[blue]

Audi has Subaru beat in the motor reliability department...that 4.2 V8 in the Audi will outlast any of the Subaru engines (from what I've seen, Subi motors like to crap out around 130-150k, usually at the HG subsequently wasting the rest of the motor). The rest of the car, on the other hand...

I really can't comment on the reliability of the 2.7T, but if it's like any other turbo engine the weak point will always be the turbo and assorted parts.

 

[Transcend]

your probably just an idiot. allroads kick subaru's ass's. and for all you subaru lovers, anyone else see the article in the new york times a few months back saying what car companys advertise towards gay people, Subaru(lezbaru), mazda miata, mini cooper, vw bug

A post or 2 more like this (personal attacks, general name calling and ignorance), and you get an imposed vacation. Capiche?

Also, if you want to be an ass, at least learn to use proper grammar and punctuation.

 

[Spokompton]

2.7T=killer motor. Buy it.

I hope that's a joke!

My 2.7t has terrible turbo lag, and countless problems.

My buddy's 2.5t WRX is way more responsive and powerful.


Audio only makes good looking and feeling (interior) cars, which is why I was such a sucker for it. The suspension rides like a bloody cement truck, engine lags, transition is slow, AND YOU CAN'T TURN OFF ESP COMPLETELY!

The Subaru I have is a 1990 Legacy Wagon. The most reliable AWD car ever made. Looks fugly, not much top power, but get off the line faster than the Audio and is a blast to drive offroad rally style. And it holds 5 bikes.

The best bike haulers are cars you don't care to ding and get dirty, while also being reliable so you're not stuck in BFE with a POS.

And yes, the 1998-2003 non-turbo Subarus have head gasket problems. The Turbo models on the other hand are bullet proof. Esp the 2.5t. No question in my mind it's the most reliable turbo gas motor available in an AWD car. just check out NASIOC.COM if you don't believe me.

 

[flat broke]

To further Spokomtons remarks on 2.5 na vs 2.0t and 2.5t Suby engines and head gasket issues. A lot of the head gasket issues are actually associated with the H6 engines. Suby is kinda stingy on warranty engine replacements, but there have been bulletins issued on the H6 engines and an additive that was to be added to the cooling system to help avert the issue. That being said, the NA2.5 block has less internal webbing and a thinner deck than the ejt20 and 2.5t blocks. The thinner deck will allow more surface deviation over time which is why the non tubo'd motors typically show head gasket problems more frequently than the turbo'd ones. Suby makes the turbo'd blocks thicker and more heavily webbed to keep a consistent bore under higher cylinder pressures. Pretty standard engineering stuff, but in a way it's cool to see that the application of the engine dictates it's design, and that they don't just make a "one size fits all block" and bolt different components on it depending on the vehicle it's going in.

As an asside, I have to chuckle at this thread. Had it been in the lounge, I never would have seen it. But here it is lingering around the DH forum like a pair of musty riding shorts whose stank lingers long after you've pulled them out of the back of the car. If nothing else, it's brought up how many people respect different makes for different reasons. Beyond that, it looks like the only thing I've learned is that I should have looked into a hitch mount rack for my wagon to save some $$ on fuel for longer trips. To the original poster, good luck with your decision and get a good extended warranty no matter what you buy.

Chris

 

[blue]

And yes, the 1998-2003 non-turbo Subarus have head gasket problems. The Turbo models on the other hand are bullet proof. Esp the 2.5t. No question in my mind it's the most reliable turbo gas motor available in an AWD car. just check out NASIOC.COM if you don't believe me.

I work for a courier company. In the past six months 4 different Legacy wagons varying in model year and motor (from 1987-1999 I believe) and my bosses 2003 Outback have all had horrendous motor problems, 2 were HGs vaporizing accompanied by subsequent block destruction. I don't buy the whole "SUBARUS ARE MORE RELIABLE THAN EVERYTHING LOLZ" BS. They're nice cars no doubt and I wouldn't mind owning a newer one with low miles, but after seeing the awful engines they drop into the cars they build I'd have to pass on one with many miles. You might get on my case about liking a VAG product, but the engines are typically rock solid and the car has a semblance of soul. You can drive a car with broken power windows but not a car with a blown engine.

