If it WASN'T a Quattro - would you buy one?

[Fringe Ryder <Fringe@ai.net>]

No.  My sole criterion when buying my new car ('97 A4Q) were, in order:
  All-Wheel Drive with some traction control
  Standard Tranny
  >>150bhp
  Sedan
  six-cyl
  ABS & airbags
  Leather seats & CD changer.

If I couldn't have gotten an A4Q like that (and I had a very hard time
getting it), I would have settled for either a Subaru (their sedans are
lower-powered, the optional engine is only available in a luxo pack
including auto tranny, their station wagons have more power but aren't
sedans, the SVX is not sold with a standard tranny and is a coupe) or an SUV
of some sort.  (I don't like the Mitsu/Eagles for quality and style reasons.)

There is also, of course, the issue of price.  An AWD Audi is competitively
priced against other cars.  Feature-for-Feature, it goes against the Subarus
well (because it has more features), etc.  However, take away the AWD, and
it doesn't.  Would I rather have a 2WD A4 for $28K (realistic), or a much
faster and at least as reliable Nissan Maxima equipped similarly for $21K?
Heck, take the speed AND money and run for the hills, I say.

That was BEFORE I'd gotten used to bad weather.  I ordered the car on 15 Aug
96.  In late October, I moved to Seattle.  Since then, we've had snow storms
in November and record-setting snows and rain in December.  I still have my
FWD Ford.  I'm not going back.  This is the perfect car, but part of that is
due to the AWD.  I would rather have a top-end Suby or a PathFinder than a
2WD Audi.

Regards

In article <3.0.32.19961231122444.0075cfe8@mail.execpc.com> you write:
>Question for those with Quattros - new & old. If you were buying the same
>car today, and Quattro wasn't an option - would you still buyy the Audi? I