Audi A4 issues and problems?

[Quattro Pete]

Quote:

---

With the price point of Audis, people should expect and get greater reliability than what is currently available, something up to par with the Japanese. Do you disagree?

---

Yup, I disagree. That's not how it works. People don't buy upscale, sporty, fun-to-drive cars for reliability reasons. Other things like status symbol, image, handling come to play. And if the market is willing to accept that these traits come with a tradeoff, why should the manufacturers try harder? They will not compete with Toyota and Honda on reliability - it's too expensive. Instead, they'll find other attributes which set them apart. It's about choosing your battles.

This subject has actually been discussed in a recent thread:

Why do "luxury" cars have so many problems?

There is a member named Junior that explains it pretty well. You may not agree with it, but I think this is exactly how it works.

 

[Tornado Red]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

If people want minimal hassle transportation from point A to point B, people should buy Hondas and Hyundais. But when point A to point B guy starts criticizing Audis for "high maintenance" then he is missing the point. It's like the guy who is dating the ugly low maintenance car ripping the guy who is dating the smokin but high maintenance girl. To each his own.

---

It is this type of response to Audi/VW's poor reliability that I do not understand. I do not see quality feel/materials and excellent reliability as being mutually exclusive.

As I stated earlier, Audi isn't building the same reliability into their cars compared to Hyundais that cost half as much, and I think this should be improved. With the price point of Audis, people should expect and get greater reliability than what is currently available, something up to par with the Japanese. Do you disagree?

---

A couple points here:
1) Simple cars have fewer things that can go wrong. This thread started with a discussion of an A4 Audi Quattro -- that's a complex machine which would be a challenge for any manufacturer. Hyundai makes 4WD or AWD vehicles, but none that are high-speed touring cars.

Good handling is the result of sophisticated suspension systems -- you can't get it with a live rear axle and a set of leaf springs.

High power from a 2.0-4.0 liter engine is not simple stuff. It was only a couple decades ago that 100 hp from a 2-liter engine was basically the standard. Now there are engines producing over 100 hp per liter. These are not simple engines built with cheap materials.

2) The first several responses in this thread listed the common and widely-known problems with this model or with Audis in general. Every make of auto has problems -- it simplifies the owner's dilemna immensely when he starts out knowing what typically fails and at what interval. It is especially helpful when the #1 problem can usually be prevented by simply changing the motor oil at the prescribed interval, with the correct oil, and it's not even an especially expensive oil.

Any car can be expensive to maintain if all the work is done at dealerships. But if the owner is willing to get under the hood, and if he pays attention to signals his car is giving him, he can get a lot of happy miles out of a high-performance car.

 

[windnsea00]

^Well said. Also the thing with German cars is that they are generally better built for long term. They may have more electronic glitches along the way but the materials used in the body and interior can still look nice even after 10 years or 200k+ miles.

 

[Auto-Union]

Reliability....or longevity? I'll claim both for my older Audis and the newer cars tend toward overall performance without regard to simplicity.

 

[moribundman]

Taxi and police fleets commonly use the A4 and the A6 besides the Golf, and the Passat from the VAG stable. These cars are not less reliable than others. I have yet to see a competent US Audi dealership, though. My dealer did everything to ruin my car as quickly as possible.

 

[JHZR2]

how do the VAG police and taxi cars last compared to good old E-class and equivalent MB products???

JMH

 

[Tornado Red]

Quote:

---

Taxi and police fleets commonly use the A4 and the A6 besides the Golf, and the Passat from the VAG stable. These cars are not less reliable than others.

---

Ah, but those would be TDI models, not gas-engine models. Diesels only, for long life.

 

[moribundman]

My post was in regard to general reliability, supposedly complex and failure prone systems in addition to supposedly excessive electric and electronic problems.

The police cars have almost always gas engines (1.8/2.0T), the taxis have diesel engines.

 

[windnsea00]

Quote:

---

My post was in regard to general reliability, supposedly complex and failure prone systems in addition to supposedly excessive electric and electronic problems.

The police cars have almost always gas engines (1.8/2.0T), the taxis have diesel engines.

---

Interesting, I know with BMW's they use the diesels for the Polizei. (320dT and 530dT as of recent).

 

[moribundman]

The VW Touran police version has the 2.0 TDi and DSG...

 

[moving2]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

With the price point of Audis, people should expect and get greater reliability than what is currently available, something up to par with the Japanese. Do you disagree?

