How reliable are Audi's? Any suggestions for good snow car w/ decent fuel mileage?

[acidfast7]

I believe the converse is true. It's fine to state an opinion, but you should refrain from stating it as if it were a fact, especially when you failed to read the first line of someone's post.

Well then you're a person who has no understanding of physics. The shorter wheelbase on the touring with the additional weight over the rear wheels (versus the saloon/coupé) is a big deal. I (nor do most people from Bavaria) personally see why anyone would buy something with X-drive then mess it up with only 2 or 4-doors. Check the sales stats on X-drive equipped cars (worldwide) and get back to me. I mean where does one even put the skis/gear/dog in a saloon/coupé?

But, that's fine, don't let me stop you from thinking you made the correct decision with regards to driving in the snow.

----------

Man, you've got a great way with words.

Thanks, I aim to please (unless there are too many idiots around).

 

[mkrishnan]

I see the countryman as a lamentable attempt to cash in on the profitable SUV craze that is now over 30 years old and seems like it is here to stay forever.

Yeah, don't get me wrong -- that's how I felt also (actually I even thought that the Clubman, is it -- the first stretch Mini that doesn't have AWD -- was lamentable for the same reason). I guess, on the counterpoint, I'd rather have to contend with AWD Minis on the road than H3s or other large SUVs.

Back on the Audi front, I like the looks of the A3, although I'm a little underwhelmed with the fuel efficiency of the latest VW/Audi TDI's, especially considering the recent price premiums for diesel. What I'd really like to see is more availability of high-fuel-efficiency luxury vehicles in the US. There have been really good strides recently, but I'd like to see more done, and preferably not in the form of tiresome-to-drive like *cough* some Lexus vehicles....

 

[acidfast7]

Back on the Audi front, I like the looks of the A3, although I'm a little underwhelmed with the fuel efficiency of the latest VW/Audi TDI's, especially considering the recent price premiums for diesel. What I'd really like to see is more availability of high-fuel-efficiency luxury vehicles in the US. There have been really good strides recently, but I'd like to see more done, and preferably not in the form of tiresome-to-drive like *cough* some Lexus vehicles....

You guys don't get BlueMotionTech (Start/Stop Tech) yet?

The new A3 diesels get 61mpg highway/47mpg mixed over here with standard 1.6L TDI.

They have a 99g CO2/100km version that gets 71mpg highway/61mpg mixed as well, but it's still not the default engine option.

 

[mkrishnan]

You guys don't get BlueMotionTech yet?

I'm confused on this point, honestly. I think we do, but they don't seem to use that branding here much. With the Jetta just as an example of a current TDI VW in the US, it gets 30MPG / 42MPG (I believe this is 7.8 l/100km city and 5.6 l/100km highway profile). I believe this is with lackluster mid-speed acceleration, albeit lots of low-end torque (like around 8.5 seconds to 60MPH / 100kmh, but I could be wrong about this -- I'm not sure if this statistic is better on the A3?).

My point is simply that, first, diesel costs about 20% extra vs. at least standard gasoline in my part of the US. If I factor in the additional cost of the diesel, and I compare to something that's non-luxury but fun to drive (say the Mazda3 SkyActiv that's coming to the market) and gets a typical around 40mpg on highway, from a cost standpoint, the diesel is more expensive, as well as not clearly being a big environmental win over using less gasoline.

On the positive side, VW diesels have a pretty good reputation of racking solid real-world fuel economy, whereas some other vehicles do well on a test cycle and poorly in the real world.

I like Volkswagen/Audi, and I like diesel, I had just been hoping that the newest editions on the new platform would get something more like >50mpg highway. I also think it's not unreasonable to ask that their gas engines get up to the 40mpg highway that has become standard in the size class for non-luxe vehicles (I think VW offers all this, just not in American variants of the vehicles). All I mean is that I would pay for this kind of thing, but the availability of fun to drive cars with really good environmental performance is very limited in the US. If Mazda's eco tech doesn't ruin their driving experience, they'll offer fun to drive + eco, but they don't offer luxe. It's hard to get all three at this point here.

Anwways, this is way-OT. What I'm encouraged about is that a number of the Euro marques have been putting incremental gains into their American fleet. BMW's mileage numbers have gotten better, even if they're still not really dedicating their technology to accomplishing this, and some of their vehicles (1-series) in the US have shockingly bad economy considering their size and weight.

EDIT: I saw your update -- yeah, those kinds of options pretty much get nixed all the time, in the US, AFAIK, because the acceleration profile is deemed unacceptable to US buyers.

