-line clothing and, then -- what? -- they discontinue the car in favor of a lower performing, higher cost model.

    Go figure.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Bjbird, this is probably the wrong forum for Japanese chest beating, but you're correct on that one. According to the latest figures, Japanese cars have 10% major mechanical issues, and USA cars have beaten the Europeans for the first time with 18%, versus their 20%. And it seems like VW is the one dragging theirs down.

    Mark, perhaps it is not the intention of the new A6 3.2 to be a direct replacement for the 2.7T, but rather to be a kind of bridge between the outgoing 3.0 and 2.7T offerings. The 3.0 is certainly better than the turtle slow 2.8 it replaced, but nobody is going to call it a fast car. So with the outgoing car, Audi had an engine that was too slow to be competitive, and an engine that made the 4.2L totally unnecessary. Not a very smart way to do things. I think is perfectly logical for Audi to want A6 2.7T drivers to pay more and move up to the 4.2L engine, while having a single 6 offering that offers enough power to compete with the 530 and E320.
Sign In or Register to comment.