[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
re: Audi as a "consumer car"
Maybe I'm just a bit (okay... a helluva lot) biased, but did you say
"enthusiast" and "Honda Accord" in the same breath? (BTW, I also lump in your
standard Toyota into this category.)
I'm probably more than an enthusiast... more like a car junkie. But I'm simply
unwilling to drive a boring car. I actually have a 1992 Accord (my wife
brought it with her into the marriage and we kept it for her 84-yr-old father
who lives with us to drive in the winter here in WI... when his nice 75
Mercedes would be hard to start and damaged by the salt. Even he prefers to
drive the old MB over the newer Honda.) It is perfectly reasonable
transportation and has been very reliable, but has been VERY expensive to fix
when it did break. Fit and finish are also excellent. But it rides and
drives like c@*p. This is clearly a car designed to get you from point "a" to
point "b" period. I can think of few cars I rate lower in overall driving
I'm of the opinion that an older, less "reliable" car is still a better deal
than a newer "reliable" car with a hefty payment. It doesn't even _have_ to be
an Audi... but why not? You could buy a clean, low mileage (and relatively
reliable) 4KQ, 4KS, or Coupe GT for very little money. Heck, I've spent much
less on my UrQ in the last 20,000 miles than I would have on car payments on
even a cheap new car.
So, in my opinion, there's NO reason to drive a boring car.
Lake Mills, WI