Hoe reliable are Audi's?

"Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Feb 25, 3:59 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > "Gman uk" > wrote in message
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > iws wrote:
> > > > > wrote in message
> > > roups.com...
> >
> > > >>Hi,
> >
> > > >>I was planning on getting a used Audi A4 2000 model. I was wondering
> > > >>how reliabl the car would be?
> >
> > > > About as reliable as any other European car. Which frankly isn't
saying
> > too
> > > > much.
> >
> > > I suspect therefore you've never owned a European car.
> >
> > Actually, I've owned several including two Audis.
>
>
> I've found that well-maintained VWs and Audis are almost as reliable
> as their Japanese brethren. The maintenance requirements ARE
> heavier.

Careful maintenance does little to prevent some of the more notorious
problems such as pre-mature oil leaks or the poorly designed control arm
assembly.

> And VAG cars blow away several other Euro makes for reliability.
>
> E.P.
>

well I would not trade my '83 Audi 4000s 4cyl 5 speed for any other
make/model in the same year and I prefer driving it over my '91 Passat 16V
automatic. I don't even see too many vehicles that old with that many miles
on it and definitely not running as well. <g>
It has around 240K miles on it but I did install a VW GTi engine in it at
85K miles when I bought it and drove it home.
It has basically been troublefree and very cheap to operate/repair but I
have over the period of 16 years of ownership replaced headgasket, exhaust
post-cat, radiator, timing belt, waterpump & hoses and various little things
like the front seats and A/C components. Currently it needs a new clutch
(slipping a little), new boots for the steering rack and of course the rust
is starting to rear it's ugly head here in Chicago. After 24 years here
that is considered excellent!

I am currently looking for an Audi A4 (or Passat) maybe 7-8 years old with
the 1.8t engine to "fall into my lap" lol
I feel that it will be more expensive to maintain but I believe that they
are well built vehicles and just need regular maintenance. Catch the little
stuff early before they grow into big problems. ;-)
If I find a Quattro that would even be better!
So find a very nice well maintained Audi that you like and I think you will
be happy. Of course please plan to budget for repairs and maintenance! All
vehicles need attention so find one that makes you happy when you drive it!

JMHO
later,
dave
(One out of many daves)
http://vwdoc1.tripod.com/



"Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
>> > > > wrote in message
>> > roups.com...
>>
>> > >>Hi,
>>
>> > >>I was planning on getting a used Audi A4 2000 model. I was wondering
>> > >>how reliabl the car would be?
>>
>> > > About as reliable as any other European car. Which frankly isn't
>> > > saying
>> too
>> > > much.
>>
>> > I suspect therefore you've never owned a European car.
>>
>> Actually, I've owned several including two Audis.
>
>
> I've found that well-maintained VWs and Audis are almost as reliable
> as their Japanese brethren. The maintenance requirements ARE
> heavier.
>
> And VAG cars blow away several other Euro makes for reliability.
>
> E.P.
>

On Feb 25, 9:25 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
>
> oups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Feb 25, 3:59 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > > "Gman uk" > wrote in message
>
> > ...
>
> > > > iws wrote:
> > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > roups.com...
>
> > > > >>Hi,
>
> > > > >>I was planning on getting a used Audi A4 2000 model. I was wondering
> > > > >>how reliabl the car would be?
>
> > > > > About as reliable as any other European car. Which frankly isn't
> saying
> > > too
> > > > > much.
>
> > > > I suspect therefore you've never owned a European car.
>
> > > Actually, I've owned several including two Audis.
>
> > I've found that well-maintained VWs and Audis are almost as reliable
> > as their Japanese brethren. The maintenance requirements ARE
> > heavier.
>
> Careful maintenance does little to prevent some of the more notorious
> problems such as pre-mature oil leaks or the poorly designed control arm
> assembly.

Funny thing: I've got an Avant with the 2.8, and it doesn't leak at
all. After 205k miles, it's been about trouble free as it can be
expected to be. Stuff that goes bad with age has gone bad - rubber
boots and vacuum lines - but that's to be expected. Oddly, every Audi
I've owned has been mostly trouble-free. You don't get "lucky" time
after time if a car maker churns out crap.

