Re: Re[2]: Audi News

[Eliot Lim <eliot@u.washington.edu>]

On Thu, 6 Oct 1994 J_T_Douglas%mwcorp1@MWMGATE1.mitre.org wrote:

> >I've owned both.  I won't go near another VW, but I LOVE my Audi.
> 
> Funny, my VWs have been FAR more reliable than my Audis.  

it is somewhat meaningless to talk about relative reliability without
also mentioning the year and model of the cars in question.  vws have been
built in so many countries with quite a diverse spread in terms of quality
control.  even within the same plant, quality control has varied between
extremes.  e.g. the mexican plant.  german made cars used to be the ones
to have, but since the drop of the iron curtain, quality has slipped.

there is also a tendency to lump quality control and durability into the
generic term "reliability" when these two qualities are largely unrelated. 
that sets the stage for endless and pointless arguments.

a car can leave the factory with lots of little irritating defects but can
go on to provide half a million miles of service.  alternatively a car can
leave the factory with zero defects but self destruct at 68000 miles.  and
of course those in between.  audis and vws may not have top notch quality
control but tend to have good durability. 

> Maybe someone can clear this up -- I've heard from folks who should know that 
> Synchro and Quattro are different systems.  Synchro uses a patented, high tech 
> torque "sensing" fluid while Quattro is a less exotic system. Is this true?

"syncro" is a generic term used to denote a 4wd vw.. the implementation
is completely different between various models.. the quantum syncro is
nothing more than a 4000q clone, the vanagon and others use the viscous
coupling for automatically engaging drive to the other axle.

i tend to prefer full time 4wd rather than part time, automatically
engaging 4wd.  viscous couplings are crude and audi does not use them
for good reasons.

eliot