In relation to your post flat broke, if Subaru would build their NA engines to a decent spec they wouldn't have such problems. A stock VAG VR6 can handle around 12psi on stock internals before things start to melt...Hell, I have a VR running on 13:1 comp NA with stock rods/crank. Build it solid to begin with and you have cheaper manufacturing costs as well as more reliable naturally aspirated setups.

The most reliable car in the "fleet"? A 1980-something 4cyl Plymouth Acclaim with working AC that reeks of granny piss. Go figure. The simpler the car gets, I guess. There is a ton of room in the bay of that thing to work on stuff...like pickup bay room.

What would be rocking is if they dropped a V8 TDI into an all-road...

 

[rockwool]

SBDHrida, if your still open for other car/motor sugestions I'd recomend taking a look at different diesel engined wagons. None of them has the suspension lifted like an Outback or an Allroad but they come with 4wd.

Diesels have a fuel consumption that's about 25% less than an equivalent petrol engined car and their motors last forever as they arent revved above ~4000rpm.

About emissions, newer models have, if opted, come with a particle filter which vastly improves their emmisions. Those without one can be driven on 100% biodiesel (made from plants and therefor not fossile fuel) which is (or almost) CO neutral and a lot more, and biodiesel also has the advantage that it lubricates the engine better.

The only thing you have to check is that the fuel lines and gaskets are made of a non synthetic material like Vitron. VW, and probalby all VAG cars, allready come with these lines and are warrantied for biodiesel use.

Other makes might not warranty it but if you buy a used car then there's no worries as the engine warranty will probably have gone out. Don't worry about biodiesel effing up your engine (if you have the right lines and gaskets) as Rudolf Diesel was way ahead of his time and constructed them to run on peanut oil.

Read up onnit. Here's one link: http://www.utahbiodiesel.org/biodiesel_using.html

Depending on your cash consider:

The Allroad 2.5TDI with 140hp, which can easily be chiped to 170hp.
Later model Audi A6 TDI's like the 2,7 and the 3,0 are way more powerful. The 3.0 has 233hp and more torque than their latest 4.2l petrol engine!

Mercedes E-class 4-Matic wagons like the 270-320 CDI. They also have a V8 engined 420 CDI. Depending on year the 320CDI has an output of 204-224hp and a massive torque.

The VW Passat 2.5 TDI Syncro with the same 140hp engine as the old A6.

The BMW 530xd with 192-204-231hp (depending on year) are probably the most fun cars to drive in their class. I also belive that the x-models are raised like 30mm or so from the standard 2wd versions.

The Alfa Romeo 159 Estate might be to small of a car for you but it's very fun to drive and its 2.4l mash out a massive 200hp. Alfa probably being the current leader in car diesel technology. Don't remember if it comes with 4wd though, but their front wheel drive is excellent in snow otherwise.

 

[CBJ]

Can't get any of them in the US as they think diesels are bad.

 

[Jm_]

Subaru is the only other I considered. I just don't fancy turbos. The AR is also considerably larger than the smallish impreza (wrx). The only way to get the AR4.2 power from suby is the wrx sti offering which isn't available in a wagon.

Actually, for 08 the STI is ONLY available as a wagon. Supposedly with better rear legroom.

Unfortunately it looks like a pugeot now.

 

[Jm_]

A stock VAG VR6 can handle around 12psi on stock internals before things start to melt...Hell, I have a VR running on 13:1 comp NA with stock rods/crank. Build it solid to begin with and you have cheaper manufacturing costs as well as more reliable naturally aspirated setups....

Stock for the WRX is 13.5psi, stock for the WRX sti is 14.5psi. The stock WRX can handle up to about 15-16psi before it needs new injectors.

