JP Roberts wrote:
> The fact that you refuse to accept the generally accepted fact - so
read
> GENERALLY in capitals - that the upper front arms and tie rods, and
now
> lower arms are underengineered does not speak much about your
convincing
> logic.

Again, this is *circular reasoning.* There were some replacements on
some cars. Not all, and it wasn't a recall item (lowers, at least.)
So, the "underengineering" is speculative. That's real logic for you.

You can argue all you want that this should somehow be a freebie for
you, and I am still unconvinced. You cannot answer the questions
posed, and continue to run around shouting your unproven assertion of
underengineering.

> You also fail to answer how on earth it was not possible for the
coilpack
> potential suppliers - many more than one - to produce the necessary
parts in
> just under two months - it seems to have taken over five!

There was ONE supplier. Now you bring the red herring of "potential."
Yes, there were several companies with the capability of producing the
part. And in fact, that's exactly what happened - VAG contracted with
another company for the part, both the replacements and the ones to go
into new cars. But only one company had parts production capability
*at that particular moment.* Do you have any idea how long it takes to
get from a spec sheet and drawing to a finished part? Five months is a
phenomenal job. Again pointing out how little you know about
manufacturing.

> The proof that
> this could have been done is really simple. How long does it take for
a car
> order to be delivered to the end customer?

>From a drawing and spec sheet? Years.


> Generally between one and three
> months, and that's with all the extras you can ask for, and it's a
whole car
> we're talking about, right?

Hey, dimwit - all the parts are already in the pipeline and headed for
final assembly. Hell, it takes less than a day to completely assemble
a car from parts, but the parts *have to exist first.* And when you're
using a single supplier, and then have to change suppliers, well, it
can take some time.

> There is almost nothing that cannot be achieved
> if a company is willing to invest more money to keep their customers
from
> having to go back repeat times to the dealer

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

> No matter what you say, it is perfectly legitimate to feel cheated
because
> of the reasons above.

Yes, it's fun to play the victim. That way, you don't have to be
responsible for the choices you make. Your reasons are all weak,
lacking in logic, or just plain wrong. But you can't back away now,
because your ego is involved.

> I am never saying that Audis are ***, which they are
> not, but the front arm design and/or materials of the B5s were and
whoever
> fails to admit that is not worth of my credibility, period.

Funny how not all of them were replaced, and how the lowers are hardly
ever talked about. I guess the design is just bad for some people, and
not others. Your reasoning is what lacks credibility. Maybe you need
to take some courses in logic?

> To those who said I should buy a cheaper car, well, money is not the
real
> problem, it is legitimacy that's at stake, you see?

Who said cheaper? Lexus and Acura (Honda outside North America) make
some fine luxury cars. And if money is not a problem, what's your
whining all about, FFS???

> And no, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, I'm simply
making the
> facts clear

Except none of your facts are actually facts. The coil pack thing you
have completely wrong, and the control arm stuff is half-baked
speculation at best.

> because while the car is still a much better car than many, it
> comes as a bit of a disappointing thing to see that they are not
backing up
> their customers as they should.

Because they refuse to give you some wear item for free, long after the
warranty period is over. Sure thing.

Good luck with that, no matter what car maker you ultimately choose.

E.P.