CTC Review: 2009 Audi A6 3.0T

[onearmed]

Let me chime in with my father's 2006 A4 2.0T -78000km.  It's been below average in reliability. Speak of the devil just the other day the transmission started to shift very hard.  He has an appointment on Monday April 6th. In another thread, I listed the problems so far but this is not good. We'll see what the outcome is, either way definitely not one of the good ones. It's been acceptable for him so far, but this may just put it under.

My GTI has been fine in comparison.   

Just another fact. Take it as it is.


Edit:  Thanks for the quote Jaeger earlier in the thread! 

[Jaeger]

I would agree with you that it would suck for the tranny to shift rough in such a car, but is this the case? Is this what Wing meant? Perhaps he can chime in and qualify his statement.
However, if all he meant is that you can perceive the 1-2 gear shift versus the other gear shifts, I wouldn't care about one bit.

Well my friend, like I said - that's why I quoted the article in the first place.  I don't pretend to speak for Wing and I don't pretend to have any first hand experience behind the wheel of this ride.  But he described this characteristic of the transmission as a "negative" - which to me suggests something a beyond merely being able to perceive the shift, though well short of "Damn, is thing broke?" lurching and grinding.

Jaeger

[wing]

Clarification a little I guess -- it is a little difficult to explain without going into painful detail.

But the transmission tends to stay in 2nd gear for an extended period of time when slowing to a stop, when getting back on the throttle it shifts down to first then back to second quickly jerking the car what I would consider roughly.  You do not get this if you hammer the gas as it stays in gear.

It's noticeable enough to bother me.  Which means if I'm coming to a stop I stop for a complete 1-2-3 seconds to avoid the jerk.

[Jaeger]

Okay, here's our disconnect.  You think that there are good car companies and bad car companies.  I think that there are car companies that emphasize X and car companies that emphasize Y , and in some cases car companies with more resources to pull from and car companies with less, but not car companies that are "better" or "worse" than other car companies when they put equal resources towards a problem.  Those are fundamentally different views of the auto industry.

Not what I am saying at all.  I think ALL car companies strive for reliability as among their highest and most important manufacturing goals.  [Again, I'm talking mainstream here - not some hand-built super-car.]  But they don't all succeed.  Some are better at it than others.  Their quality - in respect of wich reliability is the most significant measure - is consistently good.  They don't have great variation in reliablity from model to model because they are all pretty darned good.  That doesn't mean that those compaies that perform more poorly in terms of reliability are BAD  car companies (your phrase bro, not mine) - they are just not AS good as others.

Now, the customers of said brands may not rate reliability as highly in their purchase-decision hierarchy - placing other factors at the forefront - and those are perfectly valid choices.  But that does NOT mean that the manfacturers themselves regard reliability as a secondary or tertiary concern.  Far from it.  They are all TRYING to turn out exceptionally reliable automobiles - they are just not all succeeding as consistently well.

Jaeger

[Jaeger]

Wing - thanks for the clarification and additional detail.

Jaeger

[vdk]

Clarification a little I guess -- it is a little difficult to explain without going into painful detail.

But the transmission tends to stay in 2nd gear for an extended period of time when slowing to a stop, when getting back on the throttle it shifts down to first then back to second quickly jerking the car what I would consider roughly.  You do not get this if you hammer the gas as it stays in gear.

It's noticeable enough to bother me.  Which means if I'm coming to a stop I stop for a complete 1-2-3 seconds to avoid the jerk.

Does the RPM drop to idle before it does that? Mine does the same thing, and I believe there's a TSB about that somewhere.

[safristi]

.  Which means if I'm coming to a stop I stop for a complete 1-2-3 seconds to avoid the jerk.
[/quote]..................

 Which "JERK" on here are U avoiding!!!?................

[Audi Lover]

Audi doesn't need to build reliable cars, because they drive so well.  They wouldn't sell an extra car even if it was more reliable than a Lexus, b/c quite frankly, Audi buyers might be offended.  I'd think that they wasted resources on reliability at the expense of driving pleasure.

