RE: SOTW: Audi A6 Avant

RE: SOTW: Audi A6 Avant

Author
Discussion

Fox-

13,228 posts

245 months

Sunday 17th June 2012
quotequote all
Gridl0k said:
Weirdly that gen A6 has actually improved with age, they looked ridiculous when launched vs the contemporary 5 or E

Not an E-Type by any means but certainly ahead of the times
I think its more the fact that Audi change so little with each new version it stops the old ones looking old. Similar to the fact a 94 XJ doesnt look 15 years older than a 2009 XJ.

martynr

1,076 posts

173 months

Sunday 17th June 2012
quotequote all
BigTom85 said:
Gridl0k said:


Maybe there's shortcuts, but nothing about a belt change on that seems likely to be easy...
Assuming this is the same as the B5 Passat setup, the whole front end slides forward into a "service position" giving loads of access.
I don't think Audi has changed the design of servicing the engine in many years. I think it's just the bumper that needs coming off due to engine being in longitudinal position. The same goes to vw.

Someone has given some price of front discs to cost 400£. I looked on fleabay and it is not more expensive than for my accord 2.0 and cost of around 80£ for a Mintex set. It's not an s6 ffs.

At this age I would be more concerned about the calipers...

Edited by martynr on Sunday 17th June 23:11

Bladedancer

1,260 posts

195 months

Monday 18th June 2012
quotequote all
martynr said:
I don't think Audi has changed the design of servicing the engine in many years. I think it's just the bumper that needs coming off due to engine being in longitudinal position. The same goes to vw.

Someone has given some price of front discs to cost 400£. I looked on fleabay and it is not more expensive than for my accord 2.0 and cost of around 80£ for a Mintex set. It's not an s6 ffs.

At this age I would be more concerned about the calipers...

Edited by martynr on Sunday 17th June 23:11
Perhaps a used S6 or RS6 setup would fit?

Trusty Steed

288 posts

193 months

Monday 18th June 2012
quotequote all
predding said:
Nors said:
Trusty Steed said:
Gridl0k said:
Worryingly a lot of Audi drivers seem to have transitioned to Range Rovers, which are even more fun when trying to park in your boot at 80 mph.
Eeek!! Has just swapped my Audi A6 in for a Rangie!!
laughlaugh
Why? - More fuel, aero like a brick and depreciation like an avalanche? Just curious...

Edited by predding on Friday 15th June 15:21


Edited by predding on Friday 15th June 15:23
Simple Answer? Cause I wanted one! End of...

eafertynyne

382 posts

204 months

Monday 18th June 2012
quotequote all
Only just seen this thread as, ironically, I was at Le Mans.

I bought one of these estates in 1.8T guise a year ago and promptly had it remapped and fitted with PH smiley and 'SHED' stickers! 20,000 miles later and the car has been fabulous. Not sporty by any stretch, but does the job of commuting and carting kids around brilliantly. Returns 38mpg too.

Regarding the build quality; I got side-swiped by a Spanish HGV recently and had to get the car alignment-checked before the insurance company would repair. The data in the report reflected that of a brand new car!

I was dubious about running a shed as an everyday car, but the A6 has suited me perfectly and has far exceeded expectation... It also means I enjoy my PH friendly cars even more when I use them!

Bit of a long-winded post, but I've nothing but praise for these cars.

A14RGS

226 posts

171 months

Monday 18th June 2012
quotequote all
HiAsAKite said:
We've got one of these- manual, V6 biturbo, 4WD, huge load lugger, very comfortable, load of grip, copes very well in snow...whats not to like?

The only downside - is fuel economy (as others have said) - av 24-26, 29 on a long motorway run if your lucky (once achieved 40mpg - but that was 120 miles motorway at 55mph as I was low on fuel with no money and had to get home!!)..

Plus maintenance/service costs - it is an expensive car to keep running- its heavy, stuff wears out, so it costs to keep in good nick..

But its very capable car, and far quicker and more capable than a 2tonne estate without an RS, S, AMG or M badge deserves to be....
+1
I bought mine in March this year - 2002/02 reg, 6-speed manual, lots of toys, full & detailed SH, etc - for £1700. I guess many potential buyers were put off by the 210000 miles....biglaugh
Three months / 5000 miles later and I'm loving it - so much car for so little money. It does like a drink, but also goes nicely too if the need arises; a recent 270-mile trip (on a private test track, of course) was seen off in 3 1/4 hours - and used almost a tank of fuel in doing so! nuts

No bills yet either, apart from a set of tyres that I'd factored into the purchase price.

A very versatile and under-rated Shed.

Fox-

13,228 posts

245 months

Monday 18th June 2012
quotequote all
Seems somewhat unfair to call such a car a shed!

grizlyadams

1 posts

142 months

Tuesday 19th June 2012
quotequote all
Gridl0k said:
To be fair, a 51K Alfa for under a bag of sand, someone out there is going to have his arm off (/brewer)
I don't think they will to be honest. Yeah its "only" 51k but its and R reg.... and it has that HATEFUL, HATEFUL, asthmatic, weedy 155 bhp twinspark motor in it, who's cambelt WILL break at some point (not might break, it will - irrespective of change intervals) At 51k it probably not been done yet should have been done at 30k, then there's the variator, the collapsing idler pulley's. Ugh. Alfa USED to make nice engines, the twinspark is not one of them.

Andy JB

1,319 posts

218 months

Wednesday 20th June 2012
quotequote all
j_s14a said:
Are these shape A6s expensive to run? (not just this model smile ) .
I have run an Avant C5 for past 4 years with a V6 2.4. I never skimp on servicing but it is reasonable to service if using a decent independent and some of your own nouse for simple bits. It can do 34 mpg on a run or late 20's around town but its a big heavy car so consumption is never going to be great but better than the larger V6's.

Not much has gone wrong in that time & its an 11 yesar old now but certainly no shed at 70k. Strangely although well built, its not as good an ex A4 B5 which at 14 years old when traded was completely trouble free if a lot simpler than the A6. Body work was better too!

The 2.4 is a lovely & smooth & largely bullet proof & although torquey & has just enough power it does demand a different driving style to frenetic turbo'd 4 cyl engined versions - quite often all the better for it.

Its a shame certainly with my newer A4 that Audi have gained this in your face reputation of late replacing the old 3 series driver. I completely concur with the article saying the older Audi's had a lot of style & left field thinking lacking of late. Lets hope the company car c0!cks migrate to something else once the Audi tick box has been removed from their list - as i think this is largely the trouble expressed on this forum.

rtz62

3,340 posts

154 months

Tuesday 10th July 2012
quotequote all
Now there's a surprise.....

rtz62

3,340 posts

154 months

Friday 18th January 2013
quotequote all
Yeah, same price as a 3-year old Coxster.
But the Coxster is a clitoris car; every s got one...

Ren Esis

419 posts

137 months

Friday 18th January 2013
quotequote all
???