Re: What is wrong with my quattro system? (Audi 5KQ)

[Steinbru@VNET.IBM.COM]

David Marshall said:
> I have noticed a great deal of difference between my former 87 4000q and my
> 88 5000q.  The 4000 handled and tracked excellent, but, this certainly
> isn't the case with my 5000.  When the roads are slippery there is ALWAYS a
> tendancy for the back end to want to break loose.

Then Andrew Duane added:
>I have both a 90Q and a 100Q, and this is the way mine handle, too.
>The smaller 90 is much nimbler. I think the extra weight of the 100Q
>makes it tail-heavy enough to slip easily.
>I've just always accepted it.

I have a 5ks and a quattro, and I've noticed that both are very sensitive
to alignment.  Find a really good shop that guarantees satisfaction with
a four-wheel alignment and knows Audi --it's worth the trouble.  My guy
charges eighty bucks, but spends about three hours on the car.  (And I
make sure the tie rod ends are free!)

I now firmly believe that the reason I got the 5ks is that shortly after
getting the car, my father-in-law hit a curb and put the front end out
of alignment, then subsequently clipped a mailbox on a rainy day.  For
other reasons, shortly thereafter he stopped driving and I bought the
car.  I had the car for almost a year before I put it on the road.  I
hated that car, was ready to sell it.

It was squirrelly as hell until I got it aligned, now is hard charging
in the dry OR wet!  It took me a long time to trust the handling after
the first couple of month's experience.  At about the same time I found
this list.  Now I have three audis and two vdubs.  And NO hondas (well,
except for the cb650sc --that's a nighthawk for you aficionados).

Andrew, what do you feed your opinionated cat?
--Gary

('86's:5ks&5ktq+'87CGT)