 

[Evil4bc]

I hope that's a joke!

My 2.7t has terrible turbo lag, and countless problems.

The suspension rides like a bloody cement truck, engine lags, transition is slow, AND YOU CAN'T TURN OFF ESP COMPLETELY!

Two totlly different cars and motor setup's

Audi= 2.7TT , will spool slower and have a higher end HP rating .
Also more moving parts , so this will lead to much higher repair cost .
IE: it's an Audi

WRX= 2.5 w/ small hybrid turbo designed for max output
a single turbo w/ smaller impeller will spool up faster than a twin set up .
Japanese car , cheeper parts , 1 less turbo , fewer problems , doesnt hurt it 's built like a tank motor either !

All Audi's and VW's will have a huge amount of turbo lag OEM from the factory , this is to keep the overall OEM drivability similar to their lower HP non turbo's cars

Suspension and ESP is another totally different argument ,

Audi uses Torsen a gear based AWD system , W/ a onboard computer assist to help with throttle cut out and brake assist .
But as Torsen is a proven system mechanically it really doesn't need the computers help to keep you on the road .
When a wheel start to slip in a Torsen based AWD system the gear coupling limits free movement of that wheels and mechanically transfers power to the other wheels .
Torsen can handle up to 60R 40F or 50/50 to all wheels

VW's use a Haldex AWD system ( like the system in my 04" .:R32 ) this is a computer controlled torque coupling , so as a wheel starts to slip the computer in the haldex unit sends power to the opposite wheel , this computer also works in conjunction with the onboard ESP to limit throttle and apply the brakes for added torque .
Haldex is 60F 40R or 50/50 when needed


Subaru uses a simplified version of the Torsen system and uses the gears and sylonoids to control free wheel spin and let's the gears transfer power to the wheels when needed .
I'm not 100% sure of what new bells and whistles are available on the newer STI's , only familiar with the cars I have owned personally

Hope these AWD cliff notes help

As far as suspension , it's 98% dependent on the quality of the damper used and the way the suspension has been set up vs the power the cars putting down .

Audi's come stock with Bilsteins , Subaru's don't pretty simple right there . Get better dampers and your car will drive and handle much better !

 

[blue]

Stock for the WRX is 13.5psi, stock for the WRX sti is 14.5psi. The stock WRX can handle up to about 15-16psi before it needs new injectors.

I was making a point about how Subie builds their NA motors crappy...The VR6 has never come boosted stock from VAG, yet can run nearly as much pressure as a stock WRX motor? Lols. Throw in a headspacer (Stock CR on a VR is 10:1) and you can bump to around 14-16 before needing upgraded rods. Try doing that to the NA H6 3.0/2.5/2.2/2.0/1.6 that Subaru has built and watch the block crack.

 

[blue]

Two totlly different cars and motor setup's

Audi= 2.7TT , will spool slower and have a higher end HP rating .
Also more moving parts , so this will lead to much higher repair cost .
IE: it's an Audi

WRX= 2.5 w/ small hybrid turbo designed for max output
a single turbo w/ smaller impeller will spool up faster than a twin set up .
Japanese car , cheeper parts , 1 less turbo , fewer problems , doesnt hurt it 's built like a tank motor either !

All Audi's and VW's will have a huge amount of turbo lag OEM from the factory , this is to keep the overall OEM drivability similar to their lower HP non turbo's cars

Suspension and ESP is another totally different argument ,

Audi uses Torsen a gear based AWD system , W/ a onboard computer assist to help with throttle cut out and brake assist .
But as Torsen is a proven system mechanically it really doesn't need the computers help to keep you on the road .
When a wheel start to slip in a Torsen based AWD system the gear coupling limits free movement of that wheels and mechanically transfers power to the other wheels .
Torsen can handle up to 60R 40F or 50/50 to all wheels

VW's use a Haldex AWD system ( like the system in my 04" .:R32 ) this is a computer controlled torque coupling , so as a wheel starts to slip the computer in the haldex unit sends power to the opposite wheel , this computer also works in conjunction with the onboard ESP to limit throttle and apply the brakes for added torque .
Haldex is 60F 40R or 50/50 when needed


Subaru uses a simplified version of the Torsen system and uses the gears and sylonoids to control free wheel spin and let's the gears transfer power to the wheels when needed .
I'm not 100% sure of what new bells and whistles are available on the newer STI's , only familiar with the cars I have owned personally

Haldex blows. A lot. The Subi AWD system owns Haldex...Audi Torsen on the other hand is le tits (and what the All-Road comes with).