I do understand that most cars of the "bad control arm era" don't have
bad arms. If the design is bad, wouldn't they *all* fail?

That's the problem with generalization - it just doesn't fit every
situation.

I think the biggest problem with Audis is that there are owners out
there who don't take care of them, then blame it on Audi "design".
While not faultless, they're not as wretched as you imply.

E.P.

On Feb 25, 9:42 pm, "dave AKA vwdoc1" > wrote:
> well I would not trade my '83 Audi 4000s 4cyl 5 speed for any other
> make/model in the same year and I prefer driving it over my '91 Passat 16V
> automatic. I don't even see too many vehicles that old with that many miles
> on it and definitely not running as well. <g>
> It has around 240K miles on it but I did install a VW GTi engine in it at
> 85K miles when I bought it and drove it home.
> It has basically been troublefree and very cheap to operate/repair but I
> have over the period of 16 years of ownership replaced headgasket, exhaust
> post-cat, radiator, timing belt, waterpump & hoses and various little things
> like the front seats and A/C components. Currently it needs a new clutch
> (slipping a little), new boots for the steering rack and of course the rust
> is starting to rear it's ugly head here in Chicago. After 24 years here
> that is considered excellent!
>
> I am currently looking for an Audi A4 (or Passat) maybe 7-8 years old with
> the 1.8t engine to "fall into my lap" lol
> I feel that it will be more expensive to maintain but I believe that they
> are well built vehicles and just need regular maintenance. Catch the little
> stuff early before they grow into big problems. ;-)
> If I find a Quattro that would even be better!
> So find a very nice well maintained Audi that you like and I think you will
> be happy. Of course please plan to budget for repairs and maintenance! All
> vehicles need attention so find one that makes you happy when you drive it!
>

After a certain age, stuff just breaks. An electric window motor
doesn't last forever. Nor a clutch, nor even a galvanized body shell.

Heck, people gripe about having to replace brake pads and rotors!!!

E.P.

"Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Feb 25, 9:25 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > "Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
> >
> > oups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Feb 25, 3:59 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > > > "Gman uk" > wrote in message
> >
> > > ...
> >
> > > > > iws wrote:
> > > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > > roups.com...
> >
> > > > > >>Hi,
> >
> > > > > >>I was planning on getting a used Audi A4 2000 model. I was
wondering
> > > > > >>how reliabl the car would be?
> >
> > > > > > About as reliable as any other European car. Which frankly isn't
> > saying
> > > > too
> > > > > > much.
> >
> > > > > I suspect therefore you've never owned a European car.
> >
> > > > Actually, I've owned several including two Audis.
> >
> > > I've found that well-maintained VWs and Audis are almost as reliable
> > > as their Japanese brethren. The maintenance requirements ARE
> > > heavier.
> >
> > Careful maintenance does little to prevent some of the more notorious
> > problems such as pre-mature oil leaks or the poorly designed control arm
> > assembly.
>
> Funny thing: I've got an Avant with the 2.8, and it doesn't leak at
> all. After 205k miles, it's been about trouble free as it can be
> expected to be. Stuff that goes bad with age has gone bad - rubber
> boots and vacuum lines - but that's to be expected. Oddly, every Audi
> I've owned has been mostly trouble-free. You don't get "lucky" time
> after time if a car maker churns out crap.
>
> I do understand that most cars of the "bad control arm era" don't have
> bad arms. If the design is bad, wouldn't they *all* fail?

No, not at all. Unless the design problem was so egregious they failed as
soon as they were driven off the assembly line. Most design defects are more
subtle and may not show up for thousands of miles or only show up under
certain driving conditions that would still be considered part of "normal"
driving. That doesn't alter the fact that design was to blame for the
failure.
>
> That's the problem with generalization - it just doesn't fit every
> situation.
>
> I think the biggest problem with Audis is that there are owners out
> there who don't take care of them, then blame it on Audi "design".
> While not faultless, they're not as wretched as you imply.
>
I did not imply they were "wretched" by any stretch of the imagination. And
your claim that the individual owner is "the biggest problem" is just a tad
defensive, I'd say. Look, the original O.P. asked about reliability and
maintenance issues with a 2000 vintage A4. I own a similar vintage A4 and so
I advised him on some of the issues encountered by myself as well as others
on this newsgroup and in other places like Audiworld.com. If you wish to
claim that the information I provided is false, then I invite you to produce
the evidence backing your position.

