I am a new member. Also a potential Audi enthusiast, but not yet an Audi owner. In fact, it is a family member that I have "somewhat" been advising to get an A4 - I say somewhat because there are concerns I have. The person that needs a car wants something that does not exist in a vehicle: Basically a luxurious four cylinder with great safety, reliability, and durability. I think the Audi A4 and Honda CRV are the only vehicles that comes close. Btw, standard A4 performance is sufficient for this person.

To explain some reasons why I picked the A4 for example, in contrast, the Aura TL needs 91 octane, has 4 O2 sensors, and 2 Cats - forget that! Gas prices are becoming a huge concern for this person, so, I'm wondering if this is a bad time to consider "any" present vehicle on the market. I'm certain that the next major focus of vehicle mfrs will have much to do with better fuel mileage. Perhaps next years A4 will get dramatically better mileage - and that's one of the concerns. It seems like we are years away from the hydrogen fuel from becoming commonplace in the US, even though Japan has 20 hydro stations built and ready for the new hydrogen capable Mazdas. Btw, does Audi make a hybrid?

Getting back to the search for the right car, we rode in a new Volvo S60 and it sucked big time - the new sedans are lousy in my opinion. Many 4 cylinder cars have no luxury to them and the leather is hard as cardboard and thin and cheap, for example, like in the Hyundai Sonata.

Also, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and now Volvo I am told, like to monopolize the service end of the business and make it next to impossible to work on ones own car anymore, by either forcing you back to the dealer for parts (M-B), unless you purchase their $20k software satellite PC system (BMW), etc. But I like motor vehicles and it is one of my hobbies to work on them (I repair all my property, whatever it is I own). I like the satisfaction the work gives upon completion of a job. I like to take my time and do a cleaner job than the techs do, and I'm tired of techs breaking my cars and not telling me. I own many tools of all types and have invested a good bit of time money in tools. I was told that it is possible to work on ones own Audi - that you can purchase the service information needed to maintain or repair it; that the A4 has a 4 cylinder engine and that you can use regular gas, and that the Quattro system is reliable, and durable - Is the Quattro system reliable and durable, or a nightmare of high costs?

Why is that when I see an A6 it looks like the perfect medium size Audi, about the size of a 5 series BMW, or an Acura TL. But when I go to the Audi car lots the A4 looks just right and the A6 looks way too big? Are there different sizes of the A4 and A6?

I also see where Consumer Reports has given the 2003, 2004 Audi A4 a nearly perfect red donut score - but previous years have a whole bunch of black donuts, and as usual for CR they harp about the electronics and power equipment on European cars. Is this info from CR accurate? Did the 2003/04Audi A4 become vastly improved? God knows we don't need another European nightmare car, having owned two Volvos [they are tough, but they break too frequently], or like my friend, who owns a Benz, and everyday he is calling me complaining that the check engine light is on again, or the daily nuances that can drive you car crazy. Dealer charges him something like $80 to turn his CE light off.

Any late model A4's that have proven to be trouble free? I kind of like the previous A4 body designs as much as the newer shaved rounded plain jane look.

Btw, we came very close to actually getting a 2002/2003 Acura TL, but discovered in the nick of time, that pre 2004 TL's suffered from bad transmissions. Many Acura enthusiasts confirmed this via email. It was against their interest to promote this information, so that was how I knew it had validity to it. So, with that in mind, can someone steer me in the right direction about the A4's, and anything negative, or idiosyncrasies that I need to know in advance about Audi in general, or particular years, or features to avoid, etc., etc. -- Sorry for any typos that crept in.

diyer

 

wow dude.. thats one hell of a post.. most people won't bother reading it because it was so long .. i admit i just skimmed through it after the 1st couple of paragraphs..

well if you are looking for the 4 cylinder Audi.. that would be the 1.8T .. and like the Acura you would have to put alteast 91 octane in it as well..

maybe you should change your mind about finding a good 4 cylinder.. and up your search to the A4 2.8 or 3.0 6 cylinders.. non-turbo..

those seem to be the best bet for what you are looking for..

 

i got bored after reading the 1st pgph so i have no clue what the other 43 paragraphs said

just get the 1.8T and mod the hell out of it

 

CAUTION: LONG post.

You think his post is long?
The following is worse, but it's intended for him if he chooses to read it.

BTW, why are you guys suggesting the 1.8T?
As a used model yes, but as a new model it doesn't exist.
I'd pick the 2.0T over the former 2.8 V6.

