[s-cars] Reliability of mid 90's 90CS Quattros

[Tom Mullane]

True, the earlier cars may seem like a safe haven because they are similar
to ours so they seem familar, but go with a later model 90 over an early
one.

I currently maintain the sister-in-law's 1993 90 (formerly the wife's car),
my urS6, my 1991 CoupeQ, and couple few (3) C5 A6's, so I am pretty familiar
with both the early and late 90's.  Newer cars are always easier to work on,
and the V6 is a really good engine.  Also, the electronics are vastly more
reliable (age related); somewhere in 1993 Audi separated and color coded the
various harnesses - muy bien.  The early 1993's had some leaks (it's an
Audi, what did you expect) and there is an injector O-ring recall because
the cars burst into flame (again, an Audi).  Early 1993 cars are also prone
to evaporator issues; if the AC is flat, get ready to pull the dash.

The 90 in my care has 180+k on it and runs very well. Every time I get in it
I marvel at how well it is holding up.  I recommend you go with a 1994 or
1995 if you can find one.

...and then do an AAN conversion, of course :-)

Tom


Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:53:36 -0700
From: "Wayne Dohnal" <wd1 at hevanet.com>
Subject: [s-cars] Reliability of mid 90's 90CS Quattros
To: "S-car list" <s-car-list at audifans.com>, <calvinlc at earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000e01c4a13a$0ddbcbe0$9ea55e82 at dohnal>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="Windows-1252"

>Just wondering what experiences people have had with the mid 90's 
>(2.8L) versions of the 90 CS Quattros.  I am looking for a car for my 
>nephew and I would like it to be pretty reliable but not be like 
>driving your living
room
>sofa.  Any experiences with these cars (good or bad)?  Thanks!
>--Calvin

I haven't owned one but almost purchased one a few years ago and did a bunch
of research and asking around.  I test drove this car (a 95) before doing
any research and liked it a lot.  I ran well, felt solid, and was
comfortable.  Other than the normal Audi things, the only major reliability
issue I came up with is with the engine.  There are problems with a leaky
valley pan gasket and head gaskets, which can lead to other failures.  I
also concluded that the timing belt job is significantly more difficult than
on the I5 engine.  I was ready to buy the car after a pre-purchase
inspection but the inspection uncovered oil leaking from a head gasket and
the seller wasn't willing to take my lowered offer.

After that episode I learned more about the S-cars and learned about all of
the toys that were left off the 90 CS, like power passenger seat, glass
sunroof, various gauges, more comfortable seats,  and whatever else I can't
remember offhand.  In hindsight I'm really glad the deal fell through and I
ended up with the S-car.  I was concerned about reliability problems with
the turbo but that seems to be a non-issue.

My feeling is that if I were going for a 90 I'd look for an early-90s model
with the I5.  Too bad the horrible small trunk is part of that package.  I'm
sure you will hear from people who have owned a 90 to get more detailed
info.

Wayne Dohnal
1994 S4