Last post on Nov 25, 2013 at 11:27 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Lexus GS 430, Acura RL, BMW 5 Series, Volvo S80, Audi A6, Infiniti M35, Infiniti M45, Mercedes-Benz E-Class, Cadillac STS, Sedan
#8800 of 10348 Audi corrective
Dec 01, 2006 (6:46 am)
For some reason, among the various threads that run through the forum, there is an "unreliable Audi" thread. Haven't seen a similar detailed litany of repairs about other cars recently (Mark ... maybe your pro-Audi voice creates a compulsion to report only bad Audi experiences).
So, simply to keep some balance, ... I drove the M35, which came and went in three months) 3600 miles, during which time I needed repair of the rear suspension, driver seatbelt, and headlights.
On the Infiniti M new owners board, an owner, at the 34K mileage point, lamented: "I have owned my M45 sport for 14 months now. My previous vehicle was a FX35. I do drive about 2500 miles a month, so the car has about 34,000 miles on it. I am disappointed in how it is holding up. There seem to be some "glitches" that happen once in a while. The auto drivers seat and steering wheel work about 50% of the time. When it does not work, I have to push the memory seat position to start driving. There is a rattle in the back end of the car when I stop sometimes, and the a/c smells musty when the car starts up after sitting for more than an hour. I know these seem minor, but after spending over 50k for a car I want it to work right. I have taken it to the dealer for all of the issues only to be told that they cannot repeat them. I purchased an Infiniti so I would not have to worry about repairs. The car's initial appeal has really worn off. I am actually looking forward to my lease ending in 10 months. Its to bad, this car has potential, it just needs a little more excitement to be a show stopper."
And, from the Infiniti M35/M45 owners' problems forum: "I've put about 12,000 miles on my 2006 M35X. Before leasing, last summer, I read all the reviews and all of the posts on various sites - including Edmunds. The reviews were fantastic and so were the posts. Many former BMW and Mercedes owners raved about the M. I'm guessing there are other potential buyers that are doing the same right now. In my opinion, the best things about this car are the sound system (best I've ever heard in a car) and the interior. I really don't like the drive AT ALL. On the highway, the steering is all over the place. The transmission shifts are really pronounced in sound and feel, reminding me of a stick shift being driven by someone that really doesn't know how to drive. When you dive the car hard, it does perform. However, when you drive the car normally, it feels like you are pulling a boat.If I could get out of the lease today - I would (and I still might, regardless of the financial loss). I dislike this car so much I left it at our winter home in Florida all winter. This way, I would only have to drive it one week per month. Our two other cars are an Audi A4 and a BMW X3. Both of cars drive better than the M. All I can think about each time I drive the M is - I really can't stand this car! I kick myself each day for not choosing the Mercedes E350 or BMW 530."
#8801 of 10348 Re: . [james27]
Dec 01, 2006 (9:12 am)
I sold my 2000 A6 2.7T w/ 100,000 miles for $11,500 and bought a new Mazda Cx-7 for $28,350.00. Needed more hauling capacity, liked the way the Mazda handled, and changed brands with no expectations that Mazda will be more reliable than Audi.
Buying a vehicle really is a crap shoot no matter what the forums or anybody says or writes. Liked the look and driveability of the Mazda, plus the slick tiptronic setup, and really have to hope for the best!
If I have to have the radiator, water pump, timing chain, front end parts,oil seals, and "a few other things" replaced before 50 K, even if these things are covered under warranty, my search for the "holy grail" of reliable and trouble free transportation will start all over again.
Dec 01, 2006 (11:01 am)
Has anyone beside me been perplexed by the frequency of people generalizing from their car's particular service history to that brand's ultimate reliability? Contributors here seem bright, thoughtful, even insightful except in this one area.
Here's the situation: your car's particular service history is a matter of luck: sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad, but it is a matter of chance. As such, it's really not worth long diatribes. What you learn from problems is how good a particular dealer is in dealing with them, and how good a brand is in standing behind their products. But you don't learn a general reliability lesson for that brand or your model.
