I'm interested in a 98-2001 A6 with 2.8L (not a turbo) Manual transmission, but I'm concerned about reliability and I'd like to get a better idea of what reliability and maintenance costs would be like. Here's why:

We've had our '90 Nissan Maxima SE Manual for over 12 years. It's been very reliable, but my wife is pushing for something newer -- specifically, year 2000 or later. To me, the 3rd-gen Maxima is a wonderful classic, but to her, it's just an old car, and she wants something newer. She won't hear of new paint; it has to be a newer car. When she recently spoke seriously of replacing it with a Camry, I just about had a heart attack. So I'm on the hunt for something that will keep her happy without being bland.

Requirements:
-- Seat 5 adults comfortably.
-- 4-door sedan (wife hates wagons & hatchbacks)
-- Manual transmission
-- Fun to drive
-- Wife wants light blue (first choice) or silver

I'm not excited about where Nissan took the Maxima in the 5th & 6th generations (2000 - 2008). But the Audi A6 looks interesting. Even more room for 3 in the back seat, a nicer, prettier, more refined and luxurious car, and AWD, which would be nice for the black ice we get on the hilly roads around here (Seattle area).

However, when I look at the Consumer Reports reliability for the A6, I shake in my boots. It looks pretty bad, compared to the Nissan and our Toyota minivan.

Googling tells me that the 2.7L Turbo is particularly high maintenance (I was thunderstruck to learn that you have to pull the engine to replace them), but the 2.8L had no turbo and was available with manual transmission 98-2001. The 2.8L's acceleration, though obviously slower than the (bi-turbo) 2.7L, looks good enough for me, in fact it looks pretty close to our Maxima.

So what do you think about the reliability of that combination? About how should I expect maintenance costs to compare to our Maxima?


FWIW, I'm also considering a 2007 Honda Accord sedan, V6, Manual (light blue available that year only for Manual V6). Low maintenance, and strong acceleration, but weak handling compared the Maxima & A6, and no AWD. Still, though, better handling than a Camry. I'm sure my wife would love it.

(Why am I comparing a 98-2001 Audi A6 to a 2007 Accord? Because they're both in our price range. A 2007 A6 would cost more than we want to pay.)

I'd really like to get the Audi. But unless I hear some really good news about reliability, I think it's probably going to be the Accord. Just so long as it's not a Camry!

 

If money is an issue and you are concerned about reliability, steer clear of Audi (and BMW, and Mercedes). At 15 years old, things wear out and break and parts and labor can be expensive. I find the Japanese cars to be boring, but they are more reliable and a little less expensive (I have heard) to work on.


E.g., just put inexpensive front rotors and dust-free pads on my A6 and it was $370.