 

[acidfast7]

Anwways, this is way-OT. What I'm encouraged about is that a number of the Euro marques have been putting incremental gains into their American fleet. BMW's mileage numbers have gotten better, even if they're still not really dedicating their technology to accomplishing this, and some of their vehicles (1-series) in the US have shockingly bad economy considering their size and weight.

EDIT: I saw your update -- yeah, those kinds of options pretty much get nixed all the time, in the US, AFAIK, because the acceleration profile is deemed unacceptable to US buyers.

Yeah. I agree and I find it astonishing, because the top speed/acceleration needs are greater over here. But, then again fuel is much more expensive (last time it was about 130 USD for a tank), so I guess we're more easy going about acceleration.

However, I will say that I am glad you guys finally got the FIAT 500. That's an excellent car. The diesel does over 70mpg on the highway. And, the TwinAir version (which you don't have yet) is even more interesting (875cc twin-cylinder engine).

Slow progress I guess.

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

My experience with Audi/VW hasn't been the greatest. They are nice cars, but between 90,000-110,000 there were a lot of things that needed to be replaced/maintained that got pretty expensive. If you know how to do most work yourself, you can save money (oil, brakes, spark plugs, air filter, etc.)

Now I am driving a Mercedes Benz C Class, and I absolutely love it. Lightyears ahead of the A4 I owned before it. I just passed 140,000 miles and have had no major problems at all. I just had my CEL come on for a bad oxygen sensor, but that will only cost me about $60 to fix, and all other investments have been on normal maintenance (brakes, oil changes)

I have always had an affinity for BMW, you may find interest there as well.

To be honest though, all of these cars are going to be expensive to maintain if you can't work on them yourself. Everything is covered on these cars, and they aren't exactly the easiest to figure out, but if you are slightly mechanically inclined, and you access some forums about your car, there is a wealth of knowledge and help you can receive. However, if you can't do things like an oil change by yourself, or do your own brakes, I think I would stay away from a luxury brand. Mechanics/shops really charge a lot more to work on these cars, and with putting 80 miles a day on the car you are going to be looking at fairly frequent oil changes, tire rotations, etc.

In that case, I would recommend a subaru. There are many models to chose from, the wrx offers all wheel drive and a fun turbo charged engine. Others like the outback offer a ton of storage room along with the all wheel drive system. The subaru Legacy is more of their "luxury" sedan, with the Legacy GT coming with the turbo charged boxer engine. These cars are great in the snow, cheap to maintain, and will run forever.

 

[steve2112]

I'm confused on this point, honestly. I think we do, but they don't seem to use that branding here much. With the Jetta just as an example of a current TDI VW in the US, it gets 30MPG / 42MPG (I believe this is 7.8 l/100km city and 5.6 l/100km highway profile). I believe this is with lackluster mid-speed acceleration, albeit lots of low-end torque (like around 8.5 seconds to 60MPH / 100kmh, but I could be wrong about this -- I'm not sure if this statistic is better on the A3?).

My point is simply that, first, diesel costs about 20% extra vs. at least standard gasoline in my part of the US. If I factor in the additional cost of the diesel, and I compare to something that's non-luxury but fun to drive (say the Mazda3 SkyActiv that's coming to the market) and gets a typical around 40mpg on highway, from a cost standpoint, the diesel is more expensive, as well as not clearly being a big environmental win over using less gasoline.

On the positive side, VW diesels have a pretty good reputation of racking solid real-world fuel economy, whereas some other vehicles do well on a test cycle and poorly in the real world.

I like Volkswagen/Audi, and I like diesel, I had just been hoping that the newest editions on the new platform would get something more like >50mpg highway. I also think it's not unreasonable to ask that their gas engines get up to the 40mpg highway that has become standard in the size class for non-luxe vehicles (I think VW offers all this, just not in American variants of the vehicles). All I mean is that I would pay for this kind of thing, but the availability of fun to drive cars with really good environmental performance is very limited in the US. If Mazda's eco tech doesn't ruin their driving experience, they'll offer fun to drive + eco, but they don't offer luxe. It's hard to get all three at this point here.

For some reason, the EPA's test cycle tends to make the diesels look worse than they really are. I have read too many reports and have known people with TDIs who routinely go far over the official ratings. High 40s/low 50s are common even without extreme hypermiling. The Autoblog podcast talked about this a while back. While comparing the Chevy Cruze Eco and TDI Jetta, both rated at 42 MPG highway, they said the difference is that you have to work to get that mileage with the Cruze, while you could flog the TDI and do everything wrong (jack rabbit starts, 80+ on the interstate, etc) and still get 42MPG easily.

