[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: Which Quattro to buy?
well it was me who said that the later ur-q's were less expensive to
maintain than the earlier ones. however, i have never owned an mb.
over the same period of ownership, my 20v has cost less than a ¼ of the
maintenance of my old wr 10v. and with the 10v i never got around to
replacing suspension bushes, or upgrading the brakes/shocks. the fact was i
couldn't afford to, and the price/ownership equation was getting a bit
dodgy. the wr, btw, was mint (body/interior).
so, the 20v is much cheaper. discounting the purchase cost of course...it
also only requires annual maintenance, not 6-monthly.
i wonder though if the mb isn't *more* expensive to maintain than the wr???
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 98 00:36:11 -0800
From: Michael Williams <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Which Quattro to buy?
Phil Payne decided to speak these words:
> Total $32,675.74
>The 'run rate' has gone down significantly since the start of 1998,
>when I took up wrenching again after a thirty-year (28, actually)
Jeez, and who was it that said that the later ones are cheaper to
maintain than the early versions? Well, i can tell you it aint even
close to that bad in the record for my car...but of course, i just
the new engine and some othe things at a cost of 4200 bucks, but
that was a one time thing...
But phil, arent your prices for parts and such alot higher because
astronomical taxes and fees and stuff??