quattro Digest, Vol 38, Issue 51

[Sean]

Hello,

I own a 91 CQ and have run my dad's old beater 200 20vtq for about a 
year now.  I would call that car reliable to a point.  The car has 332+K 
miles on it and I keep racking them up.  The drive train hasn't been 
replaced to my knowledge and between me, and my Dad we have run the car 
well over 200K now.  The car recently went into the shop for an ignition 
switch which we knew would sooner or later break.  Considering it was 
the original and that the car hasn't had to many hiccups in recent years 
that was an unfortunate event, but not unexpected.  The car hasn't shown 
it's wear like my Coupe has.  My coupe being 275K is on a short lease of 
life these days.  The 200 on the other hand still kicks some as while 
getting around.

If the car was maintained my the PO it should be a decent car.  The 200 
I am driving currently has maybe been in the shop 4-5 times since we got 
it.  Things like the ignition switch, blower motor, timing belt, etc.  
Nothing unexpected or outrageously expensive for these cars.  My Coupe 
on the other hand has eaten one thing after another so if that is any 
indication of things.  The turbo cars are all more expensive to maintain 
then non turbo's due to the extra wear of the turbo.  I am not a fan of 
the 1.8T as I part time in a Machine shop that rebuilds heads.  We have 
a pretty constant flow of 20v 1.8t heads with any where from 12-20 bent 
valves.  Any car that costs 1400 for a head after 60k isn't that cheap, 
though they are reliably broken.

HTH
Sean
91 CQ with 3.6l PT v8 and TDi 6-speed

>C4 series cars certainly have a reputation for reliability that exceeds 
>Audi's (low) standards.
>My '95 a6q is both reliable and affordable to fix when, on occasion, it 
>isnt.
>
>Somehow I assume the S-turbo cars are less cheap to keep :-)
>
>Grant
>On Dec 23, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Kent McLean wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Adam A. Luy wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Just wanted to throw it out there and see what all y'all had to say 
>>>about it.
>>>      
>>>
>>What Taka and Jim Rose said.  My '89 200 TQ was a great car, but
>>reliable it wasn't. I bought it for $2900, and put another $4K into
>>it over 2 years to bring it up to snuff -- regular maintenance plus
>>non-maintenance things like Euro headlights, oil cooler, and a gas
>>tank. My '94 100 S Avant, FWD and automatic, has been a model of
>>reliability in comparison. I paid $2800 for it, and in 2 years have
>>replaced the ignition switch, a control arm, front brake pads, and
>>tires.
>>
>>So, I'd recommend a 1995.5 S6 Avant.  It won't be cheap, but it
>>will be more reliable than a 200. It will also have the I-5 turbo
>>that takes power upgrades like a politician. A B5 Avant will not
>>have the power you want, and it won't have the collectible charisma
>>of the S6.
>>
>>-- 
>>Kent McLean
>>'94 100 S Avant, "Moody"
>>'89 200 TQ, "Bad Puppy" up in smoke
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>quattro mailing list
>>quattro at audifans.com
>>http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/quattro
>>---
>>Watch this space for ads :)
>>    
>>