2004 a4 3.0 or 1.8
02-23-2006, 07:23 PM
#21
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2004 a4 3.0 or 1.8
> Inline 6? To the best of my knowledge, Audi has never made a straight
> six - certainly not in recent years. My 2002 A4 3.0 has a V6. Nice
> engine, too. Can't say anything about the reliability, though -
> firstly because it's only done 35000 miles and secondly because I've
> only had it since April.
I have a 2002 A4 3.0 also - it just passed 80,000 miles. It was afflicted
with the coil pack problem at about 40K, but otherwise has been solid.
> Downside to the 3.0 is that it's a bit thirsty. I average about 24mpg
> (UK - dunno what that converts to in US measurements). For comparison,
> I used to average 29 mpg out of a 1998 2.5 BMW 323i (E36).
According to the computer, I have averaged 26.3 mpg (US gallon) over the
last few months - that's 31.6 mpg to an imperial gallon. I commute 110
miles daily, 30 of which is in town, 50 of which is at around 65mph, and
30 of which is around 80-85.
Steve
> six - certainly not in recent years. My 2002 A4 3.0 has a V6. Nice
> engine, too. Can't say anything about the reliability, though -
> firstly because it's only done 35000 miles and secondly because I've
> only had it since April.
I have a 2002 A4 3.0 also - it just passed 80,000 miles. It was afflicted
with the coil pack problem at about 40K, but otherwise has been solid.
> Downside to the 3.0 is that it's a bit thirsty. I average about 24mpg
> (UK - dunno what that converts to in US measurements). For comparison,
> I used to average 29 mpg out of a 1998 2.5 BMW 323i (E36).
According to the computer, I have averaged 26.3 mpg (US gallon) over the
last few months - that's 31.6 mpg to an imperial gallon. I commute 110
miles daily, 30 of which is in town, 50 of which is at around 65mph, and
30 of which is around 80-85.
Steve
02-23-2006, 07:23 PM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2004 a4 3.0 or 1.8
> Inline 6? To the best of my knowledge, Audi has never made a straight
> six - certainly not in recent years. My 2002 A4 3.0 has a V6. Nice
> engine, too. Can't say anything about the reliability, though -
> firstly because it's only done 35000 miles and secondly because I've
> only had it since April.
I have a 2002 A4 3.0 also - it just passed 80,000 miles. It was afflicted
with the coil pack problem at about 40K, but otherwise has been solid.
> Downside to the 3.0 is that it's a bit thirsty. I average about 24mpg
> (UK - dunno what that converts to in US measurements). For comparison,
> I used to average 29 mpg out of a 1998 2.5 BMW 323i (E36).
According to the computer, I have averaged 26.3 mpg (US gallon) over the
last few months - that's 31.6 mpg to an imperial gallon. I commute 110
miles daily, 30 of which is in town, 50 of which is at around 65mph, and
30 of which is around 80-85.
Steve
> six - certainly not in recent years. My 2002 A4 3.0 has a V6. Nice
> engine, too. Can't say anything about the reliability, though -
> firstly because it's only done 35000 miles and secondly because I've
> only had it since April.
I have a 2002 A4 3.0 also - it just passed 80,000 miles. It was afflicted
with the coil pack problem at about 40K, but otherwise has been solid.
> Downside to the 3.0 is that it's a bit thirsty. I average about 24mpg
> (UK - dunno what that converts to in US measurements). For comparison,
> I used to average 29 mpg out of a 1998 2.5 BMW 323i (E36).
According to the computer, I have averaged 26.3 mpg (US gallon) over the
last few months - that's 31.6 mpg to an imperial gallon. I commute 110
miles daily, 30 of which is in town, 50 of which is at around 65mph, and
30 of which is around 80-85.
Steve
02-23-2006, 08:36 PM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2004 a4 3.0 or 1.8
I just bought a 2001 A4 with a 2.8 a month ago... Mechanic told me the 2.8's
(bumped up to 3.0L and now 3.2L) are the safer bet, they only "need" regular
oil, whereas the 1.8T needs it, but it wasn't required, they also needed a
larger oil filter, and these were not used for the first few years...