I've had a terrible time with my 2002 BMW X5. I wouldn't buy another one just because it has left a bad aftertaste. But I look at CR's just-released buying guide, and discover that the 2002 BMW has been of average reliability, with particular problems in electrical systems, AC, and power equipment. Well, my problems were in none of those areas; they were in the transmission, the suspension, and the body integrity. Does this mean that CR got it wrong? Of course not. It means the world is a phenomenally random place, and the hand I was dealt is not likely to get dealt again. I learned that my BMW dealer is pretty supportive and does its best to fix things and minimize my inconvenience. I might buy another BMW (maybe a 525ix wagon) and hope for a better hand. But I didn't learn much about BMWs or X5s. I go to places that do reliable surveys to learn about that.
#8803 of 10348 Re: Reliability of LPS [lansdownemike]
Dec 01, 2006 (11:29 am)
The question is : Were you satisfied with the dealer service in repairing the transmission, suspension and body integrity to the point where you would purchase BMW again?
I was not with the Audi dealer authorized service,and found an independent shop to keep the car running.
#8804 of 10348 Re: More is better. . . [markcincinnati]
Dec 01, 2006 (11:38 am)
I rarely visit here since purchase of my current non-LPS.
But every time I do ( these cars still hold a level of interest for me ) it seems I see a post by Mark that intrigues me.
Full disclosure here:
My current ride is a 2007 Corvette Coupe. HP \ TQ = 400 of each. And weight is close to 3200#. Mark’s A6 3.2 has 255 \ 243 and weighs something over 4000#.
One reason ( high on my list ) that I did not end up buying something like an Audi A6 4.2 ( I drove one of the first to arrive here in Atlanta ) is:
More ( as in great steaming piles of ) Torque and More ( as in very, very quick for a Daily Driver ) Acceleration were of paramount importance to me. And my circumstances finally allowed me to have an only vehicle \ Daily Driver wherein I could “give up” 2 seats & 2 doors in favor of a significant step up in both acceleration & handling.
The Corvette board I primarily monitor is rife with Corvette drivers who have 1 or more additional vehicles – and some are Audis or BMWs. But there are also a surprising ( to me ) number of folks who commute daily in their Corvettes – as I now do.
Point here is that I am rarely able to use WOT in the first 3 gears for more than a few seconds at a time. ( I generally try to avoid exceeding every current posted speed limit in the US. ) But I can utilize WOT on occasion, and I can & do use WOT in the higher gears, reveling in the elasticity and the Torque that slings me along at entertaining rates of acceleration.
( My name is Ray & I am a TQ \ HP Junkie – looking for a 12 step program. )
While I cannot safely explore the very high cornering limits of the Corvette. The handling is quite enjoyable at 6 or 7 tenths. And I can accelerate at a very enjoyable and engaging rate of speed whenever the mood & traffic \ road conditions allow.
So. More is better. For me.
And my recent trip to Florida over the weekend resulted in quite respectable fuel economy.
Trip: Approx. 725 miles, mostly over 2 travel days.
Average MPG = 28.25 ( Excel & Trip Computer nearly identical )
I was not driving trying to achieve the best possible MPG. This trip also included a couple of ( um ) ‘demonstration’ acceleration runs: 15 – 95 or so. NOT exactly the best conditions for fuel economy . . .
I did not select a Corvette because I expected Honda fuel efficiency – but this I do find quite remarkable.
Just my 0.02 gallons worth.
Very Happy with More . . .
#8805 of 10348 Re: More is better. . . [rayainsw]
Dec 01, 2006 (12:28 pm)
I have never heard of a Corvette getting THAT kind of fuel economy... once owned a blue 1980 L-82 that only made about 17-19 mpg. Must be quite a few breakthrough upgrades in every area of Corvette construction in the last 26 years!
#8806 of 10348 Re: More is better. . . [rayainsw]
Dec 01, 2006 (12:54 pm)
You are always welcome here no matter what you drive.
#8807 of 10348 28+ MPG Re: More is better. . . [fonefixer]
Dec 01, 2006 (12:55 pm)
“I have never heard of a Corvette getting THAT kind of fuel economy... once owned a blue 1980 L-82 that only made about 17-19 mpg. Must be quite a few breakthrough upgrades in every area of Corvette construction in the last 26 years!”
Well – 26 years has brought many breakthroughs in many areas:
EPA estimates for mine ( six speed automatic ) are 17 \ 27.
