Notices

2009 a4 3.2

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 06-25-2009, 03:16 PM
  #11  
Audi Forum - Posts like an S4
 
wanthema's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Markham
Posts: 279
wanthema is on a distinguished road
Default Re: 2009 a4 3.2

why would u still go for a demo? people beat the **** out of those cars because they are test driven vehicles. no point in buying something people use to beat with.. because later your gonna find more problems to look after.
wanthema is offline  
Old 06-26-2009, 08:22 AM
  #12  
Audi Forum - Posts like an A5
 
rutman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: 'Sauga Ontario
Posts: 395
rutman22 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: 2009 a4 3.2

me personally... i've had bad experience with Used Cars, and Demos.

I now Lease Everything!!
cant be bothered to worry about the car after 4 years....
but that is a personal choice.

Demos arent always beaten up, but the chance for damage is greater. U would probably find bumper scratches, and that cars have been revved very hard and driven faster than it is the norm during a test drives...

I had bought a 2002 Nissan Sentra Vspec, which was a demo.. and for the first year it ran great. then suddenly it started having clutch issues, and brake issues, and it just became too expensive to maintain..

it doesnt hurt to go see someone else to compare numbers, especially since Alex cant completely advertise his pricing here.

Go there, sit down and talk to him.. If u dont like what he has to offer, let him know...
after you've done your comparison, make your decision.

These cars are great and a lot of fun, let us know your decision.

cheers

Rudy
rutman22 is offline  
Old 07-28-2009, 09:12 PM
  #13  
Audi Forum - Posts like an A1
 
milton.blake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: London, Ont.
Posts: 6
milton.blake is on a distinguished road
Default Re: 2009 a4 3.2

IMO, don't hesitate to buy an '09 3.2 a 4, even though audi is not making them any more. I spent a lot of time test driving both the 2.0 and 3.2, and came to the conclusion that the 3.2 is a much smoother, more refined engine than the 2.0, which sounds noisy and thrashy by comparison. Some people may like that, but I find it out of place in a vehicle in the $ 50,000 range. I'm very happy with my 3.2, and I don't feel the mileage advantage of the smaller engine is that great. Another factor to consider, if you keep the car long enough, is that you'll never have to worry about replacing the turbo in the 2.0, which would be a major expense. Also keep in mind that the extra $ you'll pay for the 3.2 includes a number of features, like the Technology package, rear parking sensors which warn you when you're rear end is getting too close to something, great looking 10 spoke alloy wheels, etc. which are quite worthwhile.

Milt from London ON
milton.blake is offline  

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:54 AM.