I've been driving for at least 25 years and am auto enthusiast for longer than that. I too enjoy working on my own cars.
The things you are looking for in a vehicle is pretty much what everyone wants, some luxury, economy, quality, reliabilty, utility, and perhaps style.
I've gone through the market in small to mid size economy to near-luxury to luxury cars. There are a LOT of great automobiles out there these days.
Car manufacturing has come a long way and I wouldn't hesitate to even suggest a new Hyundai to the the right person for that car.

Yes, it's hard to find the "right" car and one reason is because there are so many good ones and not because so many suck.
But, one car that sucks to one person will be welcomed by someone else. So, it comes down to what the potential buyer wants for themselves and if the car fits them.

Does the person you are shopping for come to test drives with you? If not, then your job is harder than it should be. I know because being the "car guy" in my circle of friends and family, I am asked to go out and look for cars.
But, I won't go into those stories just mine as I just replaced my 3 year lease BMW 325i with a new 3 year lease A4 2.0T.
The relavent question is; why did I buy the A4 over the other great choices out there?

First, what kind/type of car did I want and what purpose did it have to serve?
I wanted a sedan with comfort. I don't need a lot of luxury, but some would be nice. The luxury was not a priority. Comfort and function of the car was more important than the quality of the leather or the gleam of the chrome trim.
Also, I wanted the car to have "sporting/enthusiasts" driving capabilities. Thus, mechanical function and feel is VERY important to me as I want to feel connected to the road and to the driving experience. A good ride was also important, although I realize that to have a "sport" driving experience a bit of softness of ride may need to be given up...but maybe not, more on that later.
I'm not a brand loyalist so brand doesn't matter from a pride standpoint. I take more pride in knowing the car I bought functions well and performans well regardless of it's brand. Cost is always a concern, so you have to have a dollar amount you can afford. This helps narrow the field.
The cars I finally seriously considered once everthing was test driven: The list is much smaller than the actual cars driven.
Acura TL and TSX
Audi A4
BMW 3 series
Cadillac CTS-V
Lexus IS350
Jaguar X
Volvo S40
G35
Subaru Legacy GT

For me those cars fit the bill. But, I had to cut the Legacy as it didn't fit me too well. I found the seats to be flat and driver room a bit narrow. However, that's because I'm a big guy. My jacket is a 52, and I'm 6'1" with a tall torso so I push the limits of ergonomic design.
If I were smaller, the Legacy GT is a wonderful automobile for a great price considering they sell under invoice even when there are not rebates, and even lower with the rebates.
If you load the GT up with the more "luxury" pkgs. you get a finely designed and comfortable sport sedan that will run rings, in terms of power and speed, around the A4, TSX, 330i and give the TL a run for the money.

The CTS-V is a MONSTER. Awesome driving machine, but most of that is due to it's kick butt engine. Room is excellent, sweet sport seats.
Lower interior quality than the Audi, Lexus, and Acura.

The final decision came down again to the A4 or BMW 3 series. I just seem to prefer the way Germans design their sport sedans.
There is a "feel" in how European cars are engineered and designed compared to the Japanese.
Over the years and surveys the Japanese have come out on top in terms of long term reliability. The Euro/Germans typically get the awards for design and engineering as well as resale.
But, for me it came down to the A4 and 3 series. Now, both cars are NOT known for their reliability record. However, I know that anything mechanical can and does break. You have to decide if the benefits outweigh the negatives. Toyota has one of the best reliability records. Well, that's great if I were buying a refridgerator or toaster where I don't have an emotional attachment to how it feels when I control it.
However, for me the interaction between driver and car is important and can be subtle. For some of us that interaction and sense of involvment is more important than whether or not I have to repalce the tires 2 times over 50,000 miles vs. just once, or whether or not I may have 3.5 problems per 10,000 vs. 1.75 per 10,000.

I really liked Acura TL by the way. For the money it was the most luxurious and gave the most options all included in it's quite attractive price.
Plus, if offerd the best space between the A4 and 3 series as well as the most power and best feeling manual trans. The FWD configuration is also quite safe and very secure in winter driving, not as secure as Quattro, but easily does the job just the same. Still, there was certain lack of feel in the TL in terms of driver engagement. It seemed fun to drive for me mainly due to it's excellent manual trans and it's snick-snick gear box. Yet, I still felt detached from the car. The best attached feeling for me came from the BMW 3 series. That car felt the most direct and connected to the driver/me.
Of all the cars I tested the BMW had the best, most well sorted sport suspension that gave a smooth ride as well as excellent grip and feel.

