I have a 2000 A4 2.8 with manual transmission, no quattro and the
optional sport package (stiffer springs and 17-inch wheels/tires). I
drive with a lead foot and take turns a little hard, but I don't take
the car racing or offroad or anything like that.
I just had to spend about $700 replacing the motor mounts and
replacing a worn tie rod end (front right). The drive train had been
shifting noticeably on throttle lift after hard acceleration, and they
noticed the tie rod problem when they did the motor mount work.
This car has only 35,000 miles on it, supposedly comes from a company
with performance heritage, and I'm not beating it up or anything, and
yet it needs this work after only a few years? This doesn't seem
right. I had a lot less problems with my 12-year-old Honda Civic ...
and I realize that maybe nobody can match Honda/Toyota reliability,
but I would expect the basics of drivetrain and suspension to be well
done in a car at this price level.
Can anyone comment on this?
If you're going to point me to a recall or a tech bulletin, then what
are my recourse options considering the car's out of warranty and I
already paid for the work?
Tie rod ends wear out . . . especially if you take a lot of hard corners.
35,000 seems a little low to be replacing them already, but it's better if
something like that is caught early. The motor mounts aren't really
suspension. In a small car with a strong engine (like an A4 2.8, for
example), it is possible to stress the motor mounts with very aggressive
driving. Torque is your enemy here, so the manual tranny didn't help. Try
shifting before 7 grand from now on. :) -Dave
On a side note, how many sets of tires you been through already? :)
Thanks for the insight. I guess I do corner fairly hard, and 90% of
my driving is in the city. I'd think they would have sized the motor
mounts for the engine. I mean, it's not like this is an afterthought
turbo bolted onto a smaller engine, it's a straight-up V6.
The very first thing I had to get used to in this car was how the V6
engine really did not like to be reved super high, unlike the little
1.8L 4 in the Honda -- gawd I beat the crap out of that engine and it
kept going. Redlined it nearly every low shift for 12 years. On the
Audi I rarely go over 5000 revs and never over 6000. Redline is at
6500 I think. So I don't really think I'm reving it hard, although I
routinely plant the throttle at low revs. Thus torquing up the
drivetrain pretty good, I guess.
I'm about halfway through the second set (at 35K miles). Both sets
were factory approved Dunlop SP/8000E's. OK I hear the gallery
spinning up to flame each other about tires now so I'll step out of
the way :)
Ah, the difference between a Honda I4 and an Audi V6. They require very
different driving style. The Honda engine will have all of its power at
the top end, with very little torque (comparatively speaking) at lower
revs. The Honda will thrive on high revs. The Audi V6, however,
develops a good deal of torque in the lower to mid-band rev range, but
the power falls away at high revs.
It sounds as though you've learnt that the V6 makes best progress in the
2500-5500 rev range. The only reason for reving higher than that is if
it's the wrong moment to momentarily lose drive with a gear change. If
you are driving more sedately, the engine will pull smoothly, and
reasonably strongly, from 1500 rpm, or less. All in my experience from
owning an A4 V6 2.6, and A6 V6 2.7T and an RS6 V8 4.2T and previous
experience of Honda 1.5 and 1.6 I4 engines.
Peter Bell (Note Spamtrap - To reply, replace 'invalid' with 'bellfamily')
I haven't driven an Audi V6, so I can't comment on the "comparatively
speaking" part. However, my 95EX Accord can easily outperform pretty
much everything on the road at any speed. Now, you have to realize
that this is a statement of what I have seen. This means with DRIVERS
that I have seen. I have blown away Mustang GTs in my car. Obviously
the drivers were idiots to get beaten by a Honda. The point is that
my car, which is rather old at 150,000 miles plus, still out performs
the majority of driver-vehicle combinations I come across. So even if
the Audi does have more torque at low revs, I don't see why it
matters. A Ferrari has the ability to go faster than my car, I
presume, yet they generally don't.
As far as saying the Honda has ALL of its power at top end, that is
not even close to being true. My car is almost never in first gear,
as second has more than enough torque from a stop. I can easily
accelerate whenever the tach is above 2000 RPMs, where you state the
Audi has power at 1500 - not a huge difference.
No I have not.
All 'expressions' are mathmatical in nature so if your 'go fuck
yourself' statement is a true expression, what does it equal?
How about 'I am an idiot'?
You should have just bought the Audi instead of coming here and being
However, my 95EX Accord can easily outperform pretty
I remember someone trying to outperform my A4 1.8TQ in his '95 Honda Accord.
That was before I had it chipped. Now, let me say that at lower revs, the
power/weight ratio is still favourable to the Honda in this comparison.
Anywhere else my A4 beat the Honda, although the Honda was surprisingly
close in terms of low-speed acceleratio, which meant we were on a par in
start-and-go traffic but then I left it behind.
Now that my car is chipped it bears no comparison but of course a Civic R -
with 200PS and its low weight should accelerate relatively faster than any
stock A4. I always thought the A4's biggest handicap is its weight, and may
I say I'm not happy with its 5-gear manual tranny, either.
American Accord are more powerful and the VTEC engines were available in the
upper versions. An Accord 2.4L 160HP will keep up with a Passat/A4 1.8T
170HP, while being more economical and running on regular fuel.
But it is stll an Accord. Boring.
I tested the Acura TSX and it was OK up to a point but the 200 hp
going thru the front wheels is a great way to be pulled into a turn.
And the TL? 270 hp, same problem but you get pulled into the corner
faster and with less control.
When I went looking I didn't consider the vanilla Japanese econoboxes
for a second. If I wanted one I wouldn't have even bothered testing
it. I would have just ordered a Camry XLE or the equivalent Accord.
And the Passat is heavier than the A4 (with quattro) and has less
trunk space etc. The Passat 1.8T 4Motion is a consolation prize
compared to the A41.8Tq. And more turbo lag. Nice but not good enough.
I know when some young gun revs up his tarted up Honda/Acura I can
whip him. Neither can outdrive the A4q, no way. But since I am
geezerly and sedate, I can be happy in the knowledge that I don't have
to show off. I know. The kid doesn't. Mmmm smug.
Don't assume that your choice will be the best fit for others. It is all
between your two ears.
Funny because virtually in ALL comparaison tests I have read around the
planet that includes both Acura TSX (AKA Euro Accord and Audi A4), the Euro
Accord won. The A4 is obese (3-500lbs heavier) and underpowered for all
The Quattro system is dead weight that won't make the car more agile or any
safer, to the contrary. It can be fun on mud/snow. That's it.
firstname.lastname@example.org (Steve Grauman) wrote in message
I dunno. He and Saintor are about the same kind of moron. Anti-Audi
idiots who troll newsgroups in their ample spare time, bench-racers
who have "driven" every different kind of car (of course, this is
because they have so many "friends" that own all these different
cars.) Didja ever notice that they always know everything about
Independant to any opinion content, email@example.com alias Jonesy
(and with also a high possibility of firstname.lastname@example.org alias Eric)
has proven in the past to be disrespectful and to behave constantly in an
unappropriate manner that is clearly defined as harassment. Reason may be
mental health or at least obnoxious personnality. It is no mistake he was
listed in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet as a potential net abuser. If this
reply shows in this actual thread, it must be considered as just another
evidence of his harassment habit. No more waste of my valuable time with
Sorry for the inconvenience."
You already lost your supernews account over this. Shall we go for
your videotron account as well?
I'd be happy to point out how you're violating the TOS and AUP to
them. Consider this your final warning.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.