I'm not familiar with the turbo lag of the 2.7T, but the last two 4 cylinder VAG turbo motors have almost no turbo lag at all (1.8T and 2.0T). They use small very fast spooling turbos to achieve great low-end torque (and excellent stock drivability) as opposed to a WRX or STi where nothing kicks in until what, 4k RPMs? This isn't a major concern to me, but your info regarding VAG turbo setups is dead wrong.

 

[Kornphlake]

Haldex blows. A lot. The Subi AWD system owns Haldex...Audi Torsen on the other hand is le tits (and what the All-Road comes with).

Are you just saying that to have the last word in the tread or is there some physical data you have to support your claim?

If properly maintained and functioning each system accomplishes pretty much the same thing. I'd guess what "blows" about the VW Haldex system is more a matter of tires, suspension and brake selection rather than the actual functionality of the AWD system.

I really don't know as much about cars as I do about bikes though, I may be way off...

 

[Jm_]

I was making a point about how Subie builds their NA motors crappy...The VR6 has never come boosted stock from VAG, yet can run nearly as much pressure as a stock WRX motor? Lols. Throw in a headspacer (Stock CR on a VR is 10:1) and you can bump to around 14-16 before needing upgraded rods. Try doing that to the NA H6 3.0/2.5/2.2/2.0/1.6 that Subaru has built and watch the block crack.

Actually, the compression ratio for the subie motor is much lower to start with (around 8:1), and that pressure I gave is just the normal max boost pressure. You can do 20psi of just boost if you have the right injectors and intercooler to sort it all out, that's no problem.

I'm talking about the 2.0 engine here.

Basically, that means you have a HUGE amount of room to play with, you can hook up a BIG turbo to the engine and run some pretty crazy numbers of MAF and boost, and not "kill" the engine.

The 2.5 turbo engine has the boost turned down about 1psi for both the sti and the regular wrx, to make up for the bigger displacement and keep the same hp numbers, although you can easily increase it back up. The 2.5 engine has even more capability (but doesn't meet rally restrictions on engine size).

I just like talking about cars

An audi with far more HP than either the WRX or the STi will obviously go a lot faster at top-end, although if you increase the hp of either one they'll get the same results.

These NA 2.0 and 2.5 turbo (current) motors have amazing potential. I'm pulling about 260-275hp from my 2.0, small mods for about 14.5-15psi of boost (at my altitude), intake and ECU. That aint much compared to what's possible.

 

[flat broke]

I was making a point about how Subie builds their NA motors crappy...The VR6 has never come boosted stock from VAG, yet can run nearly as much pressure as a stock WRX motor? Lols. Throw in a headspacer (Stock CR on a VR is 10:1) and you can bump to around 14-16 before needing upgraded rods. Try doing that to the NA H6 3.0/2.5/2.2/2.0/1.6 that Subaru has built and watch the block crack.

In relation to your post flat broke, if Subaru would build their NA engines to a decent spec they wouldn't have such problems. A stock VAG VR6 can handle around 12psi on stock internals before things start to melt...Hell, I have a VR running on 13:1 comp NA with stock rods/crank. Build it solid to begin with and you have cheaper manufacturing costs as well as more reliable naturally aspirated setups.

Actually, by building every block to handle cylinder pressures not every block will see, you effectively raise the price of the economy models for performance they won't achieve. The ROI on having different molds and R&D done for different block configurations is quickly made back in higher margins over the many units sold.