So, back to the A4 or 330i. As I said, I had been driving a 325i for the past 3 years so the new 330i felt very familiar in terms of driving dynamics.
However, ergonomically there was something not right about it. The sport seats that I LOVED in my 2003 325i now felt a bit cramped under my shoulder blades. The price went up, the style went down. Meanwhile, everytime I would test drive the A4 I felt something that compelled me to keep coming back to it. It has a great turbo engine, a new better operating 6 spd. manual trans, gorgeous interior and built quality, and the famous quattro AWD.
After have the RWD BMW for the past 3 winters, I wanted something that would let me get on my way with less drama. Now, mind you, I grew up with RWD cars so to me driving the BMW on snowy streets was no big thing, but you do have to pay more attention and adjust your driving style with more care.
AWD really appealed to me and I wanted to give it a shot this time around.
Also, as you mentioned gas is not cheap. The 3 series did not improve it's MPG rating well enough from the former models. Getting 17-18mpg in the winter and 21-22mpg in summer was NOT good enough for a manual car. The Audi's 2.0T engine has been reported to get qutie a bit better mileage than the BMW. So that is big bonus to me.

Overall, the A4 has a great look and feel. It's also relatively unique as you don't see them everywhere as you do the BMW.
Audi reliability also appears to have improved over the past few years.
The car rides sweetly and very securely even when going 90mph solid down the highway. It's rock solid and relatively quiet.
The engine has excellent torque and pulls the car quite easily, although I do notice I have to shift more often than in the BMW, but then that happens with a 6spd. trans. The interior is a class above the BMW with perhaps the Lexus being even more luxurious than the Audi.
I got the S-line pkg., which is priced way too high for what you get. But, if you like the look of the pkg. and the added performance of it's wider stickier tires and sport suspension, then you have to decide if it's worth it for you. For me it was as I am leasing, so the $3000 (MSRP) pkg. price won't cost me but half that amount over the lease term.

So far I love my A4. However, there are some things I wish were different. Some thing I already knew before I bought the car and some I'm discovering as I drive it more. The seats are decent, but not as comfry as the BMW sport seats or the Acura TL and TSX seats. The A4 seats lack side bolsters, especially for a "sport sedan" and even more so in a $3000 S-line pkg. option that is intended to give more "sport" to the car.
I detect a bit too much wind noise once above 80mph, but most of the cars have that. I just turn up the stereo. Speaking of stereo, a car in this class deserves a much better sounding audio system than what it has, and the Bose at $1000 is not enough of an upgrade for the money.
The audio is MUCH better than the stock 325i audio system. However, the Bose does not compare at all to the Logic7 system in the new BMW, which comes standard in the 330i and costs $1200 more in the 325i. If the Logic7 were offered in the A4 for $1000, I would have jumped at the opportunity to have an excellent audio system. The rear seat room is rather small in the A4 compared to the other cars in it's class. However, ingress and egress is easier in the A4 than it is in the narrow opening of the 3 series back seat.
Finally, my biggest "I wish this were better" factor of the A4 is it's "electric" steering with variable power assistance. It feels very artificial at low speeds as it gets extremely light, so much so that you could operate the steering with your pinky even if it were broken. The steering weight/effort does go up to a very nice feel once speed is up only 10mph, but overall the steering feel is muted. The steering itself is quite direct and quick and that I enjoy. I just wish they would have left one weight on the steering at all speeds and allowed a bit more road feel to come through.

Well, that was rather long but I hope it helps a bit in at least explaining why I choose the A4.
Good power, great build quality, great design, very good MPG, style, and comfort. Lots of good things to be appreciated.
And, let's not forget the GREAT lease rates that let you drive a high end Euro/German sport sedan for not much more than buying a Chevy Impala SS, but then one may like the Impala, but that's a different story and different website.

 

Yeah, with turbo cars you have to run high octane (leading to higher ga prices). You probably should go the 2.8 or 3.0 route.


Wow!! You guys are really going post crazy with the lengths.

 

[/quote]

CAUTION: LONG post. You think his post is long? The following is worse, but it's intended for him if he chooses to read it ...

A: Well, I chose to read it, but you knew that, didn't you!? I must have written a book in a past life. But seriously, I enjoyed it and it helped.

