[s-cars] WAS gas prices, now racist subaru's

[LL - NY]

Yeah, I wonder if Audi would do that:
 Be compassionate - Bwaahahahahaah
Fix it quickly - U vant it ven?
Offered a Loaner car? - Vat, ve haf Loaner Karrs? Bwahahahaha
 As for durabilty, in WRC, haven't been too many Subie engine failures. 
Running into things, well that's another story. 
 Again, not saying I don't like (old) Audi. One of the reasons I jumped on 
my S6 was that
I couldn't picture myself doing a modded A4 1.8T or S4TT (although the avant 
would've been QUITE helpful) due to the comparatively lesser build quality 
(not by much, but it's there). Yes, the Audi's are more tanklike than Subies 
(most noticable in the interior materials and paint finish) but they've lost 
a little of that something that made them special when even they, Ja!, had 
to build to a price in order to stay competitive. In the meantime, lets 
accept the cars for what they are, expensive AWD cars with potential and 
class, lesser priced cars with potential and decent build. 
 LL - NY
   On 9/6/05, R. Mair <waves at comcast.net> wrote: 
> 
> Happened once to my friends 2003, somewhere around 30k miles I believe. 
> The dealer was however very compassionate about the problem, fixed it up 
> pretty quick and offered a loaner car.
> 
> Rolf
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Pasqualoni, James E
> To: 'R. Mair' ; Taka Mizutani
> Cc: S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 2:12 PM
> Subject: RE: [s-cars] WAS gas prices, now racist subaru's
> 
> 
> My friend's 98 Outback 2.5l has had the heads rebuilt twice due to head
> gasket failure. Twice. With only 75k on the odo. So how do the 2.0 (WRX)
> and 2.5 (Sti) turbo motors differ from the NA ones? Lower compression,
> etc???
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com
> [mailto:s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com] On Behalf Of R. Mair
> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 1:59 PM
> To: Taka Mizutani
> Cc: S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: [s-cars] WAS gas prices, now racist subaru's
> 
> OK, i guess i need to make this clear enough to understand. First, I've
> spent weeks at Bosch headquarters, and countless hours in schools across 
> the
> country learning and dealing with engine management systems for VW and 
> Audi
> cars. I believe I can speak intelligently on this subject.
> Audi has had Bosch supply most electrical parts for decades. This includes
> alternators, starters, volt regs. etc, as well as the bulk of the engine
> management systems. Oh... and filters etc... Bosch in general has built 
> some
> amazing systems. The old CIS units of the late 80's, early 90's were so
> outdated, yet passed California's strict emissions test. Bosch and Germans
> cars were one and the same it seemed. Bosch clearly has had some quality
> control issues here of late. As a car manufacturer, what do you do? do you
> suddenly ditch a major supplier in search of another one that has never
> worked with your cars? It would take YEARS for another company to pick up
> where Bosch left off. Would that be the best way to go or do you assume
> Bosch will fix the problems sooner than later? Valeo had problems with
> heater cores in mid-80's VW's. A recall was offered. In general, their
> quality is somewhat better today.
> 
> so what you are saying Taka is that Audi should look into a crystal ball 
> and
> see that in 50k miles, they are going to have MAF failures, or perhaps
> coolant sensor failures, or even notice that ICU's were going to fail at
> some point? None of these particular parts are placed wrong in the engine
> compt! I'm not thrilled with Audi overall myself, I think i've made that
> clear in previous posts. but you are not correct in some of your
> assumptions. Turbo placement is not the major factor for the failings in
> Audi's. The initial rec. by Audi to extend oil changes and use 
> conventional
> motor oil was not a smart move. Yes, Dumb Dumb Audi! Given synth oil and 
> 5k
> miles, you won't see a tenth of the failures. In my garage, i've seen 
> allot
> more 1.8t failures than 2.7, as 2.7's came from the factory with synth oil
> installed. but they still suggested 10k oil changes. Still not good.
> 
> You don't know 2.7's very well Taka. For the most part, they are pretty 
> darn
> tough, as far as the internals go. There was a 01 S4 speedvision cup car 
> at
> the Duryea hillclimb a few weeks ago, actually took fourth fastest 
> overall.
> It had stand alone engine management, K04 turbos and about 2500 race miles
> on the stock, un touched bottom end. I'll bet it won't be rebuilt for some
> time after that. What i was ref. to a time bomb being, is what mods do to 
> a
> stock engine. I'll take ANY audi turbo thats huffed to the hilt on a stock
> engine before i'd do the same on a Japanese engine.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Taka Mizutani
> To: R. Mair
> Cc: calvinlc at earthlink.net ; S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 8:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [s-cars] WAS gas prices, now racist subaru's
> 
> 
> Rolf-
> You're excusing a ton of faults, blaming the suppliers?!? The OEM is
> responsible for ensuring that the quality of the components that suppliers
> sell them are up to par, otherwise it reflects poorly on the OEM. Who do 
> you
> think people blame when there is a problem with their cars? Do they blame
> Valeo, saying "man, Valeo makes crappy electrical components." No. They
> blame Audi.
> 
> The turbos on the 2.7T go rather regularly- it's not the extended oil
> change intervals that kill them- it's the design of the engine. That same
> little K03 turbo lives much longer in the 1.8T engine. Putting the turbos
> where they're located in the 2.7T engine compartment is what shortens 
> their
> life- not enough cooling, IMO.
> 
> What about the other stuff:
> 
> instrument cluster issues- VW A2, A3, A4; Audi type 44, C4, C5, B5, B6, D2
> control arm issues- B5, B6, C5
> transmission issues- D2
> oil leak issues- D2
> ignition coils and ignition components- C4, B5
> diff seals- ongoing since type 44
> turbo failure- B5, B6, C5
> MMI issues- D3
> miscellaneous electrical problems- ongoing since type 44 days or earlier,
> hasn't gotten better
> 
> Time bomb on the Subaru? No more so than the C5 2.7T- you chip the 2.7T,
> it's just a matter of when, rather than if, the turbos fail. RS4 turbos 
> fail
> much less frequently- larger oil passages, much thicker impeller shaft.
> Coming from a auto mechanic, I'm pretty shocked that you're willing to 
> state
> that the Audis are so much better than other cars out there.
> 
> I happen to like Audis, that's why I've owned them- no way would I put up
> with that stuff if I didn't. But your statements are just outrageous. 
> Lexus
> simply doesn't have these issues, as a shining example of a very complex 
> car
> with tons of "stuff" in it that doesn't break very often. They also don't
> blame their suppliers for problems.
> 
> Taka
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>