The VR6 is a solid engine, and the main reason I bought my 97 GTI. But it was built with a modular idea in mind when VW devloped it and there is one reason why it is a little beefier. The other issue is the fact that you're comparing a cast iron engine block to a cast aluminum waterboxer design. The cast iron block is cheaper to manufacture, but doesn't help in power to weight issues. Another reason Suby and other mfgs cast specific blocks/parts for specific target vehicles is because by saving a couple bucks in aluminum on every engine built for an economy/compact model, the cost of the vehicle can stay lower. In much the same way you would expect a full on XC race deal to be tailored towards weight savings, you wouldn't employ the same parts selection in building a decent freeride or DH rig. Application specific engineering saves money and provides a product that meets the needs of it's intended market. There's nothing wrong with that. Comparing the VR6 engine platform to the NA Suby blocks is an apples to oranges comparison.

The statement about the VR6 hodling up to 12psi before melting pistons is irrelevant to the strength of block discussion and kind of confusing with relation to your other statement about the VR6s holding up to 16psi with stock rods. Melting pistons is a fuel management/static CR/inadequate quench volume issue and in the application you're talking about, tottaly different than factory engines failing under normal operating conditions. The Ej20t and 25t engines hold the boost they are designed for, and the VR6 has proven itself as a very competent platform (though not without it's share of head gasket issues through its life cycle as well) that has been a solid "go to" starting point for many of VW's performance endeavors. To compare the non performance segment engines of other mfgs isn't really an accurate comparison.

Outside of this thread, and in honest curiosity, what kind of fuel do you run on the 13:1 static CR VR6, whats the displacement, and corrected BHP if you don't mind me asking?

Chris

 

[blue]

Outside of this thread, and in honest curiosity, what kind of fuel do you run on the 13:1 static CR VR6, whats the displacement, and corrected BHP if you don't mind me asking?

Chris

Most days a mixture of 91 and 104 to bring it to around 95-96oct. It can run on 91 without detonation, but it pulls timing like no other.

Displacement is 3 liters, BHP is around 225, wheel is about dead on at 200. Really goes to show what a limiter the 12 valve head is on that motor. I'm likely getting a 16 valve turbo in a few weeks in a Mk2. N/A 12valve VR is not the way to go for power, sadly.

Actually, the compression ratio for the subie motor is much lower to start with (around 8:1), and that pressure I gave is just the normal max boost pressure. You can do 20psi of just boost if you have the right injectors and intercooler to sort it all out, that's no problem.

I'm talking about the 2.0 engine here.

Basically, that means you have a HUGE amount of room to play with, you can hook up a BIG turbo to the engine and run some pretty crazy numbers of MAF and boost, and not "kill" the engine.

The 2.5 turbo engine has the boost turned down about 1psi for both the sti and the regular wrx, to make up for the bigger displacement and keep the same hp numbers, although you can easily increase it back up. The 2.5 engine has even more capability (but doesn't meet rally restrictions on engine size).

I just like talking about cars

Yeah...the VAG 1.8T is the same way. You can make a ton of power with simple bolt ons like you're saying before needing to do engine work. Stock turbo motors are a godsend to the boy racer community.

I look forward to the 16vT in coming weeks. 275whp in a 2200lb car. Sleepah! It's too bad it's really too low for a hitch rack...

I too just like talking aboot cars.

 

[SBDHrida]

I'd say its time to abandon this thread. I've got the info I wanted about hitches, as well as some suggestions for other cars. For everyone who made logical contributions, thanks. However, all of the personal attacks and back and forth banter between Subaru fans and Audi fans, and anybody else with an burning opinion on the subject, isn't helping me. I'll choose one or the other based on my opinion, and that only. Everyone has to realize that we all have our own opinions, and verbal assault probably won't sell us on any others. Anyways, I'm out.

 

[Toshi]

Actually, the compression ratio for the subie motor is much lower to start with (around 8:1), and that pressure I gave is just the normal max boost pressure. You can do 20psi of just boost if you have the right injectors and intercooler to sort it all out, that's no problem.

