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

Michael Kuriger michael at isuzu-mods.com
Fri Apr 11 11:03:02 EDT 2003

[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
It's hard to argue when it was working fine for the time period audi
guaranteed it for.  if you get free turbos at this point consiter
yourself lucky!! ;-)


j y wrote:

>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
>>>of a claim when the machine is just 2k mi over the
>>>warranty expiration - that is just TOO close -
>>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.
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
>BiturboS4 mailing list
>BiturboS4 at audifans.com


More information about the Biturbos4 mailing list