Cost of repair Audi BMW Saab...(crossposting)

If the above isn't the victim of a typo, I invite you to take a look at the torque vs rpm curves of biturbo 30v 2.7L audi engines and any straight-six NA bmw engine you care to examine.

Clearly, you will be surprised...

/daytripper '00 s4 6spd

If you compare equal power engine and you thrash the engine, the BMW will always give you better mileage, so obviously you know nothing about BMW engines.

And huge lag and less driveability and the BMW would still beat the SAAB on acceleration, which is what counts. Peak HP won't drive you anywhere.

Audi's 1.8T should not have any detectable turbo lag but I can spot that easily, now I can't think Saab turbos can be very different.

And their torque is way much linear, which makes them better all round. Their smoothness alone qualifies.

Your definition of handling superbly does not tally with the fact when I go skiing I can often find BMW drivers stranded or looking for their chains. I've driven RWD and can tell you again it's pretty close to useless in really bad weather. Think of slopes uphill. The proper tyres will give you more fun under very specific hyper-controlled conditions but can't do much in real life winter driving on icy roads.

Quite probably true, except for the by and large.

But you will need to replace the rear ones much more often, if you enjoy spirited driving on winding roads, that is. We all know it is winding roads that are good fun.

I have a set of fully dedicated winter Vredesteins to be able to enjoy my quattro in the winter, and a set of Sport Contact 2 that my car is already "wearing" now.

At the end of your BMW life you will probably have spent more money on tyres for your BMW than I will have on my Quattro gear. The difference is you'll have left your BMW parked when there was snow on the road, while I'll have been driving my Quattro all year round.

JP Roberts

Are they too common, or do you simply notice them more than other cars? Do a fun experiment and count the cars passing by on the freeway. Then provide some figures. I can't speak for other countries, but in the Netherlands you'd lose count of the Peugeots, VWs, Fords and Opels before you count a couple of BMWs. Yet, I *see* more BMWs (or expensive Mercs and Audis) simply because they stand out more in traffic.

Same thing for the "Get out of my way" thing: a Golf or Peugeot that's being pushy on the freeway would leave a less lasting impression on you than that one shiny BMW.

I can't remember all the Renaults and Volvos and VW driving up to my tailgate, probably thinking, "yeah, I'm gonna show this BMW my car's better/faster/whatever". Very occasionally I see a BMW or an A3 do the same. Yet *those* times I can remember.

People see what they wanna see.

Peter

(someone wrote, but JP trimmed the address of,)

I've never seen the word "thrash" in a scientific analysis of engine output and fuel consumption. Perhaps you can point us to, you know, actual data to back up your claim?

You've never driven a Saab Turbo, have you. "huge lag"? Maybe in 1978...

Ah, so you _are_ talking about something you haven't driven. "Well, the engineers at Audi couldn't figure it out, so Saab must not have either"?, is that your thinking?

Please compare and contrast to, say, the 2.3Liter Turbo engine from Saab. Show your sources. (hint: flat is flat). For extra credit, show the shift points as they relate to the torque curve, per RPM.

Dave Hinz

Boys, boys, this has turned into a pissing competition...

DAS

At least in Germany seeing lots of BMWs and Mercs is no illusion! They are top sellers:

DAS

Yes, I know about Germany. Germans know what to drive and how to make it. :-)

But I don't believe the OP was in Germany.

I wonder, what are the top selling cars in England? Do you know a site with stats?

The top selling cars in Holland in 2003 were: 1. Opel (55.698 nieuwe exepmplaren) 2. Peugeot (52.412 exemplaren) 3. Renault (47.159 nieuwe auto's) 4. Ford (42.146 nieuwe auto's) 5. Volkswagen (40.390 exemplaren)

Unfortunately, the list ends here.

Do you count taxi cabs? That's not fair :-)

I'll make a short drive around my neighborhood, just for fun, and count the Mercs and BMWs I see. I'll post the results tomorrow or the day after. I'll also post the number of corners, and then we'll know.

Peter

"JP Roberts" wrote

And the front-driver SAABs (and Audis, for that matter) will have to have their front tires replaced more often than their rears. Even.

And I have a set of Michelin Pilot Alpines for my 330xi for winter. A guy in an S4, parked next to me last winter, said he almost didn't make it up the ski hill's road. I said: "get rid of the PZeros."

Floyd

I replace the front and rear tires on my Saab 9-5 at the same time. You have to apply some form of wear management so the front and rear tires wear close to the same rate.

Imad Al-Ghouleh schrieb:

Because it is. Especially compared to a FWD saab or a quattro Audi. :-)

BTDT.

The rearwheel drive is fun and with all the electronic gimmicks it will really do it's job. However at a certain climb angle or even slipperyness of the road, the rearwheel drive gives in, then the FWD and then the quattro.

Fair enough. In my experience, handling is one thing. In dry conditions I couldnt argue which is better on the edge of friction as I haven't driven all drive concepts in this condition. Maybe I should make it clear that IMO the risk of getting stuck with a rearwheel drive is higher than with a FWD or quattro.

Ok, so I live in Austria, we also have quite a bit of snow and it's always the RWD vehicles that get stuck first.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Using the same high quality winter tires FWD's do get you further and quattro even more so.

Regards

Wolfgang

fbloogyudsr schrieb:

Good advice. Quattro does not negate the laws of physics. Friction still counts :-)

Regards

Wolfgang

I switch between winter tires and summer tires when appropriate, and what was on the front last year, goes to the back this year. They're all directional, so that's as much tire rotation as is possible, but you're right, it makes the sets ready for replacement all at once.

All cars wear tires, and unless something is drastically wrong, it's not going to differentiate between manufacturers.

Dave Hinz

Sorry, no. This is contrary to the laws of physics. If you assume equal axle weights, as the car climbs it places more weight over the rear axle and less over the front. So a rear wheel drive car would have an advantage over a FWD in climbing. Obviously, an AWD car with the same weight and tires would be better than either.

I have never found a FWD car is better than a RWD car in the snow in general. The reason people think that is because at the point that they

-Fred W

They sell more, and these are the cars that last for 300k miles or more, while the Opels, Fords and VW's are in the scrap heap.

-Fred W

For an anecdotal data

I owned an early SAAB 900 Turbo and it was without a doubt the most troublesome car I've ever owned. Let's take a look:

--front calipers with integral emergency brakes cost a bundle and rot in a few years (40K)

--front seat springs (actually rubber straps) snap due to seat heaters (50K)

--transmission (60K)

--key breaks off in switch on floor (60K, middle of January)

--head liner falls down (65K)

--fuel gauge breaks (50K)

--brake master cylinder (55K)

--fuel smell all the time (>40K)

--cracked head (80K)

--another transmission (90K)

--turbo (90K)

--clutch slave and master cylinders (60K)

--sunroof leaks

--door seals fail

--anything plastic starts to crumble

I used synthetic oil every 3000 miles so the engine ran great. The maintenance just cost too much to keep. I bought a VW and relaxed on the weekends.

Matthew

Just exactly the point I wanted to make!