I'm talking about the 2.0 engine here.

Basically, that means you have a HUGE amount of room to play with, you can hook up a BIG turbo to the engine and run some pretty crazy numbers of MAF and boost, and not "kill" the engine.

i eked 299 whp (aka, at the wheels on a dyno, not fabricated butt-dyno figures) out of my 2.0 wrx engine. big turbo (vf34), big front mount intercooler (and yes, big lag), water injection, bigger injectors, and 18-22 lbs of boost depending on the gas and which map i wanted to run that day...

 

[Evil4bc]

Haldex blows. A lot. The Subi AWD system owns Haldex...Audi Torsen on the other hand is le tits (and what the All-Road comes with).

I just supplied the info , didn't give personal opinion .
Personally I have owned all three and not to start a argument but from my personal experience believe me

.:biggrin:
I'm not even going to get into a

discussion on RM

Everyone will have "their " opinion of what "they" think is best .
It's a big world and this is why there are tons of different cars , bikes ect made so everyone can have their favorite .

In the end if your buying a Audi , Subaru or VW all the AWD system's mention are good some cost more than other and each have their drawbacks and their strong points . Sounds like you know what you want and the info has been clearly displayed .
Good luck car shopping and enjoy you end purchase whatever it is .

 

[Jm_]

i eked 299 whp (aka, at the wheels on a dyno, not fabricated butt-dyno figures) out of my 2.0 wrx engine. big turbo (vf34), big front mount intercooler (and yes, big lag), water injection, bigger injectors, and 18-22 lbs of boost depending on the gas and which map i wanted to run that day...

Yeah, and it usually loses ~60hp to the drivetrain on the way to the wheels, at least with the subie's AWD.

 

[Toshi]

Yeah, and it usually loses ~60hp to the drivetrain on the way to the wheels, at least with the subie's AWD.

and, despite that impressive power figure, i still like my RX-8 (~180 at the wheels? heh) a whole lot more. power isn't everything -- tractability, traction, handling, suspension design, drivetrain layout, gearbox durability/feel, weight, ride quality, styling, interior quality, road noise, and how it's classed for SCCA events all play important roles as well

 

[blue]

i eked 299 whp (aka, at the wheels on a dyno, not fabricated butt-dyno figures) out of my 2.0 wrx engine. big turbo (vf34), big front mount intercooler (and yes, big lag), water injection, bigger injectors, and 18-22 lbs of boost depending on the gas and which map i wanted to run that day...

Wows. How do Subi's dyno? AWHP, RWHP or FWHP?

I know guys with nearly stock 1.8Ts aside from a chip/FMIC or water/meth making about the same power. Granted, it will never launch as well as a WRX...

 

[Toshi]

Wows. How do Subi's dyno? AWHP, RWHP or FWHP?

I know guys with nearly stock 1.8Ts aside from a chip/FMIC or water/meth making about the same power. Granted, it will never launch as well as a WRX...

dynos differ. show me the dyno sheet for the same day, same dyno, same weather... i find it hard to believe that a 1.8T on a stock turbo would get 300 whp.

anyway, that's power at all four wheels on an all-wheel dyno.

 

[gideon]

Calm down, dude. You gave incorrect information and he called you out on it. No need to go after him.

I wouldn't mind the car you described, but I also wouldn't mind being able to fly, having a billion dollars, etc.

You're right, squashed by me, apologies to everyone including JM

On a separate note
A trailer would be nice, but a lot of us urban mice don't have a place to store it, heck it's an ordeal to even wash the car

 

[gideon]

owned +1

Et tu, Brute?

 

[Stoked]

Et tu, Brute?

haha gid i miss your rants

 

[gideon]

haha gid i miss your rants

aw c'mon, everyone's good for a rant every now and then, even u :biggrin:

 

[gideon]

Really, then why is it rated for 15mpg city and 20 highway? Not to mention that if you drive it to "use" that power, you'll probably do much worse.

