Last post on Mar 14, 2012 at 5:17 PM
You are in the Audi A4
What is this discussion about?
Audi Cabriolet, Audi A4, Convertible
Sep 18, 2002 (10:19 am)
Thanks for the advice. I think you know the type of anticipation that builds when you have been wating for something from preconception(day 1) to release(within the next 4 weeks).
This has been my anticipated cabriolet. I bought an A4 in 1998 new and LOVE the car even at 190hp.
My loyalties are with Audi, but when I heard that:
1. NO QUATTRO
2. NO european NAV 2
3. NO anticipated S4 version for 2003
4. 220HP given its massive weight.
I was dissapointed and sent a letter to Len Hunt at Audi America.
I was able to see and sit in the car 2 weeks ago in Redwood Shores California and loved the look and feel, so gave it the benefit of the doubt.
Now I read the Edmunds review:
"mainly marketed to females"
Top bows at 70MPH
Its like a 3rd stab in the back for me.
Im wondering if I should hold on to my 98 A4 until Audi gets a bigger engine and fixes its problems in this vehicle?
Of course Ill test drive it next month, but im beginning to believe what others are saying about avoiding first year vehicle introductions to let them "get the bugs out:"
Just my 2 cents.
anyones comments are welcome:)
Sep 18, 2002 (11:01 am)
My feelings still stand. It looks like a very nice car that costs too much for what you get. It reminds me of the Acura 2.2CL, the first year IS300, the first year base Boxster, the first Mercedes ML or BMW Z3---an unfinished vehicle. At a low sticker price, I'd be willing to take an almost-there vehicle but when you start tipping the scales at $50k, for me personally I'd rather that the manufacturer finish the job before I put down money. My guess: this car will get Quattro and a real engine two calendar years from now, for the 2005 model. Either that or it'll be dead. That's the car I'd pay $50k for.
Just my opinion. I haven't driven one and haven't read much about it. I do know that based on the specs I was hearing, I honestly thought the A4 cab would be (like the sedan) a low-to-mid $30s convertible that fills the gap between a Sebring and a CLK cabrio. Unfortunately yet another mid-$30s convertible opportunity has been lost.
Sep 18, 2002 (6:13 pm)
Two of your disappointments should be fixed by adding the Sport package. Edmund's test vehicle did not include the Sport package, therefore the tamer ride and ok handling. Having a "tame ride" is a good idea in a convertible since the body looses a lot of its rigidity compared to the sedan, but Audi offers a Sport package for those who would rather punish themselves with a rougher ride, greater cowl shake and body flex, and more squeaks and rattles over the long-term.
#28 of 251 The A4 convertible is not intended.....
Sep 18, 2002 (7:19 pm)
to be a sports car or a real performer. It's too heavy. Think of it as an analog of the Mercedes SL, albeit w a small back seat.
Look at the TT 'vert if you want to fly with the top down. I believe there's more power coming for it (240 hp?).
#29 of 251 latoure
Sep 18, 2002 (9:50 pm)
I really think you're reading way too much into Edmunds' review. Test drive the car yourself. Find a dealer that will let you take the car for a day. The Audi dealers here are very willing to do whatever to get you into an Audi. The Cabrio is a luxury convertible not a sports car, you know a relaxed touring sort of car. My only issue with it that it only comes with the CVT. Awesome technology but a bit strange feeling when you drive one.
There will be a 1.8T version in Feb 2003 for about that price range.
Sep 19, 2002 (2:25 pm)
Yes, I still owe it to myself to test drive one, and Im not looking for a rocketship, but I would like to know that it at least has the same off-the-line acceleration as the BMW 3301 cabriolet. Is that too much to ask? also: I have cooled down about this issue, but Audi Quattro has always been a competitive differentiator and probably saved their asses 6-7 years ago. They have abandoned this feature for the cabriolet. Bad choice in the longrun. My recommendation:
A higher low-end torqe ration engine(probably a 240+HP). I dont know how the Audi engineers approved a 220HP engine for a car of thiis weight?
The Marketeers in the US must have applied pressure to them to make the quick buck to boost 2003 sales.
Just my 2 cents.
Sep 19, 2002 (10:33 pm)
I don't think Audi has ever offered Quattro on the Cabrio. I think they see it as being a "good weather" car and thus most people wouldn't opt for Quattro on a convertible. I don't *think* it will be as quick as the 330CiC due to weight and that car having a manual trans option.
Good luck in whatever you decide, keep us posted.
#32 of 251 Test Drive
Oct 10, 2002 (11:59 pm)
My local Audi dealer had about 4 of these on their front lawn today, so I couldn't resist.
This is first and foremost a very good-looking, well-crafted car. Those two things stand out right away. The CVT is kinda odd at first, but I got used to it after a few mins. The top's action is completely silent and the climate control automatically shuts off when you lower the top. Neat. This is "touring" car, much softer than the 330Ci droptop. Solid, calm, stylish is what this car is. The body structure is rigid and the tires do grip, but it's no sports car. The one I drove had everything, 47K (gulp). Nice car, but I'd like to see a 2.7t or S4 version.
#33 of 251 Nice car, but I'd like to see a 2.7t or S4 version.
Oct 11, 2002 (9:36 pm)
Me too - but no doubt that would result in yet a bigger gulp...maybe 53-54K?
Oct 12, 2002 (9:46 pm)
Probably so, and only an "S4" version would be worth that much. Now if they'd bring in a 2.7t version for the price of the current 3.0 model they would have a real winner on their hands.