Just like if Lexus made their cars more fun to drive, their sales would decrease.  Their buyers look forboredom and reliability as their chief goal, and that's why Lexus needs to build their cars off corolla and camry platforms (admittely those platforms are quite reliability).

[Jaeger]

Audi doesn't need to build reliable cars, because they drive so well.  They wouldn't sell an extra car even if it was more reliable than a Lexus, b/c quite frankly, Audi buyers might be offended. 

   Yeah man, I'm sure Audi owners would be ever so miffed if their cars were more reliable. 

Jaeger

[TopGun]

.....DSG.....

If anything it makes the car much more fun to drive.

While that may be your opinion, I don't think one could argue that a DSG removes many interfaces the driver has with the car...the clutch pedal itself...engaging and disengaging the clutch, and moving, mechanically, gears/synchros together.

I, personally, don't understand how removing interfaces with your machine can possibly make it more fun.

[Turbo Bob]

.....DSG.....

If anything it makes the car much more fun to drive.

While that may be your opinion, I don't think one could argue that a DSG removes many interfaces the driver has with the car...the clutch pedal itself...engaging and disengaging the clutch, and moving, mechanically, gears/synchros together.

I, personally, don't understand how removing interfaces with your machine can possibly make it more fun.

Have to agree, I haven't driven one but based on reviews by UK enthusiast's mags the DSG is very competent but not necessarily more fun. In fact one said it was so efficient it took all the fun away!

[Turbo Bob]

There's not a doubt in my mind that the A6 is less reliable than a GS.  However, from the reviews I've read, it's much more exciting dynamically than the GS and comparable luxury-wise.  So it depends on your particular priorities are.  So long as we don't all have the same priorities, it's good that not all car companies make cars with the same priorities.

To my way of thinking, reliability SHOULD be among the very highest priorities for any car manufacturer.  It's not like there is any inconsistency - from a manufacturing standpoint - between making a car that is fun to drive and making a car that is reliable to operate - so it's not really a question of priorities.  To suggest such is to join ranks with our blowhard Audi driver who scoffs at any mention of reliability as being beneath the consideration of a driving purist.  Which is, of course, utter drivel.  How much driving enjoyment do you get stranded on the side of the road waiting for the flatbed to arrive?

What about Alfa Romeo, hardly reliable, but drool worthy nonetheless!  Their older models (and some of the newer ones) are as reliable as an old Ferrari, but are the epitome of driving passion. Sometimes the thrill of getting from A to B is more important than anything else.

[initial_D]

Audi doesn't need to build reliable cars, because they drive so well.  They wouldn't sell an extra car even if it was more reliable than a Lexus, b/c quite frankly, Audi buyers might be offended. 

   Yeah man, I'm sure Audi owners would be ever so miffed if their cars were more reliable. 

Jaeger

Should be in the Friday Funnies section ... 

Audi cars do drive well, I agree.

[Mitlov]

Why are people discussing DSG?  The A6 3.0T has a torque converter automatic ("Tiptronic").  Wing said that the shifts nearly rival a DSG automatic.  Not that this is a DSG automatic.

[vdk]

Why are people discussing DSG?  The A6 3.0T has a torque converter automatic ("Tiptronic").  Wing said that the shifts nearly rival a DSG automatic.  Not that this is a DSG automatic.

Yes yes yes.

I also think Oz meant to compare DSG automatic transmissions with those with a torque converter.

[Threader]

Quote" Audi Lover Says:
Yesterday at 07:28:22 pm Audi doesn't need to build reliable cars, because they drive so well.  They wouldn't sell an extra car even if it was more reliable than a Lexus, b/c quite frankly, Audi buyers might be offended.  I'd think that they wasted resources on reliability at the expense of driving pleasure.

Just like if Lexus made their cars more fun to drive, their sales would decrease.  Their buyers look forboredom and reliability as their chief goal, and that's why Lexus needs to build their cars off corolla and camry platforms (admittely those platforms are quite reliability)."