One new question: Since you must use high octane gasoline in a turbo, does that mean the Audi V6 non-turbos can use regular gasoline, 87 octane?

We also considered these vehicles. Very similar to your list

Acura TL
Audi A4
BMW 5 series
Lexus ES330
Jaguar S type
Volvo S60
Infiniti G35 Q: why did you reject this car? Isn't this RWD?

" ... Toyota has one of the best reliability records. Well, that's great if I were buying a refridgerator or toaster where I don't have an emotional attachment to how it feels when I control it ... "

A: Funny and good point. Personally I like the road feel design better too. I used to own an original 1967 Shelby GT-500. That was a fast, nice looking, great sounding car but I would not care to own one now. I would like a 5 series BMW with Acura or Lexus seats.

"... the price went up, the style went down ...

A: Yes, I agree, I noticed that too. I despise the newer BMW's.

" ... Now, mind you, I grew up with RWD cars so to me driving the BMW on snowy streets was no big thing, but you do have to pay more attention and adjust your driving style with more care.

A: I still like RWD, I grew up in a mountainous area of PA. lots of snow (measured in feet, not inches) - no problem! I laugh myself silly every winter watching the city folk panic over a few inches [especially the wives of yuppie-suburban-computer-stock-millionaire-types in their monstrosity SUV's].

" ... I got the S-line pkg., which is priced way too high for what you get. But, if you like the look of the pkg. and the added performance of it's wider stickier tires and sport suspension, then you have to decide if it's worth it for you ... " [/quote]

A: Is this S-line pkg. what makes some Audi's look to have a very road hugging stance? I ntoice this when they all pass me on the highway.

A: The small rear seat may be an issue with this person needing to haul around me or sis and three grand children.

diyer

 

R U sure? My local Audi dealerships tell me that you cannot use regular gas in any recent audi. I mean perhaps 1970's Audis, but not what is made these days.

But I sure wish you were right about that ...

diyer

 

Geez, you guys are insane with your long posts.

Hell, I always put 93 octane in my audi, wouldn't give her anything less.

If you want to rip it, get an a4 and bt it, and forget about the gas. its only a few bucks a tankful, put a crowbar in your wallet and live little. Just make sure it has good seatbelts.

If your worried about gas, buy a hybrid.

 

Here is the concept regarding "octane". Octane is not something that is "added" per se.
It is a result of the fuel formulation to achieve certain properties. One of the properties sought is the fuels ability to resist "auto ignition", meaning it's ability to resist igniting before compression is at the proper point for optimal engine performance. Higher octane rated fuel is more resistant to igniting before the spark even while the air/fuel combination is under extreme compression and/or heat. Lower octane fuel will more likey auto ignite or explode under heat and pressure before the spark comes. That is called "detonation". Detonation is an uncontrolled explosion of the air/fuel mixture before optimal compression is done and before the spark ignites it. Detonation has the quality of having "multiple flame fronts". What is that? Well, in a proper ignition moment the spark is the single point source for igniting the fuel, which then burns from that point in a "controlled" manner. When detonation (can happen with preignition as well) happens, the air/fuel burns due to heat and compression, thus it explodes as it's ignition point is not know and there are several points of ignition. Thus, the mixture burns with multiple flame fronts all colliding towards each other. That explosion is audible as "knock".
If knock is left unchecked and uncontrolled, those shock waves from the explosion cause a tremendous increase in pressure and heat to build up in the combustion chamber. Left unchecked the knock can actually crack that piston. Not a good thing.

So, what can control a knock event? Retarding timing can reduce the knock. Pulling back the timing can slow the combustion process to get the knock under control and stopped. Knock is detected by a "knock sensor". In the past, knock sensors were used primerely on turbo engines as they are prone to high heat and have increased compression pressures in the combustion pressure, afterall that is why they produce more power, due to the turbo's ability to stuff more air into the combustion chamber above normal atmosphere. That increased heat and associated pressure increases the change of knock.
So, a knock sensor is an auditory device that is tuned to "hear" the frequencies associated with knock events. When detected the sensor sends it's info to the computer that then decides how/when to apply the timing reduction and or fuel controls.
Reducing timing also reduces power. Remember that.

