Scott's indecision (long)

[Tom Nas]

"Tessie McMillan" <tessmc at drizzle.com> wrote:

(snip)

>So which are you, Scott: are you a driver, or are you a passenger? Are you
>an early adopter, or do you stick with the solid-gold software? Do you like
>to build your own machines, or would you rather buy a package? Do you have
>kids, a mortgage, orthodontia bills and other monthly commitments that would
>make upgrading your current car more attractive, or are you a dot-com
>millionaire? (BTW, I'm kind of including an urQ in the same category as the
>CGT -- it's a 'newer' car, not a 'new' car, with the added unknown that you
>don't really know it's previous ownership history.)

Agree 100%.
I'd like to add one thing: for me, tinkerability is part of a car's appeal. 
I like a car that needs a few jobs doing to it, especially as long as those 
remaining problems don't make the car unreliable. I like looking under the 
hood and seeing the engine instead of a couple of tamperproof covers, being 
able to check things out, do simple repairs and upgrades without having to 
pay someone at a dealership to fiddle about with a computer to fix my 
mysterious error codes.

A new car might drive very well indeed, be safe and comfortable, but that 
is its only appeal in my opinion. I'm not even sure if the new cars are an 
aesthetic improvement in every respect.

To each his or her own, but mechanic simplicity and rugged build have their 
attractions.

My suggestion to Scott: either upgrade the CGT or buy the UrQ and beta-test 
it on short runs until it's reliable. When you get the basic maintenance 
done, most older Audis are pretty reliable. You've got the q-list as a 
back-up, every known problem on every Audi model has been encountered and 
dealt with by someone on this list...

Regards, Tom

PS Tess: a car-nut friend and I were recently discussing our top-10 
automotive horrors. We agreed on one thing: drive-by-wire on the new Alfa 
166. :-)