I really like the TDI, and the drivetrain itself seems really reliable, but I have known too many people who basically had the car fall apart around the drivetrain. Electrical problems seem really common.

I'm with you on Mazda. My last three cars have been Mazdas, and I love them, but the fuel mileage has been terrible on all of them. I really hope the SkyActiv tech can retain the Mazda soul while helping out the mileage. Now, if they would just fix the face on the 3.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Back on the Audi front, I like the looks of the A3, although I'm a little underwhelmed with the fuel efficiency of the latest VW/Audi TDI's, especially considering the recent price premiums for diesel. What I'd really like to see is more availability of high-fuel-efficiency luxury vehicles in the US. There have been really good strides recently, but I'd like to see more done, and preferably not in the form of tiresome-to-drive like *cough* some Lexus vehicles....

Unless you have money to burn, I really don't see too much advantage in the A3 over a well-equipped Golf. If you do have the money to burn, go ahead and get the A3 - it's a great car. I am annoyed by the fact that the base model is FWD - I think that Audi needs to make their entire lineup AWD.

Well then you're a person who has no understanding of physics. The shorter wheelbase on the touring with the additional weight over the rear wheels (versus the saloon/coupé) is a big deal. I (nor do most people from Bavaria) personally see why anyone would buy something with X-drive then mess it up with only 2 or 4-doors. Check the sales stats on X-drive equipped cars (worldwide) and get back to me. I mean where does one even put the skis/gear/dog in a saloon/coupé?

But, that's fine, don't let me stop you from thinking you made the correct decision with regards to driving in the snow.

I think you're going overboard here. Are you saying that AWD BMW sedans/saloons are so badly balanced that only an idiot would drive them? It's funny how, on the one hand, you tell us that German cars are so well engineered that they are "wasted" on US roads, and now your telling us that BMW has built a car so fundamentally flawed that only an idiot would drive it.

Which is it? You can't have it both ways. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, of course. But it is just that - an opinion. Personally, I am a big fan of the Touring models, though they are hard to find in the US (especially the 3-Series). But to each his or her own.

For some reason, the EPA's test cycle tends to make the diesels look worse than they really are.

Diesel prices are not subsidized by the government the way gasoline is, and very few car manufacturers are interested in diesel passenger cars. Also, the auto industry is currently trying to sell gasoline hybrids - not diesels. The truth of the matter is that completely standard diesel small cars often equal or exceeed the fuel economy of current hybrids in everyday driving conditions. Car makers are not keen on this becoming general knowledge.

I have read too many reports and have known people with TDIs who routinely go far over the official ratings. High 40s/low 50s are common even without extreme hypermiling. The Autoblog podcast talked about this a while back. While comparing the Chevy Cruze Eco and TDI Jetta, both rated at 42 MPG highway, they said the difference is that you have to work to get that mileage with the Cruze, while you could flog the TDI and do everything wrong (jack rabbit starts, 80+ on the interstate, etc) and still get 42MPG easily.

A friend of mine has a 2007 (I think) Jetta diesel with a manual transmission. After he finished breaking in the engine, he's been reporting economy numbers in the low-mid 40s. I would describe his driving style as average - not aggerssive but not overly gentle. The diesel VWs definitely exceed their rated economy buy a significant margin - this makes me wonder if VW will revise their fuel economy numbers in future diesel models.

In terms of reliability, there was aslight issue with water freezing in the intercooler pipes in very cold weather. Other than that the car has had no issues.

 

[Naimfan]

Well then you're a person who has no understanding of physics. The shorter wheelbase on the touring with the additional weight over the rear wheels (versus the saloon/coupé) is a big deal. I (nor do most people from Bavaria) personally see why anyone would buy something with X-drive then mess it up with only 2 or 4-doors. Check the sales stats on X-drive equipped cars (worldwide) and get back to me. I mean where does one even put the skis/gear/dog in a saloon/coupé?

But, that's fine, don't let me stop you from thinking you made the correct decision with regards to driving in the snow.

I see you don't bother disputing that you've offered opinion as fact. When you learn the distinction, kindly check back in.

Incidentally, the wheelbase of the wagon and sedan are identical at 107.3 inches. Might want to get your facts straight - it helps. Curb weight of the AWD wagon is roughly 380 lbs more than the RWD sedan.

