RE: 91 200 Q Fuel pump

[Peter Henriksen <peterhe@microsoft.com>]

Nope, didn't even know there was an updated version.

Do you have part numbers or some other way to differentiate the two
(visually, perhaps)? I'd be interested in knowing what I have. Also, you
seem to have missed the total $ amount for the updated version.
- peter, peterhe@microsoft.com, issaquah, wa, usa
  91 200qw
  94 acura legend gs
  80 mazda 626


>-----Original Message-----
>From:	MARK_ANDRE@HP-FtCollins-om4.om.hp.com
>[SMTP:MARK_ANDRE@HP-FtCollins-om4.om.hp.com]
>Sent:	Thursday, September 19, 1996 4:12 PM
>To:	74543.407@compuserve.com
>Cc:	Peter Henriksen; ALEXNECKAS@aol.com; GREGSJ@MINIMALL.IMM.COM;
>MARKA@nsmdserv.cnd.hp.com; A-MIKEMI@EXCHANGE.MICROSOFT.COM; ERICHA@WRQ.COM;
>lorens@polaris.mindport.net; MALLICK@ORION.CRD.GE.COM;
>quattro@coimbra.ans.net; RAO@pixar.com; stadmef@pweh.com;
>LINUST@interramp.com; MANNLAW@INDY.NET; 75363.2524@compuserve.com
>Subject:	91 200 Q Fuel pump
>
>Item Subject: cc:Mail Text
>     In replacing my fuel pump (old one wasn't bad, but at 60K I wanted to 
>     replace those items that, if gone bad, could strand the car), I 
>     discovered in talking with Linda of Carlsen, the local repair shop, 
>     and Audi, that there are two options:
>     
>     * stay with the original-style pump for about $250
>     
>     * go with the "update" pump, which uses a different pump part and a 
>     number of associated plastic housings, hoses, and clips. Total cost $
>     
>     My question to you guys--do you know of any technical reason to choose 
>     one over the other? i.e. was the update setup better in any way (no 
>     more buzzing when it's hot or something like that)?
>     
>     Many thanks,
>     
>     Mark Andre
>     91 200QW