In my review of many, many relevant posting, 28+ MPG for trip mileage is not exceptional for a C6.
Happy motoring . . .
#8808 of 10348 Re: More is better. . . [rayainsw]
Dec 01, 2006 (1:17 pm)
More IS better was "a" theme I was singing. However, there is a point, for me, for MY circumstances, that THAT much more is unable to be fully appreciated. And, since I can't "have it all," I see myself reaching somewhat of a saturation point. Note: I am NOT there -- YET!
This is not to say I think my 255HP A6 is even a tiny bit more than "adequate." I suggested there are times that I think it is inadequate, but that I just couldn't put my finger on an example that stuck in my head.
I have had cars that were so "woefully inadequate" that I thought they were dangerous to attempt to drive if one had to merge on a freeway "already in progress."
Here is something that this discussion (or my own wanderings) reminded me of. You see, I used to be an "audio junkie" or "audio geek" (perhaps I still am, but time and tide have drastically reduced the time I have to spend in my local Audiofile Heaven and at this point, the additional money I would have to spend to improve my system gets me to "breathtakingly expensive.") Where was I, oh yea. . .
I used to live in an apartment (way back in college.) I had spent every dime I owned on speakers, amplification, turntables (remember records?) and cartridges (sometimes costing more than the turntables they were used in.) My speakers were the epitome of 'high fidelity.'
They played true and they COULD play both true and loud. It is a sad fact that speakers that can play true sound even better the louder they get (up to the limits of ear pain, of course.)
So, there I was, with a really cool audio system (well, it was at least really expensive) that I couldn't play at any volume above what at the time seemed like a mere whisper (without really honking off the neighbors.) My pre-amp and amps stayed cool since they were barely cranked, the speaker diaphragms never had a chance to show off their excursive abilities.
Fast forward. I live in a house, my "home theater" has five subwoofers and tens of thousands of dollars worth of electronics and source components -- I watch a lot of CSI, whilst I'm reading Car & Driver, Road & Track, Automobile, and -- it's pitiful isn't it. I have the tools, I have the technology, yet I still barely crack it open, barely crank it up (although my wife would disagree.)
Ditto my situation, I'm certain, were I to have an RS4 or S8 or S6. Lots of refined brute force, so little chance to even "crank it up above a whisper" kind of thing -- AGAIN.
So, I search for the holy grail, my Batmobile, so to speak. I want more than the 255HP that Ingolstadt has bestowed upon the A6 3.2, but see little merit in the extra cost (for the performance gain) associated with a 4.2.
So I say, "weapons grade torque" with similar horsepressure and I'd be fine. But, I'd put a couple of thou into a sound system upgrade (cause in the car, I CAN crank it up.)
Nevertheless, "I STILL can't drive -- 55!"
#8809 of 10348 Re: More is better. . . [markcincinnati]
Dec 01, 2006 (1:52 pm)
Interesting, for sure.
I had an old Yaschica D camera (bought second-hand) when I was in college & took many fairly decent photos with it. Later in my life I got a Mamiya C220 (twin-lens reflex, like the Yaschica) with a number of bells & whistles & took a number (but fewer than the YD) of good photos. That camera was stolen, and I ended up with a SLR Mamiya M45, by far the best of the lot. Mostly snapshots from that one, sadly.
But (here's the elusive point), the better my equipment got, the less time I had to use it & the less passion (or whatever) I brought to the table. Getting older has its drawbacks, and this (for me) is one of them.
The more money one has to indulge in stuff, as one ages, the less time is available. I drove my second-hand MGB in 44 states (when I was 20) & my 240-Z 40K miles/year several years running (when I was 25-30). Now I can afford better cars, but don't have the opportunities that I had then to actually use them as they were intended.
Maybe it's just me.
OTOH, I live in a part of the country that allows me to blast across Nevada & other unpopulated areas pretty much as I see fit, so on those rare (but treasured) occasions when I do engage in a road trip these days, it's a memorable thing.
That's why I'm telling myself that the next vehicle I get, even though it'll spend 99% of the time and 95% of its accumulated mileage commuting, is worth what it'll cost.
A handful of days a year, I can live again.