Leading to sluding issues on some cars. Turbo's can fail, natural aspiration
*can't*. A V6 is smoother then a 4 cylinder.
With an automatic the 1.8T has some lag off the line, doesn't seem as
annoying with a manual transmission tho.
V6 fuel economy isn't all that great, the 1.8T would be a lot better... I'm
averaging 12L per 100kms in this winter weather, mix of in town and highway
driving (120-135kph).
A 1.8T car will handle better due to less weight at the front of the car.
I'm glad I picked the V6 version tho, seems better suited to my driving
tastes (lots of cruising on the highway, occasional spirited drives down the
back roads).
<sheehan888@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140720338.000996.255570@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi everyone im currently looking at purchasing a 2004 A4...my only
> hesitation is in choosing the engine. Ive heard some horror stories
> about engine problems that audi has had in the past and i was wondering
> wich engine is less prone to problems. I like most other people would
> like to avoid catastrophic engine failure and the resulting $$$
> outflow.
>
> I love the idea of having the inline 6 but i noticed it was only
> available for 3 modle years ( i think) whereas the 1.8 has been in
> service much longer. Is it because there were problems with the 3.0?
>
> Any input form anyone would help....thanks alot
>
(bumped up to 3.0L and now 3.2L) are the safer bet, they only "need" regular
oil, whereas the 1.8T needs it, but it wasn't required, they also needed a
larger oil filter, and these were not used for the first few years...
Leading to sluding issues on some cars. Turbo's can fail, natural aspiration
*can't*. A V6 is smoother then a 4 cylinder.
With an automatic the 1.8T has some lag off the line, doesn't seem as
annoying with a manual transmission tho.
V6 fuel economy isn't all that great, the 1.8T would be a lot better... I'm
averaging 12L per 100kms in this winter weather, mix of in town and highway
driving (120-135kph).
A 1.8T car will handle better due to less weight at the front of the car.
I'm glad I picked the V6 version tho, seems better suited to my driving
tastes (lots of cruising on the highway, occasional spirited drives down the
back roads).
<sheehan888@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140720338.000996.255570@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi everyone im currently looking at purchasing a 2004 A4...my only
> hesitation is in choosing the engine. Ive heard some horror stories
> about engine problems that audi has had in the past and i was wondering
> wich engine is less prone to problems. I like most other people would
> like to avoid catastrophic engine failure and the resulting $$$
> outflow.
>
> I love the idea of having the inline 6 but i noticed it was only
> available for 3 modle years ( i think) whereas the 1.8 has been in
> service much longer. Is it because there were problems with the 3.0?
>
> Any input form anyone would help....thanks alot
>
02-23-2006, 08:36 PM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2004 a4 3.0 or 1.8
I just bought a 2001 A4 with a 2.8 a month ago... Mechanic told me the 2.8's
(bumped up to 3.0L and now 3.2L) are the safer bet, they only "need" regular
oil, whereas the 1.8T needs it, but it wasn't required, they also needed a
larger oil filter, and these were not used for the first few years...
Leading to sluding issues on some cars. Turbo's can fail, natural aspiration
*can't*. A V6 is smoother then a 4 cylinder.
With an automatic the 1.8T has some lag off the line, doesn't seem as
annoying with a manual transmission tho.
V6 fuel economy isn't all that great, the 1.8T would be a lot better... I'm
averaging 12L per 100kms in this winter weather, mix of in town and highway
driving (120-135kph).
A 1.8T car will handle better due to less weight at the front of the car.
I'm glad I picked the V6 version tho, seems better suited to my driving
tastes (lots of cruising on the highway, occasional spirited drives down the
back roads).
<sheehan888@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140720338.000996.255570@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi everyone im currently looking at purchasing a 2004 A4...my only
> hesitation is in choosing the engine. Ive heard some horror stories
> about engine problems that audi has had in the past and i was wondering
> wich engine is less prone to problems. I like most other people would
> like to avoid catastrophic engine failure and the resulting $$$
> outflow.
