I have have/had 2 A4s (Avant which was a waste got rid of it, and a sedan), these 2 cars don't even come close to the quality that I have in my 4000 Quattro or my 82 Ur Quattro. The A4s have more options but its not the options that are the quality problem its the basic mechanics. The 82 Ur I have more than 300,000 on with the original drive units. I doubt that I'll get this in the A4.<p>The A4 Avant I dumped and got a A6 Avant and the quality is much better, its not been in the shop except for normal service.<p>In looking at this forum it seems that the number of problems reported indicate low quality in the A4 line.

You'll read complaints by owners of any make out there. There are not any problems that the A4 or Audi in general has, that other makes don't have. If I was worried about my car breaking down all the time (which it doesn't), I'd go with a different manufacturer. My $.02.<p>BTW, there was a lengthy discussion yesterday about quality issues. It's probably on page 2 of this forum.<p>CraigB<br>'98 1.8TqM (10k mile service tomorrow; no problems...yet) 8^)

This forum is like any other type of forum (e.g. talk radio, consumer editorials, etc.). People who have bad stuff to report are the one's you tend to 'see'; that's human nature. This gives the impression that there are many problems. But, you have to take into consideration the entire population as a whole, not just the minority who report problems. Always think critically about what you are reading. Actually, the majority of threads posted to this forum are positive in nature, and many of the problems are minor. If you doubt what I say, lurk around in some of the other vehicular forums for a while; and just be glad you don't have some of their problems.<br>

I did not say Audi has poor quality, just the A4 seems below normal for the 2 that I have owned. I have been an Audi buyer since 1982 had no problems until the A4 came along.<p>I read the loooooong list of appends yesterday, they seem right on the mark, the A4 is below quality standards for Audi.

I did not say Audi has poor quality, just the A4 seems below normal for the 2 that I have owned. I have been an Audi buyer since 1982 had no problems until the A4 came along.<p>I read the loooooong list of appends yesterday, they seem right on the mark, the A4 is below quality standards for Audi.

I think its also in advocates nature NOT to report problems in public as this indicates that they have made a bad choice.<p>The quality problems on the A4s that I have owned did prompt Audi to send the rep. out several times. They did offer to offset the difference of the Avant tarde-in on a new A6 Avant, which I took them up on as I do believe in Audi.

<br>Yes, I have one. I agree that it should last a long time, but unless you completely redo all of the electrical system it is nowhere near being reliable enough to be driven daily. If you want something with good mechanicals and don't care about the options, etc. buy a GM.<p>Todd W<br>

Chipping an engine designed (or manufactured, more likely) to put out 150HP up to 200 or 235HP is going to at some point cause problems. Chips don't necessarily conform to "normal usage," nor do aftermarket exhausts, etc. Put 10 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag, and it's gonna break.<p>IF THE A4 HAS SO-SO RELIABILITY, WHY CAN I ALWAYS GET A SPOT AT MY AUDI DEALER FOR NORMAL SERVICE, EVEN THOUGH SALES HAVE SKYROCKETED? Because the cars are designed extremely well and the quality is there. I've only seen two A4's at my dealership with major problems in my 10 months of ownership - one 1996 or 1997 whose water pump exploded, and one 1998 Avant that a tree fell on...<p>-josh<br>98.5 2.8qms (20K miles)

In 300,000 ZERO warranty work, no replacement parts except exhaust, so no quality problems. The 4000CSQ did eat a head gasket at 200,000. Must say that my Ur still beats my A4 hands down.<p>I like Audi's, I continue to buy them its just the point that the A4 quality is not up to the Audi name. <p>I would say that MOST people in this forum are first time Audi owners so they have nothing to compare to except other companies and yes the A4 seems to be above the quality of GM and others.<p>People in this forum seem to be to sensitive, relax no car is perfect. It could be that Texas just gets the rejects.

<br>I'm in Dallas, one of 3 UrQ. There is an '82 in Austin, but we don't know of any others.<p>Todd W

<br>email me, I know the other UrQ owner in Austin (unless you're him hiding under different initials) and I'd like to hear from you (especially if it is you!). I won't get the email until I get home.<p>Todd W

First of all, I love this car! But I constantly get razzed at work because it's ALWAYS in the shop. And, I can't get in for service because it's so crowded with other a4's. These cars are great, but reliable? Sorry, not a word I would use in the same sentence as Audi A4.<br>

If you think they have such poor quality, why have you owned TWO of them? Seems like if you don't like a car, that you wouldn't buy ANOTHER one.<p>

Hell, even the old A6 has a better build quality than the new one. Just like old Mercedes' are better build than the new ones. Just look at the 124-series compared to the 210-series, and the M-class!! Crap. No car will ever be build as solid as the now outgoing S-class(140-series).<br>You see, they have to think about the costs these days.

People in this forum equate problems with car bashing, this is NOT the case. I bought another one because Audi offers me the the car that I want at the price. The quality issues are being addressed during the 3 year warrenty period by the way is the best plan that I have seen.

<br>My parents have a 92 SHO with 130K in excellent condition and a 95 Grand Cherokee with 90K that looks almost new. They have been very reliable so far, with only tows due to bad batteries (internal short). Nonetheless, I would rather drive my 86 5KTQ with 195K and lots of regular maintenance.<p>It just depends on your definition of "sucks".<p>Todd W