> E.P.
>

On Feb 26, 12:45 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
>
> oups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 25, 9:25 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > > "Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
>
> > roups.com...
>
> > > > On Feb 25, 3:59 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > > > > "Gman uk" > wrote in message
>
> > > > ...
>
> > > > > > iws wrote:
> > > > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > > > roups.com...
>
> > > > > > >>Hi,
>
> > > > > > >>I was planning on getting a used Audi A4 2000 model. I was
> wondering
> > > > > > >>how reliabl the car would be?
>
> > > > > > > About as reliable as any other European car. Which frankly isn't
> > > saying
> > > > > too
> > > > > > > much.
>
> > > > > > I suspect therefore you've never owned a European car.
>
> > > > > Actually, I've owned several including two Audis.
>
> > > > I've found that well-maintained VWs and Audis are almost as reliable
> > > > as their Japanese brethren. The maintenance requirements ARE
> > > > heavier.
>
> > > Careful maintenance does little to prevent some of the more notorious
> > > problems such as pre-mature oil leaks or the poorly designed control arm
> > > assembly.
>
> > Funny thing: I've got an Avant with the 2.8, and it doesn't leak at
> > all. After 205k miles, it's been about trouble free as it can be
> > expected to be. Stuff that goes bad with age has gone bad - rubber
> > boots and vacuum lines - but that's to be expected. Oddly, every Audi
> > I've owned has been mostly trouble-free. You don't get "lucky" time
> > after time if a car maker churns out crap.
>
> > I do understand that most cars of the "bad control arm era" don't have
> > bad arms. If the design is bad, wouldn't they *all* fail?
>
> No, not at all. Unless the design problem was so egregious they failed as
> soon as they were driven off the assembly line. Most design defects are more
> subtle and may not show up for thousands of miles or only show up under
> certain driving conditions that would still be considered part of "normal"
> driving. That doesn't alter the fact that design was to blame for the
> failure.

The fact that the failures are small in number does not automatically
point to a design flaw.

> > That's the problem with generalization - it just doesn't fit every
> > situation.
>
> > I think the biggest problem with Audis is that there are owners out
> > there who don't take care of them, then blame it on Audi "design".
> > While not faultless, they're not as wretched as you imply.
>
> I did not imply they were "wretched" by any stretch of the imagination. And
> your claim that the individual owner is "the biggest problem" is just a tad
> defensive, I'd say.

Not really. People complain a lot about wear items and regular
maintenance, and then blame "design" when their deferred maintenance
comes back to bite them.

You mentioned "external oiling", and yet, the 2.8L motors I've had
have never seeped oil.

How odd.

> Look, the original O.P. asked about reliability and
> maintenance issues with a 2000 vintage A4. I own a similar vintage A4 and so
> I advised him on some of the issues encountered by myself as well as others
> on this newsgroup and in other places like Audiworld.com. If you wish to
> claim that the information I provided is false, then I invite you to produce
> the evidence backing your position.

Requesting proof of a negative? How quaint.

Your *opinion* of what is or is not a design flaw is no more provable
than disprovable. The replaceable items like brakes and timing belt?
Not only VAG vehicles require these things, so the suggestion that
somehow European autos are unique in this regard is disingenuous.

A Camry of the same vintage needs the same sorts of things.

E.P.

"Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Feb 26, 12:45 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > "Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
> >
> > oups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Feb 25, 9:25 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > > > "Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
> >
> > > roups.com...
> >
> > > > > On Feb 25, 3:59 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> > > > > > "Gman uk" > wrote in message
> >
> > > > > ...
> >
> > > > > > > iws wrote:
> > > > > > > > > wrote in message
> > > > > > > roups.com...
> >
> > > > > > > >>Hi,
> >
> > > > > > > >>I was planning on getting a used Audi A4 2000 model. I was
> > wondering
> > > > > > > >>how reliabl the car would be?
> >
> > > > > > > > About as reliable as any other European car. Which frankly
isn't
> > > > saying
> > > > > > too
> > > > > > > > much.
> >
> > > > > > > I suspect therefore you've never owned a European car.
> >
> > > > > > Actually, I've owned several including two Audis.
> >
> > > > > I've found that well-maintained VWs and Audis are almost as
reliable
> > > > > as their Japanese brethren. The maintenance requirements ARE
> > > > > heavier.
> >
> > > > Careful maintenance does little to prevent some of the more
notorious
> > > > problems such as pre-mature oil leaks or the poorly designed control
arm
> > > > assembly.
> >
> > > Funny thing: I've got an Avant with the 2.8, and it doesn't leak at
> > > all. After 205k miles, it's been about trouble free as it can be
> > > expected to be. Stuff that goes bad with age has gone bad - rubber
> > > boots and vacuum lines - but that's to be expected. Oddly, every Audi
> > > I've owned has been mostly trouble-free. You don't get "lucky" time
> > > after time if a car maker churns out crap.
> >
> > > I do understand that most cars of the "bad control arm era" don't have
> > > bad arms. If the design is bad, wouldn't they *all* fail?
> >
> > No, not at all. Unless the design problem was so egregious they failed
as
> > soon as they were driven off the assembly line. Most design defects are
more
> > subtle and may not show up for thousands of miles or only show up under
> > certain driving conditions that would still be considered part of
"normal"
> > driving. That doesn't alter the fact that design was to blame for the
> > failure.
>
> The fact that the failures are small in number does not automatically
> point to a design flaw.
>
> > > That's the problem with generalization - it just doesn't fit every
> > > situation.
> >
> > > I think the biggest problem with Audis is that there are owners out
> > > there who don't take care of them, then blame it on Audi "design".
> > > While not faultless, they're not as wretched as you imply.
> >
> > I did not imply they were "wretched" by any stretch of the imagination.
And
> > your claim that the individual owner is "the biggest problem" is just a
tad
> > defensive, I'd say.
>
> Not really. People complain a lot about wear items and regular
> maintenance, and then blame "design" when their deferred maintenance
> comes back to bite them.
>
> You mentioned "external oiling", and yet, the 2.8L motors I've had
> have never seeped oil.
>
> How odd.

How fortunate for you.
>
> > Look, the original O.P. asked about reliability and
> > maintenance issues with a 2000 vintage A4. I own a similar vintage A4
and so
> > I advised him on some of the issues encountered by myself as well as
others
> > on this newsgroup and in other places like Audiworld.com. If you wish to
> > claim that the information I provided is false, then I invite you to
produce
> > the evidence backing your position.
>
> Requesting proof of a negative? How quaint.
>
> Your *opinion* of what is or is not a design flaw is no more provable
> than disprovable.

If it wasn't a design flaw, then why has Audi changed the design? See
http://tinyurl.com/3b2c39 for example.
I think Tom and Ray get it about right in http://tinyurl.com/38lqom .

The replaceable items like brakes and timing belt?
> Not only VAG vehicles require these things, so the suggestion that
> somehow European autos are unique in this regard is disingenuous.

I never suggested any such thing. The O.P. asked about maintenance items
too. I told him about brakes. Many Americans are accustomed to having rotors
machined instead of replaced. I passed no judgement on that. Actually,
replacement rotors are not terribly expensive and the job is not difficult
for a DIYer. However, I did not get the impression that the O.P. was much of
a DIYer. Same for the TB - it's a maintenance item and my point in bringing
it up was that it would be in the O.P.'s best financial interest to
determine if the used car he was about to buy had had it done recently or
was due for it.