>
> I love the idea of having the inline 6 but i noticed it was only
> available for 3 modle years ( i think) whereas the 1.8 has been in
> service much longer. Is it because there were problems with the 3.0?
>
> Any input form anyone would help....thanks alot
>
(bumped up to 3.0L and now 3.2L) are the safer bet, they only "need" regular
oil, whereas the 1.8T needs it, but it wasn't required, they also needed a
larger oil filter, and these were not used for the first few years...
Leading to sluding issues on some cars. Turbo's can fail, natural aspiration
*can't*. A V6 is smoother then a 4 cylinder.
With an automatic the 1.8T has some lag off the line, doesn't seem as
annoying with a manual transmission tho.
V6 fuel economy isn't all that great, the 1.8T would be a lot better... I'm
averaging 12L per 100kms in this winter weather, mix of in town and highway
driving (120-135kph).
A 1.8T car will handle better due to less weight at the front of the car.
I'm glad I picked the V6 version tho, seems better suited to my driving
tastes (lots of cruising on the highway, occasional spirited drives down the
back roads).
<sheehan888@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140720338.000996.255570@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi everyone im currently looking at purchasing a 2004 A4...my only
> hesitation is in choosing the engine. Ive heard some horror stories
> about engine problems that audi has had in the past and i was wondering
> wich engine is less prone to problems. I like most other people would
> like to avoid catastrophic engine failure and the resulting $$$
> outflow.
>
> I love the idea of having the inline 6 but i noticed it was only
> available for 3 modle years ( i think) whereas the 1.8 has been in
> service much longer. Is it because there were problems with the 3.0?
>
> Any input form anyone would help....thanks alot
>
02-23-2006, 08:36 PM
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2004 a4 3.0 or 1.8
I just bought a 2001 A4 with a 2.8 a month ago... Mechanic told me the 2.8's
(bumped up to 3.0L and now 3.2L) are the safer bet, they only "need" regular
oil, whereas the 1.8T needs it, but it wasn't required, they also needed a
larger oil filter, and these were not used for the first few years...
Leading to sluding issues on some cars. Turbo's can fail, natural aspiration
*can't*. A V6 is smoother then a 4 cylinder.
With an automatic the 1.8T has some lag off the line, doesn't seem as
annoying with a manual transmission tho.
V6 fuel economy isn't all that great, the 1.8T would be a lot better... I'm
averaging 12L per 100kms in this winter weather, mix of in town and highway
driving (120-135kph).
A 1.8T car will handle better due to less weight at the front of the car.
I'm glad I picked the V6 version tho, seems better suited to my driving
tastes (lots of cruising on the highway, occasional spirited drives down the
back roads).
<sheehan888@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140720338.000996.255570@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi everyone im currently looking at purchasing a 2004 A4...my only
> hesitation is in choosing the engine. Ive heard some horror stories
> about engine problems that audi has had in the past and i was wondering
> wich engine is less prone to problems. I like most other people would
> like to avoid catastrophic engine failure and the resulting $$$
> outflow.
>
> I love the idea of having the inline 6 but i noticed it was only
> available for 3 modle years ( i think) whereas the 1.8 has been in
> service much longer. Is it because there were problems with the 3.0?
>
> Any input form anyone would help....thanks alot
>
(bumped up to 3.0L and now 3.2L) are the safer bet, they only "need" regular
oil, whereas the 1.8T needs it, but it wasn't required, they also needed a
larger oil filter, and these were not used for the first few years...
Leading to sluding issues on some cars. Turbo's can fail, natural aspiration
*can't*. A V6 is smoother then a 4 cylinder.
With an automatic the 1.8T has some lag off the line, doesn't seem as
annoying with a manual transmission tho.
V6 fuel economy isn't all that great, the 1.8T would be a lot better... I'm
averaging 12L per 100kms in this winter weather, mix of in town and highway
driving (120-135kph).