So, that's why higher octane rated fuels are better for higher compression and forced induction engines. The high octane fuel is formulated to have a greater resistance to ignite prior to the spark. Thus, "octane" isn't something that's added. It's a number derived from testing the fuel formulation in a test engine that has variable compression. As you increase the load on the engine you also increase the heat, as you increase the boost you also increase the combustion chamber pressure. Heat and pressure are what can trigger knock. So, using high octane fuel means the fuel is more resistant to knock under those conditions.

A high performance/high output engine can only achieve it's maximum output when conditions are correct for it to operate at peak level.
If you use lower octane fuel, knock is more likely to occur. If knock occurs the computer will retard the timing to keep the knock under control.
By pulling the timing to control the knock the engine will also produce less than optimal power.
So, can you use lower octane fuel? Yes, but you also can lose power and efficiency leading to lower MPG and less power. If you paid for the power production then pay for the fuel to get the best performance. You can at times use a lower octane fuel if you know that you won't be needing/using higher power. But, instead of going to 87 octane, you could easily use 90-91 instead of 92-93.
Typically the difference between grades is only about 10 cents. If 87 octane is $1.00, 89-90 is about $1.10, 91-93 is about $1.20.
From the lowest to highest let's use 20 cents. If you buy 10 gallons, the added cost is $2. A typical tankful at 15 gallons will only be about $3 more.
That is not very significant. Also, you can split that to $1.50 if you go with midgrade.
But, the point is higher octane fuel will allow the engine to produce it's best performance and give you it's best efficiency. For the added $3 per tankful, it's worth it. In a pinch or two if you really need to, yes you can use lower octane fuel and your car will be just fine, it will simply produce less power and be less efficient.
Winter has more ideal conditions in which you can use lower octane fuel as the temps are colder and the engine temps are kept cooler much easier.
Summer heat and pulling the car uphill is most demanding in an engine and requires the proper fuel.

BTW, once you understand how "octane" works and what it is, you also understand that "premium" means nothing. Higher octane fuel is not "better" fuel, nor will it make an engine produce more power just because there is "more octane". Engines are designed and produced to take advantage of fuel formulations. If an engine is designed to produce it's best power and efficiency with 89 octane fuel, then going to 92 octane will get you NOTHING.
You are simply spending more money and getting nothing in return. In fact, some people have actually had lower MPG by using higher octane fuel in an engine disigned for lower octane fuel.

Oh yeah. Another LOOONG post. That's ok, I've got the time.

 

Infiniti G35 Q: why did you reject this car? Isn't this RWD?

A: Is this S-line pkg. what makes some Audi's look to have a very road hugging stance? I ntoice this when they all pass me on the highway.

A: The small rear seat may be an issue with this person needing to haul around me or sis and three grand children.

diyer

[/quote]

I liked the G35. It doesn't feel as light on it's feet as the BMW, but it's got great power. Also, the ride is not up to the standard of BMW and Audi.
The price is great even though the inside is a little lack luster in terms of quality materials, but overall I think it's nice.
The exterior shape is ok, but to me it's a bit boring.
The main reason I rejected it is due to the very uncomfortable seats for me. Why the heck would the engineers put the seat controls in the thigh bolster?
Bolsters are used to hug your body when in a turn. Thus, if you put hard, sharp edged objects in the bolsters, at some point the object will push into the drivers flesh. That's the main reason why I can't own the G35. The seat design is awful and frankly, stupid.
There is a new G35 replacement coming this fall and it looks pretty cool with even more power. I hope they fix the seats and put the controls in a more neutral place other than pushing into peoples body parts. ha!

That nice low hugging stance is the sport package which lowers the standard A4. And, with the wide tires it looks like it means business and it does.
The S-line adds a bit more "sport" or "aggressive" look as there are some body parts which draw the body look lower thus giving it a more hunkdered down look, plus there are low profile 18" wheels and tires that are a bit wider than the standard A4 with sport suspension.
The A4 with sport suspension uses the same suspension as the S-line, so the lowering is the same.

The front driver/passenger room is quite nice and roomy in the A4. I feel it's a bit roomier than the BMW. The rear is a bit more cramped, but if it's grandchildren they should be fine, for a while at least until they get bigger.

The TL has decent/bigger rear room, but it's a larger overall car than the A4 or 3 series. The A3 and 3 series are compact class, the TL is a midsize like the A6 and 5 series. The TSX is a compact size, but inside you can really feel that it's bigger in the front drivers area as well as more room in the back.
The TSX is a fine automobile. If they gave it 50 more HP and a good dose of torque, it would be a much bigger hit and seller.