How much better would that 20mpg be if it used a 4cyl diesel?

The toureg has a green rating of 1. It doesn't get any worse than that. You don't buy a toureg to be "green". You buy one because you "think" you need 300hp.


http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2007_Volkswagen_Touareg.shtml
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2008_Volkswagen_Touareg.shtml

the 04, which was the ones we were looking at the time we bought the allroad get 22mpg on hwy (according to this site)
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2008car1tablef.jsp?id=20379
I had remembered it was around 25 but was slightly off

That is still pretty darn impressive considering what this vehicle is capable of:
heavy load towing, offroad/snow, hauling people and gear, general ripping

I test drove 2 of them, not even in tip mode and was like an airplane taking off

 

[Jm_]

No, 22mpg on the highway is not impressive.

Next.

 

[blue]

I bought a 1.8t...

Mmm, 1500rpm turbo spool.

 

[gideon]

No, 22mpg on the highway is not impressive.

Next.

figured it out, you just hate german cars

 

[JustMtnB44]

Zombie thread revival! So does anyone that owned an Audi allroad during this discussion still have it? If so, how has it held up over the years? I am thinking of picking one up as I always thought they were cool and they are fairly cheap now. That is probably because they seem to be high maintenance with expensive repairs. But I do most automotive repairs myself so I'm not too worried, I just don't want a car that turns in to a total money pit. (Yes I know, older Audi's generally are money pits). It also needs to be reliable enough that I could take it on a cross country road trip without worries if I wanted to. Buying a well maintained slightly older one, lets say '03 with 90k miles, would cost about $9k less than a newer one, let's say '05 with 60k miles. It seems worth the cost savings to me as $9k can buy a lot of parts.

The other option is the 2005-2009 Subaru Outback XT (turbo). The only advantage it has over an allroad is reliability IMO. Generally it's just not as interesting as the allroad.

 

[RUFUS]

The air ride suspension for the 03 is total S*** Plus the cost of maintenance for that year at 90k is going to suck. My 2000 A6 avant is at 90k and I am looking at $5000 worth of work in the next year.

I would highly recommend the Outback. I also love the look of the Allroad.

 

[ozzemale]

Well since that's a nice grave dig.
I would just plain suggest an a4 1.8tq s line.

Love mine to bits.

 

[igz-]

My moms Allroad is like 4 years old now or so and it's still going strong

No major problems as of yet... The air suspension got a little pissed off a while ago but then it fixed itself hahahahahh

Other than that... It's pretty solid... I'd say 19mpg is the overall average...

Umm... what else... It's boss to road trip in with a roof rack

 

[Sandwich]

Check out places like audifans.com and quattroworld.com, as well as audiworld.com for people selling allroads. Your best bet with a car like that is to get one from somebody who's an enthusiast and took very good care of their care. You really don't want to buy an audi from a casual driver, as if they aren't looked after, you're up ****'s creek and will find out later.

allroads are pretty stout chassis(es) but the suspension can be iffy. It's about $1500 per corner to replace the airbag, but it may be less to do it yourself. It's like 1200 for the compressor, which will need to be replaced if one of the bags has been leaking for a while. A coilover conversion is probably cheaper.

Engines are variable...the 2.7t is a good engine and at this mileage, it'll either have already failed or it won't. I guess reliability was hit or miss. I don't know if they offered the 2.8, but that's the most reliable engine for the C6. The 4.2 isn't quite as stout, but it's non-turbo and if it's maintained, should be ok. I think it uses a timing chain too, so belts are less of an issue.

The tiptronic tranny is pretty stout. I'm not sure if certain years are bad, but it's worth checking into.

They are good cars, but with the amount of crap the germans put in their vehicles, more stuff can go wrong. Things don't break on a subaru because they were never there to begin with! If you don't want the goofy features, like nav, air suspension, auto/man gearbox, extra horsepower, etc., get the subie.

http://forums.quattroworld.com/allroad/

http://audifans.com/marketplace/browse.php

I don't know what your price range is, but that's a good place to start.