A 1.8T car will handle better due to less weight at the front of the car.
I'm glad I picked the V6 version tho, seems better suited to my driving
tastes (lots of cruising on the highway, occasional spirited drives down the
back roads).
<sheehan888@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140720338.000996.255570@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi everyone im currently looking at purchasing a 2004 A4...my only
> hesitation is in choosing the engine. Ive heard some horror stories
> about engine problems that audi has had in the past and i was wondering
> wich engine is less prone to problems. I like most other people would
> like to avoid catastrophic engine failure and the resulting $$$
> outflow.
>
> I love the idea of having the inline 6 but i noticed it was only
> available for 3 modle years ( i think) whereas the 1.8 has been in
> service much longer. Is it because there were problems with the 3.0?
>
> Any input form anyone would help....thanks alot
>
02-24-2006, 12:07 AM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2004 a4 3.0 or 1.8
"Rob Guenther" wrote
>I just bought a 2001 A4 with a 2.8 a month ago... Mechanic told me the
>2.8's (bumped up to 3.0L and now 3.2L) are the safer bet, they only
>"need" regular oil, whereas the 1.8T needs it, but it wasn't required,
I'm assuming you meant the 1.8T needs <synthetic oil>, which is true.
Dealers used to put bulk dino oil in them at 10K mile intervals and
that's what caused the sludging issues.
> they also needed a larger oil filter, and these were not used for the
> first few years... Leading to sluding issues on some cars. Turbo's can
> fail, natural aspiration *can't*. A V6 is smoother then a 4 cylinder.
The 2.8 has some problems of its own like oil leaks or high oil
consumption. But yeah, it's still probably a safer bet. The 1.8T was a
tuner's paradise, hence why it was so popular. The 2.8 is not as easy
to modify for higher power with little resources. Of course with
modifications come higher risks of engine (and other component)
problems.
>
> With an automatic the 1.8T has some lag off the line,
Yeah, even more so with quattro.
> doesn't seem as annoying with a manual transmission tho.
Yup, I was quite happy with mine, especially after chipping it.
> V6 fuel economy isn't all that great, the 1.8T would be a lot
> better... I'm averaging 12L per 100kms in this winter weather, mix of
> in town and highway driving (120-135kph).
That's not bad. I was getting similar mileage with a 1.8T in mostly
city driving.
Cheers,
Pete
02-24-2006, 12:07 AM
#30
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2004 a4 3.0 or 1.8
"Rob Guenther" wrote
>I just bought a 2001 A4 with a 2.8 a month ago... Mechanic told me the
>2.8's (bumped up to 3.0L and now 3.2L) are the safer bet, they only
>"need" regular oil, whereas the 1.8T needs it, but it wasn't required,
I'm assuming you meant the 1.8T needs <synthetic oil>, which is true.
Dealers used to put bulk dino oil in them at 10K mile intervals and
that's what caused the sludging issues.
> they also needed a larger oil filter, and these were not used for the
> first few years... Leading to sluding issues on some cars. Turbo's can
> fail, natural aspiration *can't*. A V6 is smoother then a 4 cylinder.
The 2.8 has some problems of its own like oil leaks or high oil
consumption. But yeah, it's still probably a safer bet. The 1.8T was a
tuner's paradise, hence why it was so popular. The 2.8 is not as easy
to modify for higher power with little resources. Of course with
modifications come higher risks of engine (and other component)
problems.
>
> With an automatic the 1.8T has some lag off the line,
Yeah, even more so with quattro.
> doesn't seem as annoying with a manual transmission tho.
Yup, I was quite happy with mine, especially after chipping it.
> V6 fuel economy isn't all that great, the 1.8T would be a lot
> better... I'm averaging 12L per 100kms in this winter weather, mix of
> in town and highway driving (120-135kph).
That's not bad. I was getting similar mileage with a 1.8T in mostly
city driving.
Cheers,
Pete