I can't see why anyone would mess up a perfectly balanced E46 sedan with the extra weight, etc., of the wagon. If you're taking the dog/skis/gear anywhere in a sedan you have the wrong car.

Funny how dogmatic you are without seeing it. I simply suggested the OP consider an E46 AWD and now you're the one claiming that an E46 RWD is inadequate where I live. What was the last time you drove up into the mountains in Colorado in a RWD E46? Oh, right - that'd be never.

Thanks, I aim to please (unless there are too many idiots around).

Well, you're the only one here . . .

Bye!

 

[steve2112]

Diesel prices are not subsidized by the government the way gasoline is, and very few car manufacturers are interested in diesel passenger cars. Also, the auto industry is currently trying to sell gasoline hybrids - not diesels. The truth of the matter is that completely standard diesel small cars often equal or exceeed the fuel economy of current hybrids in everyday driving conditions. Car makers are not keen on this becoming general knowledge.



A friend of mine has a 2007 (I think) Jetta diesel with a manual transmission. After he finished breaking in the engine, he's been reporting economy numbers in the low-mid 40s. I would describe his driving style as average - not aggerssive but not overly gentle. The diesel VWs definitely exceed their rated economy buy a significant margin - this makes me wonder if VW will revise their fuel economy numbers in future diesel models.

In terms of reliability, there was aslight issue with water freezing in the intercooler pipes in very cold weather. Other than that the car has had no issues.

While I normally firmly believe our government is the best that lobbyists can buy, I don't know that the EPA is controlled by the auto industry. I could be wrong, though. I agree on the diesels, and I really wish we would get more of them here, but I don't see it happening. The American buying public tends to be short-sighted, and only sees how much more expensive diesel is at the pump, and ignores diesel.

I don't think the automakers set their official mileage numbers. The numbers on the sticker are set by the EPA, so I don't see how they could change them. It's like I was saying: the diesels can get high mileage without resorting to tricks like hybrid drivetrains, special tires, or engine/transmission tuning. The Chevy Cruze Eco with the manual, for example, has overdrive in 4th-6th gears and is insanely high geared so it can turn in 40+ MPG highway.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

While I normally firmly believe our government is the best that lobbyists can buy, I don't know that the EPA is controlled by the auto industry. I could be wrong, though. I agree on the diesels, and I really wish we would get more of them here, but I don't see it happening. The American buying public tends to be short-sighted, and only sees how much more expensive diesel is at the pump, and ignores diesel.

I don't think the automakers set their official mileage numbers. The numbers on the sticker are set by the EPA, so I don't see how they could change them. It's like I was saying: the diesels can get high mileage without resorting to tricks like hybrid drivetrains, special tires, or engine/transmission tuning. The Chevy Cruze Eco with the manual, for example, has overdrive in 4th-6th gears and is insanely high geared so it can turn in 40+ MPG highway.

I should have clarified a bit. I'm not suggesting that the EPA is in the pocket of the auto industry. But the focus of the consumer auto industry has, for so long, been on gasoline-engined cars that diesel doesn't get treated the same way by the EPA when compared with gasoline.

Only a tiny fraction of passenger cars in this country burn diesel. The number is still tiny even when you include consumer diesel pickups. As far as the EPA and congress is concerned, diesel is something that we use to power locomotives, ships and commercial trucks. There is comparatively little pressure from consumer groups and the auto industry to make diesel cheaper and cleaner. As a result, it isn't subsidized to the same extend as gasoline for consumer use, and few cars are sold that burn it.

If diesel got the same political/industry consumer attention as gasoline or even if it just grew considerably from it's current niche, it might be cheaper, and EPA standards for it would definitely be revised to more closely resemble those developed for gasoline-engined cars.

To try to keep this a little more on-topic, I would add that all of the major German luxury car manufacturers offer a diesel model here in the states. Subaru has a decent diesel model in Europe and Asia but has failed to release it here so far.

In my opinion, an AWD diesel wagon is an excellent and fuel-efficent replacement for most SUVs, and much more fun to drive I'm sure.

 

[JsR]

I have a 2009 Audi A4 and it is horrendous! I got it when I was 20 and as a young person I'm out a lot late nights, last winter in Newcastle the snow was horrendous and I couldn't drive it for 3 weeks! Getting a new car this year and was really after a Q7 brand new but they are not much better for the snow according to Audi, so I went to another brand. I have the Range Rover Evoque arriving on the 17th Feb which hopefully will be much better!
Apart from the snow, they are wonderful to drive. I can't comment on service charge etc as I purchased it brand new so had 3 years free servicing.

