Lincoln LS

Bob mx@snet.net
Mon, 07 May 2001 09:03:08 -0700


Also to be fair, you cant compare a 10 year old audi (200) to a new Honda. I
have had both vehicles of equal vintage (90 accord and 91 20V 90). The Honda was
in the shop more often and the bills for repair were outrageous. It was the
first and last honda we ever had. Im not saying it was in the shop all the time,
just more often than the Audi.
Comparing a new A4 to a new Accord is probably more of an equal comparison and
Im guessing reliability of either are quite good and comparable.
Bob

Rave Racer wrote:

>         In this case, I would have to agree.  Some have had many problems
> with their Audis.  Some foreseable, some not.  The list has helped solve
> many problems, alot of them repeatedly.  I have not had any problems that I
> didn't know about since I bought the car.  The list would take all night to
> type up, but at least I am aware of all the probs.  I have only been
> stranded by my car within the month of buying it because the owner before me
> did not understand the car.  After I sorted them out, everything has been
> smooth sailing since.
>
> > William Ng writes:
> > > Some of you
> > > may not like what I'm about to write, but Honda's level of reliability
> > > should shame any Audi engineer. With the mountain of work my 200-TQ
> needs,
> > > Audi reliability is a magnitude below Japanese reliability.
> >
> > You know, the 200tq is a type-44 Audi, and these cars have their share of
> > problems mostly because they are complex beasts, and Audi was there
> > building these highly sophisticated cars well ahead of their time.  To
> > compare the 200tq to the simple CRX is not exactly a fair comparison.
> > Try someone who has one of the earlier Acura Legends... they are worst
> > than the 200tq in having problems.  So there goes "the Honda level of
> > reliability"...  Somehow, this notion that Hondas are reliable have become
> > self-fulfilling prophesies.  People believe that Hondas are reliable, so
> > when somethings break, they justify as "needed maintenance", whereas when
> > something breaks on an Audi, a likely reaction would be that the Audi is
> > a piece of cr*p.  Conditioned response, you know.
> >
> > Moreover, to categorize ALL Audis as unreliable based only on your
> experience
> > on the 200tq is not fair either.  Other Audi models have had much less
> > problems, particularly the newer ones.
> >
> > Yes, Audi had build some troublesome models, but so did/do most other
> > marques.
> >
> >