 

[Fred.dh]

hahahah my little sedan auhahua

4 bikes 4 people!haha

 

[Jason4]

I have some experience with the Allroads and other Audis along with lots of import cars in general. I worked for two years at a good independant shop that handled most imports and my daily driver is a B5 A4.

The Allroad is a money pit, and I say that gently because I like them. I can still get parts for decent prices and I can do a lot of the work myself, I have a good tool chest and several friends that have lifts that I can use and I'd still run away from the Allroad. They were available with a 6spd trans and the 2.7T which would be a lot of fun but not very reliable; I'd prefer the 4.2 and tip but they are a bit more money.

The 2.7T has a common issue with oil leaks from both valve covers, it's usually not just the VCG but the cam tensioner seal, book time for that job is ~15 hours, and parts are a couple hundred dollars. I'd also expect the rest of the 2.7T issues, turbo failure at ~100k miles, faulty recirc valves, faulty MAFs, faulty coolant temp sensor, etc.

The suspension has a bad track record for leaking air bags which if ignored lead to faulty air pumps ($$$!!).

This is in addition to regular maintenance which can be expensive. I think the 4.2 in the Allroad has a timing belt. I know it does in the A8 and the A6 but the engine sits a little different in the Allroad, the 4.2 in the S4 does have chains and might be the same as the Allroad. If it has a belt expect the 80K service to cost ~$2500 if you have it done at a dealer or good shop.

Audi calls the fluid in the automatic transmissions "life time fluid" and don't specify a service interval. My opinion is that they consider the life of the vehicle to be over when the warranty expires. I'd recommend servicing the transmission every 60K if you plan to keep the car, expect ~$250 or so and it's not really one that can be done at home unless you have a VAG-com tool or something similar.

Oh yeah, the hazard light relay and the brake light switch will both fail too.

Get the Subaru, what it lacks in soul it makes up for with reliability. But the head gaskets will fail...I can fill you in on that too if you want.

Take my cynicism with a grain of salt, when I was working at the shop I only saw the broken cars, there wasn't any need to bring it to us if it didn't have a problem. We did a lot of routine maintenance and the Audis always had more issues come up than the Subarus during the inspections.

 

[drkenan]

From a guy who has a 2.7T S4, I'd say get the Subaru. My clutch went out last Saturday (110k on the clock) and I was thinking I'd finally get to go Stage 3 since most people pull the fvcking engine just to change the clutch. Well...I will probably do it still but parts alone for clutch/turbos/fueling are in excess of $5k. I do most of the work myself and it still costs a fortune.

I'd either get a 1.8T Avant (and beef up the suspension - maybe even put a big turbo on it) or the Subaru. Trust me - you don't want anything to do with the 2.7T engine. It's twice the turbos and twice the price of repair than a 1.8T.

Oh...and if it's got 90k on the clock (and assuming it's a 2.7T) you're gonna need a turbo change in the near future. Engine and transmission have to be yanked AGAIN for that. Seriously...I love this car to death which is why I'm keeping it but unless you're REALLY handy then I would get something else.

 

[JustMtnB44]

The air ride suspension for the 03 is total S*** Plus the cost of maintenance for that year at 90k is going to suck.

The air suspension is the same on all model years. Yes it known to fail, but it's not that hard to fix. Besides, the adjustable air suspension is what makes the allroad different and better than every other similar car (A6 avant, Outback, etc). I am worried about maintenance after 90k miles, but it seems like a lot of maintenance is required even after 60k miles which the 90k car would already have completed.

Well since that's a nice grave dig.
I would just plain suggest an a4 1.8tq s line.

I was originally thinking of getting a B6 S4 Avant, but I think the allroad is better suited to my current needs.

My moms Allroad is like 4 years old now or so and it's still going strong. No major problems as of yet...It's pretty solid... I'd say 19mpg is the overall average...

Thanks for the vote of confidence.