 

[acidfast7]

I see you don't bother disputing that you've offered opinion as fact. When you learn the distinction, kindly check back in.

LOL

when you learn how to read ... the Radstand (wheelbase) of the various E46 models range from 2725–2730 mm.

i understand in your imprecise world this may be the same.

but, seriously, when you learn some facts, let me know and I'll talk (very slightly) more seriously.

----------

I think you're going overboard here. Are you saying that AWD BMW sedans/saloons are so badly balanced that only an idiot would drive them? It's funny how, on the one hand, you tell us that German cars are so well engineered that they are "wasted" on US roads, and now your telling us that BMW has built a car so fundamentally flawed that only an idiot would drive it.

Which is it? You can't have it both ways. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, of course. But it is just that - an opinion. Personally, I am a big fan of the Touring models, though they are hard to find in the US (especially the 3-Series). But to each his or her own.

Most Germans consider anyone who drives a BMW as someone who knows nothing about value in cars. Most Germans would also consider the Audi model range to be vastly superior to the BMW range (due to the wagons), while considering the MB range to be left for extremely old people.

The 1M is an interesting addition in most peoples eyes, but really pales in comparison to the RS3 (with 5-doors) and the new roughly half-price 180hp A1 for anything around town.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Most Germans consider anyone who drives a BMW as someone who knows nothing about value in cars. Most Germans would also consider the Audi model range to be vastly superior to the BMW range (due to the wagons), while considering the MB range to be left for extremely old people.

I have to admit I'm skeptical of that characterization. Lots of motorsport enthusiasts in Germany (and all over the world) drive BMWs both on the track and every day. Audis might be particularly fashionbable these days, but BMW is not having any trouble selling sporty cars.

Just as a friendly reminder, let's keep this civil, folks. We can have different opinions without descending to the personal.

 

[acidfast7]

I have to admit I'm skeptical of that characterization. Lots of motorsport enthusiasts in Germany (and all over the world) drive BMWs both on the track and every day. Audis might be particularly fashionbable these days, but BMW is not having any trouble selling sporty cars.

I think you need to face the fact the OP is NOT a motoring enthusiast, and the OP is what this thread is about, no?

----------

LOL

when you learn how to read ... the Radstand (wheelbase) of the various E46 models range from 2725–2730 mm.

i understand in your imprecise world this may be the same.

but, seriously, when you learn some facts, let me know and I'll talk (very slightly) more seriously.

Also, this doesn't include the E46 M3, which is actually 1mm longer than the others.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

I think you need to face the fact the OP is NOT a motoring enthusiast, and the OP is what this thread is about, no?

All of the brands we've discussed make both sporty and more pedestrian models. They all make cars for pretty much all circumstances. I don't think any of the brands we've discussed are either perfect fits or outrageously bad choices.

 

[Naimfan]

LOL

when you learn how to read ... the Radstand (wheelbase) of the various E46 models range from 2725–2730 mm.

i understand in your imprecise world this may be the same.

but, seriously, when you learn some facts, let me know and I'll talk (very slightly) more seriously.

----------



Most Germans consider anyone who drives a BMW as someone who knows nothing about value in cars. Most Germans would also consider the Audi model range to be vastly superior to the BMW range (due to the wagons), while considering the MB range to be left for extremely old people.

The 1M is an interesting addition in most peoples eyes, but really pales in comparison to the RS3 (with 5-doors) and the new roughly half-price 180hp A1 for anything around town.

My, aren't we just demonstrating our inability to read what's been written . . .

Perhaps you'd care to enlighten us all on how a 5 mm difference in wheelbase makes such a "big deal" to handling in snow? Or the last time you drove an E46 RWD in the mountains of Colorado?

No? We're shocked.

Perhaps when you learn to read what's been written you can be acknowledged again.

Ta!

 

[acidfast7]

My, aren't we just demonstrating our inability to read what's been written . . .

Perhaps you'd care to enlighten us all on how a 5 mm difference in wheelbase makes such a "big deal" to handling in snow? Or the last time you drove an E46 RWD in the mountains of Colorado?

No? We're shocked.

Perhaps when you learn to read what's been written you can be acknowledged again.

Ta!

you really don't understand, eh? i guess thats why you ended up with an e46 in the first place

:facepalm:

 

[mgartner0622]

All of the brands we've discussed make both sporty and more pedestrian models. They all make cars for pretty much all circumstances. I don't think any of the brands we've discussed are either perfect fits or outrageously bad choices.