Maybe I should have mentioned other crappy components like the temperature
sender that's been replaced twice in 80,000 miles or the defective throwout
bearing that was replaced under warranty or the climate control system fan
that was replaced under warranty or the radiator that failed at 60,000 miles
or the CD changer that failed at 65,000 miles.
>
> A Camry of the same vintage needs the same sorts of things.
>
> E.P.
>

On Feb 26, 6:51 pm, "iws" > wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" > wrote in message
>
> oups.com...
>
> > Not really. People complain a lot about wear items and regular
> > maintenance, and then blame "design" when their deferred maintenance
> > comes back to bite them.
>
> > You mentioned "external oiling", and yet, the 2.8L motors I've had
> > have never seeped oil.
>
> > How odd.
>
> How fortunate for you.

Sorta pokes holes in your "external oiling" quip.

> > Your *opinion* of what is or is not a design flaw is no more provable
> > than disprovable.
>
> I think Tom and Ray get it about right inhttp://tinyurl.com/38lqom.


AFAIK, Tom and Ray have never met a German car that they have liked.
They blast German cars at every opportunity, and since there are
plenty of those early A4s out there with no control arm replacements,
I'd say that it's just more hyperbole.

> > The replaceable items like brakes and timing belt?
> > Not only VAG vehicles require these things, so the suggestion that
> > somehow European autos are unique in this regard is disingenuous.
>
> I never suggested any such thing. The O.P. asked about maintenance items
> too. I told him about brakes.

By rolling it in with your disparagement of all European cars, you
made an implication, whether you wish to admit it or not.

The simple fact is this - *all* cars need these things, and it's not
just Audi that requires them. In fact, if you want to know about
expensive timing belt changes, look at Lexus or Acura. Audi is pretty
cheap in comparison.

And, truth be told, ANY car of the vintage that the O.P. is looking at
has to have timing belt as part of the equation. And brakes,
probably. Tires might be on the list as well. Add it all up, even at
independent shops, and these standard replacement items will run in
the $1500 - $2500 range, easily. For pretty much any car of the same
year and original price range.

So, saying "pretty much the same as any Euro car, which isn't saying
much" (paraphrase) is making the implication that somehow the items
you listed *aren't* on the list for non-Euro cars.


> Maybe I should have mentioned other crappy components like the temperature
> sender that's been replaced twice in 80,000 miles or the defective throwout
> bearing that was replaced under warranty or the climate control system fan
> that was replaced under warranty or the radiator that failed at 60,000 miles
> or the CD changer that failed at 65,000 miles.

How strange that I have three Audis, for a total of well over 500k
miles, none less than 110k, that have needed none of those things.

Buying Japanese doesn't preclude getting a lemon, BTW.

E.P.

>The simple fact is this - *all* cars need these things, and it's not
>just Audi that requires them. In fact, if you want to know about
>expensive timing belt changes, look at Lexus or Acura. Audi is pretty
>cheap in comparison.
>

I don't know, my 2001 A4 (2.8L V6) timing belt was in excess of $850
with water pump, thermostat, belts, labor, etc .... our 1999 ES300
(V6) was just over $450 for all of the parts and labor. Both were at
independents that specialized in their respective makes.

On 27 Feb 2007 10:47:56 -0800, "Ed Pirrero" >
wrote:
>On Feb 26, 6:51 pm, "iws" > wrote:
>> I think Tom and Ray get it about right inhttp://tinyurl.com/38lqom.
>
>AFAIK, Tom and Ray have never met a German car that they have liked.
>They blast German cars at every opportunity, and since there are
>plenty of those early A4s out there with no control arm replacements,
>I'd say that it's just more hyperbole.

I happen to have an Audi of exactly the same vintage Tom and Ray
discuss in that column, and it so happens that at 106,000 miles,
*ONLY* my front passenger control arms have had to be replaced. The
other three corners are still entirely factory and going strong, so
the Magliozzis' sweeping generalization that I should have planned and
still be planning to replace my control arms every 30,000 miles is
totally bogus.

And Ed is right: the older a car becomes and the more miles it
accumulates, it naturally will need parts replaced. DUH!