[BiturboS4] Blown Turbos (Non-Chipped S4) - Update

j y jimnetpa at yahoo.com
Thu Apr 10 19:51:38 EDT 2003

Well...when more than a trival portion of your
customer base experiences the SAME type of product
failure...in the same brand...over several years. I
would say that there is a STRONG case for
manufacturer's defect.

I am in agreement with some who infer that Audi
migrated the S4 away from the 6 cyl bi-turbo platform
because of too many manufacturing related issues

I think because of this HISTORY..Audi has a
RESPONSIBILITY to step upt to the plate and address
this..on a case by case..or thru a general recall

Obviously, BMW USA didn't take YOUR narrow definition
of manufacturer's defect..when it stepped up..and
replaced those inferior E46 M3 engines.

So, I would say that there is an (auto) industry
precendent for addressing manufacturing problems that
plague a model line.

Yes, it's well known that it is rare for auto
manufacturer's to step up to the plate unless the
defect has the potential to cause significant economic
impact (can u spell class action lawsuits) to that

That's what makes BMW's move so different. There is
more than ample evidence that the Audi S4 bi-turbo has
some well known defects (TBB & DVs, for starters).

Yes...Audi can playn HARD BALL..but unfortunately for
them.. they do not have the size in the US Mkt to be
Assholes like GM or Ford. People in the USA still
remember the infamous Audi Accelerator problems back
in the late 80s/early 90s and Audi USA KNOWS THIS.

Audi USA CANNOT afford (from a marketing/goodwill
perspective) to take a HARD LINE over well known
defects in their product line across the board.

Another incident like the Audi Accelerator problem
will put them "out of business" in the USA. Turbos are
a MAJOR expense items - and if they fail at 52k mi -
nobody (in the USA) will spend the $$$$ for Audi

If my car had this problem at 60k mi - I would not be
as adamant. I will see what happens. Just my $.02


--- Ian McCloghrie <ian at codrus.com> wrote:
> On Apr 10, 2003 j y wrote:
> > So, that being said - in my opinion - it's is
> > unreasonable for a manufacturer to try and weasle
> out
> > of a claim when the machine is just 2k mi over the
> > warranty expiration - that is just TOO close -
> like
> What "weaseling"?  They promised you warranty
> coverage until 3 years/50K
> miles, whichever came first (or 4 years if you have
> an '01).  If there
> are 50,001 miles on the car, well, that's more than
> 50K, they are under
> no obligation whatsoever to cover repairs to your
> car.  This isn't a case
> of denying a warranty based upon some unrelated
> trivial modification,
> it's open and shut.  Anything Audi covers for you
> comes out of the
> "good customer relations" budget.
> As for the lemon law -- there are very specific
> guidlines for which the
> lemon law can be invoked.  These guidelines vary
> from state to state,
> but as far as I know, a single expensive failure
> outside of the warranty
> period generally isn't one of them.
> --Ian

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

More information about the Biturbos4 mailing list