19th Aug 2014, 19:40
You can totally disagree if you want - it's HIS review, not yours. And the 2002 A3 does not use a CVT. VW and Audi are not the most reliable cars, but there are enough out there with at the very least average reliability for people to either keep them, or buy them again, else the company would be dead.
I've had a few Audis, which all needed wear and tear repairs with age, but never once stranded me. Electrics have been dependable - only a (then) 13-year old 1981 Coupe needed the driver's power window motor rewound.
His car has the 1.9 TDI - that engine is not the most powerful, but is very well known not just for reliability, but for durability - the pick of European taxi fleets that use a VW/Audi/Skoda.
I will agree with you though - my most current car is a BMW, because the non-quattro FWD Audi A4's most recently had CVT gearboxes, and I'm not touching them in ANY car.
19th Aug 2014, 19:43
He did say he loves VWs and Audis. If you're in America, you'd be surprised how expensive it can be to repair a Japanese car when it breaks outside your continent.
24th Aug 2014, 10:15
I agree. Very poor experience with Audi. In NZ, there are hardly any you see crossing the 200k mark. The garage becomes your inlaw's house if you own an Audi. New ones are trying to catch up, but everyone I know who owns them is disappointed. BMWs or even the new Mercs are a lot better choices. New C-Classes seem to be very solid.
25th Aug 2014, 11:20
Okay, well think what you want, I am basing my review on my personal experiences.
Audis are made of beautifully put together parts. Stainless steel screws, clips, and the nuts and bolts used on the exterior parts of the car give you an idea of how long Audi think these cars will last. My Dad has been in the auto industry for nearly 50 years, and he has not once had a problem out of the 20 Audis he has had since the late 70s.
The CVT gearboxes were very fragile, but Audi have discontinued them for the much more efficient DSGs, which had their problems in the early days, but have been rectified now.
Volkswagen have the most amount of cars on the road with over 100,000 in Europe and North America. Volkswagen have sold 3 times as many cars here in Britain than Toyota and Honda put together; of course a garage is going to get more VW and VW group cars in than Hondas and Toyotas.
I find Toyotas unrefined and awkward to drive, with rubbish seats and noisy interiors that creak in the cold; they are not European and certainly not German.
I would have a BMW over a Merc; Merc quality still isn't very good and is not a patch on Audi, despite what they tell you, and they are now using Renault diesel engines. Also, the Audi is much easier to take apart than any Toyota or Honda I have had (on provisional). No rusted, stripped screws on the underside of the car, and parts for Japanese cars outside normal wear and tear items are around 20% more expensive than anything from VW, including genuine parts.
25th Aug 2014, 23:19
I agree with a few statements in the comment above, however reliability and comfort are 2 different things.
I do agree that Japanese cars still have a lot to catch up on the seats, comfort and noise cancellation. But as far as reliability goes - nothing beats a Toyota. We have 5 cars in the family, and we have a Toyota Corolla 1998 which we use as trash car and take it places which may not be safe. Bought new and now about to touch 500k (497k) and still no signs of tiredness. Everything original except cam belts, brake pads and tyres, and all we did was the 10-15k service.
Mine is not the only example however. Most of these models you see in Australia - many have done way over the 400k mark. I could never imagine an Audi doing that sort of km.
I do however agree that mechanics in Europe are more familiar, so they look after them better than the average mechanic does here, which can make it last a bit longer, but by no means would it beat a Japanese car. Toyota or Honda wouldn't be as popular and on top of the reliability list if they weren't this good, and likewise Audi and VW wouldn't be near the bottom if they were reliable.
Yes, if you do look after them - they will last and they do cost, but what we looking are at is the average trend. Not the one off trade.
26th Aug 2014, 19:57
Australia? Observation: European cars (especially the recent ones) do not seem to do very well in countries that can get very hot. Bad reviews on Euros are not uncommon from America (which can hit 40 C). Japanese cars tend to do better at that.
28th Aug 2014, 07:06
Are you measuring in miles or kilometres? If so, my car has done 243,000 KM and doesn't use a drop of oil. The TDI Volkswagen engines they use in Skoda, VWs, Seats and Audis are European taxis firm's choices as they are robust, economical and they last forever. 300,000 to 400,000 miles is nothing on them and they don't use any oil. I had a Toyota Corolla 1.6 GLS and it was using 1 litre of oil every 1200 miles, and it had done 55,000 miles with a full Toyota service history. My dad got a brand new Honda Accord in 2003, the latest shape at the time, and that started to use a similar amount of oil after it had done 18,000 miles. Honda concluded that is a trait of the engine.
Honda have had to lay off more people at the Swindon plant because their cars aren't selling enough. Japanese cars in Europe are really quite expensive for what they are, and most people in this continent would rather a home-grown product which is more suited to our tastes. The mechanics on Japanese cars are pretty robust, but an engine using oil for me is a sign of wear, that's why I would never touch an Alfa. However suspension, exhaust and bearing parts in Japanese cars for the most part are poor quality and more expensive than average to repair. Volkswagen's warranty claims have gone down 48% in the last 5 years when Volkswagen decided to simplify their cars, making them easier and cheaper to repair, while maintain quality and improving reliability, as most modern cars are needlessly over complex. The new VWs are easier to do work on than the early to mid 2000s. The Mk5 Golf and that era of Volkswagen group cars were complicated to work on however.
28th Aug 2014, 20:17
Oil consumption is very dependent on how the car was broken in, in a modern car. A mechanic friend who's worked for Mitsubishi, Mercedes and Toyota dealerships told me that there is a design trait on many European cars that makes them use oil (no kidding, my Audi and VW manuals stated that under certain circumstances it could use up to 1L/1,500 km, though my own personal experience with 5 of them was that if I ever topped up, it would be more like 1/2 L per 5,000 km on old, worn engines), but that there was a particular advantage to that design. I will say though - once old with maybe 150,000 km, I do notice that gasoline/petrol-engined Mitsubishis and Corollas here in NZ tend to smoke. Oil usage in a modern European car like VW can be because of not breaking it in correctly for the rings to bed in properly. Though the newer cars don't have to be granny-driven for 2,000 km like cars of yore, they still need to be done right.