settling on '88 5kcstq instead of '91 200 or V8?

[Fred Munro]

Konstatntin;

The major problem with the 5k auto transmission was the failure of the seal
between the differential and the tranny, allowing intermixing of the diff
and tranny oil. I believe this problem was resolved to some extent in the
'89 and later 200 auto transmissions, but judging from listers comments it
is not a strong transmission. My Audis have always had manual transmissions,
so I have no personal experience with the auto transmissions.

Fred

----- Original Message -----
From: "Konstatntin Bogach" <kbogach at home.com>
To: "Fred Munro" <munrof at isys.ca>
Cc: <quattro at audifans.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 1:45 AM
Subject: Re: settling on '88 5kcstq instead of '91 200 or V8?


> What about auto transmission? Was it changed in 200t? Still can not get
> of idea to buy 200t for my wife.
>
> Konstantin Bogach.
> 200tq 89
>
> Fred Munro wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ken;
> >
> > I have owned an '86 5ktq, a '91 200q, and now a '94 S4.
> > Based on my experiences with these cars, the 200 is a more refined and
more
> > reliable version of the 5000. On the 200, Audi resolved a lot of the
> > problems which plagued the 5000 ( leaking steering rack, leaking
hydraulic
> > pump, door handles, etc., etc., etc.). My 200q was a lot more reliable
and a
> > lot less maintenance intensive than the 5ktq. The 5ktq was more fun to
> > drive, however, since the 200q has been "sissified" a bit for the North
> > American market - softer brake pedal, more steering assist. If I had to
do
> > it over again, though, I would choose the 200q over a 5ktq.
> > The S4 is a completely different story - IMHO definitely superior to the
> > 5ktq and the 200q, although I do miss the 200q in some respects.
> >
> > Fred Munro
> > '94 S4  117k km