---

Yup, I disagree. That's not how it works. People don't buy upscale, sporty, fun-to-drive cars for reliability reasons. Other things like status symbol, image, handling come to play. And if the market is willing to accept that these traits come with a tradeoff, why should the manufacturers try harder? They will not compete with Toyota and Honda on reliability - it's too expensive. Instead, they'll find other attributes which set them apart. It's about choosing your battles.

---

So I guess you also believe that BMW , MB and Audi shouldn't try to compete with Lexus in reliability on the 7 Series / S Class / A8 vs. LS? Then why is it they are trying their best to impove their quality if, as you say, the market will accept whatever they put out? I don't see it as being so black and white- it is not a choice between either performance or reliability unless you are talking about exotic supercars, and the A4 is far from that. Also I think it is a common misconception that German cars are only unreliable in terms of electronics. I believe the problem is bigger than that. It always surprises me how a lot of German car owners will make any excuse in the book to be accepting of their vehicle's lack of reliability instead of asking for more. I guess spending a lot of money sometimes does that to people.

The Japanese are forcing the American brands to improve reliability overall. I believe that Japanese performance-oriented offerings like the TL and IS will continue to improve performance-wise, closing the gap enough to force the European makers to match their reliability. And the Koreans will keep prices down. Ain't competition great?

 

[VeeDubb]

Quote:

---

Then why is it they are trying their best to impove their quality if, as you say, the market will accept whatever they put out? I don't see it as being so black and white- it is not a choice between either performance or reliability unless you are talking about exotic supercars, and the A4 is far from that. Also I think it is a common misconception that German cars are only unreliable in terms of electronics. I believe the problem is bigger than that. It always surprises me how a lot of German car owners will make any excuse in the book to be accepting of their vehicle's lack of reliability instead of asking for more. I guess spending a lot of money sometimes does that to people.

---

First of all, how do you know they are trying their "best" to improve quality?....whatever that means. Did they recently sink millions dollars into R&D? Did you read some annual report where a key member of the management team said that now they are committed to surpassing the Japanese brands on reliability? And are they now going Toyota on us and emphasizing reliability over fit, finish and driving dynamics?

Secondly, the only person looking at this as black and white is you. Yes, in an ideal world nothing is mutually exclusive (the simple way of looking at it), but in the real world, budget considerations, marketing decisions, customer demographics, and feedback from market data dictates a company's overall strategy. And yes, there are tradeoffs in the real world where both revenue and *cost* matter.

Finally, I am a German car owner and I'm "accepting" my car's reliability problems, I guess. But I didn't pay a premium for it. I paid a little over $21k for my passat brand new in 2002, which is Accord and Camry territory. I make trips from Ohio to NC every few months and have done this for five years. Guess what, the car has never left me stranded so reliability is good enough. But yes, I would have gotten more reliability had I bought a Camry - I would have made probably five fewer trips to the dealer in five years of ownership and wouldn't have to do preventive things like use synthetic oil. whoopee!

 

[moving2]

Quote:

---

First of all, how do you know they are trying their "best" to improve quality?....whatever that means. Did they recently sink millions dollars into R&D? Did you read some annual report where a key member of the management team said that now they are committed to surpassing the Japanese brands on reliability?

---

VeeDubb- Ummm.....yes. Read the article below:
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archives/2006/06/fixing_mercedes.html

"DaimlerChrysler boss Dieter Zetsche has set the bar high for Mercedes. He aims to match the quality of Toyota's upmarket Lexus brand in the annual JD Power Initial Quality Study rankings by 2008."

Is the fact that some European automakers are trying to improve quality and reliability to match the Japanese surprising to you? I'd be very interested to hear your comments on the above article.

 

[VeeDubb]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

First of all, how do you know they are trying their "best" to improve quality?....whatever that means. Did they recently sink millions dollars into R&D? Did you read some annual report where a key member of the management team said that now they are committed to surpassing the Japanese brands on reliability?

---

VeeDubb- Ummm.....yes. Read the article below:
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archives/2006/06/fixing_mercedes.html

"DaimlerChrysler boss Dieter Zetsche has set the bar high for Mercedes. He aims to match the quality of Toyota's upmarket Lexus brand in the annual JD Power Initial Quality Study rankings by 2008."

Is the fact that some European automakers are trying to improve quality and reliability to match the Japanese surprising to you? I'd be very interested to hear your comments on the above article.

