The A4 is sold in North America as FWD.

DSG is only available with tranverse engine cars like the A3 and TT. I am
sure it will eventually move to the longitudinal cars like the A4,A6,A8.

DSG is not comapatible with conventional "quattro" which uses a torson
differential instead of Haldex electric system.

FWD cars are fairly common in southern states.

Personally if want an Audi I want Quattro otherwise why bother.


"Frank The Tank" <nospam@forme.thx> wrote in message
news:d9mdnTOCdqnRv3rZnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
> Correct me if I am wrong but I believe the A3 is the only new Audi that is
> available with front wheel drive. It would be really nice to be able to
> order an A4 or A6 Avant with FWD and a manual or DSG transmission for the
> sake of fuel economy.
>
> Everyone offers AWD these days. Why is it so diffiuclt to find a
> reasonably
> efficient FWD or RWD wagon with a manual transmission in the US? Come on
> Audi, give us a FWD A4/A6 Avant with the 2.0T or TDI with a DSG or manual
> 6
> speed !
>
> Yeah sure, Audi's AWD system is superior.. yada yada. But what about
> those
> people that don't need AWD? How about giving us an option??
> --
> sp

 

"Mike Whiteman" wrote
> The A4 is sold in North America as FWD.

Sedans, yes. But he wanted a wagon, which is only available with AWD in
the US.

Cheers,

Pete

 

"Mike Whiteman" wrote
> The A4 is sold in North America as FWD.

Sedans, yes. But he wanted a wagon, which is only available with AWD in
the US.

Cheers,

Pete

 

"Mike Whiteman" wrote
> The A4 is sold in North America as FWD.

Sedans, yes. But he wanted a wagon, which is only available with AWD in
the US.

Cheers,

Pete

 

"Mike Whiteman" wrote
> The A4 is sold in North America as FWD.

Sedans, yes. But he wanted a wagon, which is only available with AWD in
the US.

Cheers,

Pete

 

In article <ec7sg7$spe$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Pete <escape2music@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Frank The Tank" wrote
>> But what about those
>> people that don't need AWD? How about giving us an option??
>
>While having an option of FWD would be nice, I'd say everyone can beneft
>from AWD, even if there is not a flake of snow where you live.

AWD costs weight, gas, and money.

--
John Carr (jfc@mit.edu)

 

In article <ec7sg7$spe$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Pete <escape2music@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Frank The Tank" wrote
>> But what about those
>> people that don't need AWD? How about giving us an option??
>
>While having an option of FWD would be nice, I'd say everyone can beneft
>from AWD, even if there is not a flake of snow where you live.

AWD costs weight, gas, and money.

--
John Carr (jfc@mit.edu)

 

In article <ec7sg7$spe$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Pete <escape2music@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Frank The Tank" wrote
>> But what about those
>> people that don't need AWD? How about giving us an option??
>
>While having an option of FWD would be nice, I'd say everyone can beneft
>from AWD, even if there is not a flake of snow where you live.

AWD costs weight, gas, and money.

--
John Carr (jfc@mit.edu)

 

In article <ec7sg7$spe$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Pete <escape2music@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Frank The Tank" wrote
>> But what about those
>> people that don't need AWD? How about giving us an option??
>
>While having an option of FWD would be nice, I'd say everyone can beneft
>from AWD, even if there is not a flake of snow where you live.

AWD costs weight, gas, and money.

--
John Carr (jfc@mit.edu)