Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

xxx writes:

>I got 220Kmiles out of my 88 80 Quattro relatively trouble free. The
>most I did was suspension rebuilds. Never was stranded.
>I like the A6 Q.

Yet another testimony of the bullet proof Quattro.
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:WwEOb.31062$VS4.966898@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>
> I think I'm down to the A-6 with the 4.2 liter engine,

Why the 4.2? Just out of curiosity. The 2.7T gives you better acceleration
and gas mileage.

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

"Dan Manning" <DM@ourworld.net> wrote in message
news:bufgtj$fr3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
>
> "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:WwEOb.31062$VS4.966898@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >
> >
> > I think I'm down to the A-6 with the 4.2 liter engine,
>
> Why the 4.2? Just out of curiosity. The 2.7T gives you better acceleration
> and gas mileage.

In doing a side by side comparison, it appeared that the body is actually
bigger, with more room inside, and a larger gas tank (petrol) on the 4.2,
and that there were a few other items standard on the 4.2 that didn't come
on the 2.7 T. No other reason, really. I like the 2.7T as well. Although
I've tended to own V-8s over the years so I'm more familiar with driving a
vehicle without turbo lag lifting out of the gas into corners, and dropping
the hammer coming out. I would imagine that this has changed since the
last time I owned a turbo charged vehicle. Any strong reasons for one
over the other?

I think the 2.7 T was less expensive to purchase.
>
>
>
>
>

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

In message <GtLOb.32423$VS4.1011319@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> "Dan Manning" <DM@ourworld.net> wrote in message
> news:bufgtj$fr3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...

> > Why the 4.2? Just out of curiosity. The 2.7T gives you better acceleration
> > and gas mileage.
>
> In doing a side by side comparison, it appeared that the body is actually
> bigger, with more room inside,

The 4.2 is wider, but it's only because the wheel arches are more
flared. The passenger compartment is exactly the same size - no more
room.

> and a larger gas tank (petrol) on the 4.2,

Taking the difference in consumption into account, there is not that
much difference in range between the two version.

> Any strong reasons for one over the other?

The 2.7T has a little less weight hanging out over the front axle and,
therefore, has a better turn in. This is compensated for, to some
extent, by the wider tyre on the 4.2. The S6 and RS6 are better in this
respect.

--
Peter Bell (Note Spamtrap - To reply, replace 'invalid' with 'bellfamily')

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:GtLOb.32423$VS4.1011319@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Dan Manning" <DM@ourworld.net> wrote in message
> news:bufgtj$fr3$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
> >
> > "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:WwEOb.31062$VS4.966898@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > I think I'm down to the A-6 with the 4.2 liter engine,
> >
> > Why the 4.2? Just out of curiosity. The 2.7T gives you better
acceleration
> > and gas mileage.
>
> In doing a side by side comparison, it appeared that the body is actually
> bigger, with more room inside, and a larger gas tank (petrol) on the 4.2,
> and that there were a few other items standard on the 4.2 that didn't come
> on the 2.7 T. No other reason, really. I like the 2.7T as well.
Although
> I've tended to own V-8s over the years so I'm more familiar with driving a
> vehicle without turbo lag lifting out of the gas into corners, and
dropping
> the hammer coming out. I would imagine that this has changed since the
> last time I owned a turbo charged vehicle. Any strong reasons for one
> over the other?

Not really, just drive both and see which one you like. After reading some
owners reviews on www.carpoint.com it seems like people were disappointed
with the 4.2 performance, whereas the 2.7 owners ranted and raved. But as
you said, it all comes down to the buyer and what they prefer.
> >
> >
>
>

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

"REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mYgOb.26659$VS4.828669@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> And I'm at the point where I'd like to get dead bang great reliability
from
> a vehicle over a 10 year ownership (which is about 140,000 miles for me)
>
> I've been reading each of these newsgroups, as well as a few others for a
> while, and in each newsgroup there are ongoing complaints about the
> reliability of each marque. I'm ALMOST willing to go Japanese, but not
> quite yet.

If you want *dead bang reliability* in an AWD car and it's not too small or
'beneath' you, I'd take a long look at the Subaru Legacy sedans (or wagons,
if you don't mind a bit of boxy luggage room.). Strikes me as the Audi 4000
Quattro for the New Millennium. Another poster suggested that the smaller
Impreza might be roomy enough for 6-footers. The Legacy is even bigger.
--
C.R. Krieger
(and I'm a Bavarian car guy ...)

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

"C.R. Krieger" <warp2_shadowMAPS@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:400c21e0$0$40217$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net. ..
> "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:mYgOb.26659$VS4.828669@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >
> > And I'm at the point where I'd like to get dead bang great reliability
> from
> > a vehicle over a 10 year ownership (which is about 140,000 miles for me)
> >
> > I've been reading each of these newsgroups, as well as a few others for
a
> > while, and in each newsgroup there are ongoing complaints about the
> > reliability of each marque. I'm ALMOST willing to go Japanese, but
not
> > quite yet.
>
> If you want *dead bang reliability* in an AWD car and it's not too small
or
> 'beneath' you, I'd take a long look at the Subaru Legacy sedans (or
wagons,
> if you don't mind a bit of boxy luggage room.).

Heard plenty of good things about the Subaru. Haven't heard much good about
Audis from people who actually have to work on them...

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

We've got a E46 325i and a Subaru WRX wagon. The BMW is better quality
materials, but mechanically the Subaru is very well done. And the AWD is
wonderful on the few times we get snow - the BMW can't even get up the driveway,
the Subaru just goes. I'm thinking of trading the WRX wagon in on the new 2005
Legacy GT wagon which will have the 2.5l turbo engine with a bit more torque and
power as well as another 12 inches of car which will mostly matter in the back
seat. The 2005 Legay just won the Japanese car of the year award by a large
margin, it's going to be much closer to the BMW in terms of quality interior,
and still priced at around $28,000 which is a great deal.

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

"Stan de SD" <standesd@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:IpVOb.17516$1e.3930@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>
> "C.R. Krieger" <warp2_shadowMAPS@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:400c21e0$0$40217$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net. ..
> > "REInvestments" <nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:mYgOb.26659$VS4.828669@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > >
<snip>
>
> Heard plenty of good things about the Subaru. Haven't heard much good
about
> Audis from people who actually have to work on them...
>
>

The owner of an independent garage was so impressed with my Audi 90 quattro
after working on it (145,000 miles - original clutch, exhaust etc), he went
out and a brand new Audi A4.
--
Doug Ramage

Re: 4 wheel drive questions/reliability of vehicles
 

Stan writes:

>Heard plenty of good things about the Subaru. Haven't heard much good about
>Audis from people who actually have to work on them...

Nice troll. d;o)
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html