RE: SOTW: Audi A8 2.8

[pSyCoSiS]

carinaman said:

How old is this Shed? Can we tell if it's the 30V 2.8 or not?

The advert states 1998, so I'm guessing it would have the 193 bhp lump?

[y2blade]

I Absolutely love A8s.
I had the facelifted (Y plate) 4.2 briefly and would love another, if I had a garage one would fit in I'd buy another at the drop of a hat.


I Haven't driven the 2.8 A8 but drove the olde A4 avant with the same motor, it went well and doubt it would struggle in the bigger car.



Good shed.

[pagani1]

If you get tempted buy a bigger engined one for more money. A set of new tyres will cost the price of this car, especially if you buy them from a chain (They know who they are).

[carinaman]

pSyCoSiS said:

carinaman said:

How old is this Shed? Can we tell if it's the 30V 2.8 or not?

The advert states 1998, so I'm guessing it would have the 193 bhp lump?

Thank you pSyCoSiS.

I looked at the text which states 30V and then then lower pre-30V figure.

Just shooting the breeze on whether 170bhp is enough, a customer of mine bought used Alfa 164s taking advantage of the depreciation and he commented on how the characteristics of the 3 litre Alfa differed when it went from 12V to 24V and while I liked the W124 300E_24 versus Senator 24V Giant Test in CAR Magazine I read on a Merc. forum that some think adding the 24V head to that 3 litre Merc. lump spoilt it.

I don't know how the torque curves vary between the two 2.8 Audi V6s.

It seems most multivalve heads need more revs to deliver their extra benefit. The benefit of better breathing is felt most at high revs?

[ianwayne]

One months MoT would worry me with a car like this. Even a shed needs more potential 'wafting' time than that. If you live somewhere about to get wintery, the MoT may run out before you get to drive it much.

[Megaflow]

My father in law has got a V6 Quattro in the same colour, it's much better in the flesh and actually suits the car quite well, he's had for 7-8 years now and it has been faultless.

[McSam]

Yes, this is definitely the 193bhp engine, which isn't bad on fuel but makes a gorgeous noise. Very good engine, if you ask me.

Shed, sort your research out!

A lovely car, and not too slow either. I like.

ETA - Noticed the talk about the torque differences when adding multi-valve heads.. I've driven both 12v and 30v versions of Audi's V6s, and can tell you that the latter really is better in every respect. Develops more immediate shove from low down, responds to a sharp input almost immediately and sometimes aggressively if you want it, and loves to rev too. The 12v, however, takes some more geeing up and is breathless past 5500rpm.

Edited by McSam on Friday 11th January 10:16

[RenesisEvo]

carinaman said:

Just shooting the breeze on whether 170bhp is enough...
I don't know how the torque curves vary between the two 2.8 Audi V6s

Nail. Head. For a big car it's the torque that will matter more than the horsepower as to whether it feels effortless or not.

[Hoofy]

I suppose if you buy it, as toys start to malfunction, you just leave them because fixing them would cost thousands?

[Trusty Steed]

One of my staff has an R reg S8, goes like stink but is starting to look a bit long in the tooth now, he claims it will only run well on the expensive go-go juice!! Ouch that must hurt as he is only getting about 14mpg!

[over_the_hill]

ianwayne said:

One months MoT would worry me with a car like this. Even a shed needs more potential 'wafting' time than that. If you live somewhere about to get wintery, the MoT may run out before you get to drive it much.

What could possibly go wrong ?

Hoofy said:

I suppose if you buy it, as toys start to malfunction, you just leave them because fixing them would cost thousands?

That is the general idea of "shedding". Just keep running it until it finally stops, weigh it in and get another. If it lasts for 12 months you will probably get about £200 scrap weight and it has cost you £800 or £16 per-week in depreciation.

[carinaman]

Thanks McSam

I've only driven 5 cylinder NA Audis and the 3 litre 30V in an A4 B6, where it seemed to like a drink considering I was taking it easy.

[Stuart70]

Need a station shed, that the dog could go in at weekends if it had to

This is the answer to that need

Result!

[WeirdNeville]

A Friend ran a 4.2 A8 for a while, a couple of years I think. lots of electrical gremlins, woeful economy (expected and more than delivered on) and needed suspension bits doing all the time. He couldn't sell it, it went for £700 on a low-loader to Poland in the end.

Good cars, but I think you have to factor in depreciation to zero to work out if they're for you or not.

[y2blade]

Hoofy said:

I suppose if you buy it, as toys start to malfunction, you just leave them because fixing them would cost thousands?

Run it until it stops then strip and sell as parts.
There was a good market for spares when I had one.

I got back:
£1600 for the complete Engine/gearbox/transfer-box
£400 wheels (with four new tires)
£200 bodyshell (the scrap metal yard collected it)
£80 for the Exhaust with CATs
£50 headlights
£50 rearlights
£80 ABS ECU
£90 gearbox ECU
£100 Main ECU
£100 clocks
£300 complete black leather interior with doorcards
£50 complete front grill set

http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[McSam]

carinaman said:

Thanks McSam

I've only driven 5 cylinder NA Audis and the 3 litre 30V in an A4 B6, where it seemed to like a drink considering I was taking it easy.

You should have tried my 2.6 12v A4.. a 1280kg car with 150bhp, and the result was.... 26mpg.

How they did that I have no idea the 30v 2.8 had a 40bhp advantage and was still about 5mpg better off! Really lovely engine, and if you fit an open air filter they sound awesome, the best-sounding "non-performance" 90s saloon this side of an Alfa V6.

[X5TUU]

Surely weigh in value would be higher than 200 now with the increased aluminium prices??

[Mosdef]

I had a 2000 2.8 FWD A8 - great engine actually, not quick but it worked well with the car. The ride and build quality were better than the D3 I replaced it with and from what I remember the Bose system in the older car was better than the one in the newer car as well!

I drove mine down to southern Italy and even with plenty of V-Max runs (indicated just over 150mph) through Germany it still returned something like 29mpg.

[pSyCoSiS]

McSam said:

ou should have tried my 2.6 12v A4.. a 1280kg car with 150bhp, and the result was.... 26mpg.

How they did that I have no idea the 30v 2.8 had a 40bhp advantage and was still about 5mpg better off! Really lovely engine, and if you fit an open air filter they sound awesome, the best-sounding "non-performance" 90s saloon this side of an Alfa V6.

I had a 1998 A4 2.4 V6 for a while, and I agree, it did sound good at high revs. Did aound 28mpg on average.

[y2blade]

pSyCoSiS said:

McSam said:

ou should have tried my 2.6 12v A4.. a 1280kg car with 150bhp, and the result was.... 26mpg.

How they did that I have no idea the 30v 2.8 had a 40bhp advantage and was still about 5mpg better off! Really lovely engine, and if you fit an open air filter they sound awesome, the best-sounding "non-performance" 90s saloon this side of an Alfa V6.

I had a 1998 A4 2.4 V6 for a while, and I agree, it did sound good at high revs. Did aound 28mpg on average.

+1
My 1999 Audi 2.7 V6 sounds amazing (best sounding car I've had).