Only idiots buy unreliable vehicles for driving pleasure. How much driving pleasure can you derive from having your car in the shop for weeks at a time or being stranded in death valley in July? The only reality is if you are the kind of person who has a chauffeur driven vehicle(s) then it really doesn't matter if it's a unreliable POS because your staff will be at the dealer for repairs and you will just use another POS that hasn't broken down yet. For the rest of us we'll have our cake and eat it too. Lexus IS F

[Mitlov]

Only idiots buy unreliable vehicles for driving pleasure. How much driving pleasure can you derive from having your car in the shop for weeks at a time or being stranded in death valley in July? The only reality is if you are the kind of person who has a chauffeur driven vehicle(s) then it really doesn't matter if it's a unreliable POS because your staff will be at the dealer for repairs and you will just use another POS that hasn't broken down yet. For the rest of us we'll have our cake and eat it too. Lexus IS F

There's a thread about reliability here that I've spun off from this thread:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/forum/index.php/topic,61906.0.html

In short, let me say this: in 18 months, my Subaru Legacy gave me small smiles, consistently, day after day.  In the 18 months since I sold it, my Jetta has given me huge grins every day, with the exception of one day, where I had a gigantic frown.  Which is the better ownership experience overall?  I'd say the latter.  If that makes me an idiot, so be it.

As for the IS-F, if it was equal in every way to an E90 M3, it'd be a better choice for everybody.  But it's not.  They each have their strengths and weaknesses, and neither one is right for everybody.

[Jaeger]

Motlov - you are once again confusing YOUR priorities with those of the manufacturer.  If you are willing to accept poor reliability (comparatively speaking) for more driving pleasure (in your subjective opinion) -that's fine.  But that by no means suggests that the manufacturers in question place reliability in a different hierarchy in terms of THEIR priorities.

Jaeger

[Oz]

Why are people discussing DSG?  The A6 3.0T has a torque converter automatic ("Tiptronic").  Wing said that the shifts nearly rival a DSG automatic.  Not that this is a DSG automatic.

Yes yes yes.

I also think Oz meant to compare DSG automatic transmissions with those with a torque converter.

Exactly, I didnt specify. I meant DSG vs. slushbox.

My car is MT and I'm a firm believer in it.

[banfield]

Quote" Audi Lover Says:
Yesterday at 07:28:22 pm Audi doesn't need to build reliable cars, because they drive so well.  They wouldn't sell an extra car even if it was more reliable than a Lexus, b/c quite frankly, Audi buyers might be offended.  I'd think that they wasted resources on reliability at the expense of driving pleasure.

Just like if Lexus made their cars more fun to drive, their sales would decrease.  Their buyers look forboredom and reliability as their chief goal, and that's why Lexus needs to build their cars off corolla and camry platforms (admittely those platforms are quite reliability)."

Only idiots buy unreliable vehicles for driving pleasure. How much driving pleasure can you derive from having your car in the shop for weeks at a time or being stranded in death valley in July? The only reality is if you are the kind of person who has a chauffeur driven vehicle(s) then it really doesn't matter if it's a unreliable POS because your staff will be at the dealer for repairs and you will just use another POS that hasn't broken down yet. For the rest of us we'll have our cake and eat it too. Lexus IS

An expert's take on VW reliability(from boston.com/cars):

Q. I have a 2000 Volkswagen Jetta and the computer light constantly comes on. I recently I replaced the oxygen sensor then filled up with gas and the light went out. The next day it came back on. What can I do? It can't pass inspection and every time I put it in the shop it costs more money. The car has 107,000 miles so I don't consider it worn out. What can I do?

A. At this point I would return to the shop that performed the original repair. Since they seemed to have misdiagnosed the problem, at a minimum they owe it to you to look at the car again. As they get older, Volkswagens suffer from simple items such as cracked and leaking vacuum hoses to faulty mass-air-flow sensors.

John Paul is the public affairs manager for AAA Southern New England.