---

My comment is Mercedes Benz had better do something because they are some of the most overrated cars in the market place. Every notice that BMW and Audi dominate the most wanted car lists of car enthusiast sites and Mercedes (apart from AMGs) rarely make it? As I've alluded to earlier, all else equal, you'd better deliver reliability, and Mercedes has nothing on any other car maker in any area apart from the emblem on the hood.

 

[Russell]

Looks like my question regard tHE Audi A4 have, shall we say, "evolved". Even so, I am still interested in anything anyone has to to say about the 2004 A4 quirks et.

I undersand the coil issue was for earlier A4s, I understand the fraigle front suspension issue (similar to BMW e34s & e39s) and costly transmission service (ezpensive fluid & no dipstick and related labor just like newer bmws). I also understand the 1.8t oil sludge issue. Our A4 has an 8 year extended sludge warrenty. So I am looking for any thing else. TIA

BTW, one indy suggest changing the oil every 3,000 miles.

 

[Russell]

One more thing. The A4 water pump issue sounds exactly like the BMW e34 and e39 and perhaps other bmw models situation. Almost every BMW owner accepts this and changes them out as preventaive maintenance. We do not like like it, but consider it a dumb quirk of the brand. Even so, If I drove a lowest cost to buy/operate "economy" car, it would be a bigger issue.

 

[moving2]

Quote:

---

First of all, how do you know they are trying their "best" to improve quality?....whatever that means.

---

VeeDubb- MB isn't the only one. Audi is trying to improve quality, as well. Why? Please read:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb4893/is_200505/ai_n17954044

"Diana T. Kurylko Audi's three-year drive to tackle quality problems in the US has paid off. The German brand jumped three spots to No. 8 in the J.D. Power and Associates 2005 Initial Quality Study. Audi set out to improve its quality in 2002 when it languished below the industry average for problems per 100 vehicles after 90 days of ownership. The carmaker began by accepting the idea that listening to its US customers makes sense. Audi now looks at US quality monthly at the board level. It often makes changes to all its vehicles as a result..."

Comments?

 

[VeeDubb]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

First of all, how do you know they are trying their "best" to improve quality?....whatever that means.

---

VeeDubb- MB isn't the only one. Audi is trying to improve quality, as well. Why? Please read:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb4893/is_200505/ai_n17954044

"Diana T. Kurylko Audi's three-year drive to tackle quality problems in the US has paid off. The German brand jumped three spots to No. 8 in the J.D. Power and Associates 2005 Initial Quality Study. Audi set out to improve its quality in 2002 when it languished below the industry average for problems per 100 vehicles after 90 days of ownership. The carmaker began by accepting the idea that listening to its US customers makes sense. Audi now looks at US quality monthly at the board level. It often makes changes to all its vehicles as a result..."

Comments?

---

Okay, for kicks and giggles, I'll bite again. Yes, it is no surprise that Audi is trying to improve reliability after the infamous sludge debacle with the 1.8T to preempt market catastrophe. So there you have it. Now whether they are trying their "best".....well, who can answer such a vague and ill posed statement. Is Audi's quality improvement simply an attempt to preempt future disasters that may inspire class action lawsuits, or is this the mark of a philosophy shift at Audi to over-engineer cars Toyota style?

 

[moribundman]

Russell, after 157k miles and 11 years I have yet to replace a control arm, a drive axle or any other suspension/steering component other than tie rod ends (once replaced, $75).

Whether or not your A4 has a wp with plastic impeller I do not know. Simply make sure you get a wp with metal impeller when the timing belt is replaced (I suggest every 5 years or 75k miles, whichever occurs first).

One weakness of the Audi engine are the cloth-covered OEM vacuum hoses, which develop leaks that are hard to track down. If your A4 has those cloth-covered vacuum hoses, replace them with BMW vacuum tubing, silicone tubing, or use the OEM tubing but replace it preventively every 3-5 years. Takes not even 30 minutes.

The ignition switch is the most likely electro-mechanical component to fail. Check if there was a recall on your vehicle.

 

[Russell]

moribundman and others. This is all good information. Checked with two or three web/sources links regarding recalls. None for the 2004 A4. Did find a bunch of TSBS that were all good to know, but not unexpected info. Will look at the hoses next time my daughter is home. Also, I sense from comments here and the Audi sites there was a change in Audi quality/issues around 2002-2003. So 2004 seems like a good year.

We do plan to detail the vehicle together. That is,I hope it is not all me.