I've been watching this thread progress, and although I'm currently not a motoring enthusiast, although I would like to become more aquatinted with my next car, requiring it to be fun to drive.
The Camry I have really isn't a "fun" car. Just an A to B model, which is what I'm trying to avoid in my next car. Currently, it seems to me that reliability is a trade off for fun.

In regards to performing my own maintenance, I do my own oil changes (I don't trust any of the local stores to do it for me) and I've also changed my valve cover gasket, fuel filter, spark plugs and a few other parts on my car. So, I wouldn't say I could rebuild an engine, but I can do most relatively easy maintenance. I've learned a lot about my car by joining the toyotanation forum and just asking questions whenever I want to do something, and as the poster said above forums are extremely helpful.

Also, I specified the original 20k price limit because I prefer to buy used cars considering the massive amount of depreciation when you drive the new car off the lot. Over the years, this seems to be the better deal, at least in my opinion. Most used cars I've been looking at generally fall into this category.

On a side note, I love diesels myself. I wish they were as common here as they are in the rest of Europe. If I could pick from any model across the pond, it would probably be the diesel Accord Tourer with the standard transmission. Personally, it reminds me of an Audi wagon such as the Allroad.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Currently, it seems to me that reliability is a trade off for fun.

This is often true, but there are plenty of exceptions. The Acura Integra, VW Golf GTI, Honda Civic Si, Ford SVT Focus and Subaru WRX are all fun, sporty cars with a generally good reputation for reliability. On the higher end, the Porsche Boxter and Lotus Elise also both consistently get good reliability ratings.

Sporty cars tend to be driven more aggressively, which I have to think prejudices the reliability ratings against them compared with, say, a Corolla. But that doesn't mean they are necessarily unreliable cars, especially if one doesn't flog them hard.

 

[rubirock]

ok, first off, having owned an 05 STi (for a short while) and currently driving an 01.5 S4, i don't think you can really go wrong with either.
that being said, the audi, even being 4 years older with 60k+ more miles on the clock, is leaps and bounds ahead in build quality. fit and finish is impeccable and I really enjoy the interior and exterior styling. sporty, but understated, especially when compared to the wonderfully boy-racer styling of the STi, just depends on what floats your boat.
but everything about it is more expensive (aftermarket & replacement parts, labor, etc) and the engine bay of my 2.7 liter bi-turbo is not a fun place work. luckily i have a friend that is a certified audi tech so I get to work on my own car under expert tutelage for something like 40% of what it would cost me to take it to a stealership or german-specific mechanic.

so, my advice, find an S4 that is a few years older (i'm partial to the B5 model like mine) and take a drive. and do the same with the STi. that's the only way you'll know which one works best for you.

good luck!

 

[mikeyredk]

Unless you have money to burn, I really don't see too much advantage in the A3 over a well-equipped Golf. If you do have the money to burn, go ahead and get the A3 - it's a great car. I am annoyed by the fact that the base model is FWD - I think that Audi needs to make their entire lineup AWD.

Check out this link Great information about the differences.

As for the AWD you really don't need it; A heavy car (3500 lbs), snow tires and a little common sense can take you far.

 

[maccanuck2006]

I'll chime in. I've had great experience with my two Audis. I just completed the lease an 2009 A4, which was a nice upgrade from my 1998 Volvo 240DL. I loved that car and I found it utterly reliable over the 39 month lease period. It was appropriately peppy (4 banger), had great fuel economy and with the quattro it drove rings around my wife's Pilot in the snow. I would have bought it out, but I pulled the trigger on an used, but almost mint 2003 RS6, which is essentially a 515hp rocket on 4 wheels after an ECU/TCU aftermarket Stasis tune. It almost makes the 2nd mortgage to pay for gas worth while.....
But I would agree with other posters: I am religious about the scheduled maintenance and have to accept the $$ labour costs

 

[Lord Blackadder]

As for the AWD you really don't need it; A heavy car (3500 lbs), snow tires and a little common sense can take you far.

I completely agree - but at the Audi's price point I would expect them to offer AWD across the board these days, since it has become such a strong part of their brand identity. A FWD Audi A3 is just too similar to a Golf GTI. Given the choice between the two I'd take the GTI every time.

 

[mikeyredk]

I completely agree - but at the Audi's price point I would expect them to offer AWD across the board these days, since it has become such a strong part of their brand identity. A FWD Audi A3 is just too similar to a Golf GTI. Given the choice between the two I'd take the GTI every time.

Now we are talking about different animals here