Another Danoff Car Purchase Thread - FX35 Purchased

[///M-Spec]

I wish CR and JD and all these vehicle dependability people would start recording notes, especially when a car is "below average" in a category.

It'd be nice to know if the low scores were caused by a widespread but relatively simple problem with a simple solution OR a serious failure in engineering or manufacturing.

For example: I know the 2.0T has a history of buggy coil packs. A lot of VAG products have the same problem. Is that the reason CR is giving it low marks in powertrain?

If so, it's a simple problem with a simple solution. In most cases, coilpack failures occur within the warranty period and are covered. If not, they are not terribly expensive to replace anyway. There's even a recall on them.

In short, I wouldn't NOT buy a car because I expect a coil pack to go bad. That's nothing.

But if there is a different problem --failing turbos, for example, that requires the bumper to come off ($$$) and the replacement of lots of plumbing, that's another story altogether. The 2.7T in my wife's car has a long history of flakiness, which we carefully considered before we bought one (with an extended warranty).

One red dot doesn't give enough information.


M

 

[niky]

"I shouldn't have to fork out $750 for an oil change at 35,000 miles."

I bet you 50 internets that this complaint would be recorded as a "problem".


M

+1.

CR's scores indicate a problem is there, but not what it is. Note: CR considers brake dust, of all things, to be a "problem". These surveys should be taken with a grain of salt.

Go to an enthusiast's website like quattroworld or audiworld and do some research. The A3's been around in the US long enough that the car's problems should be well documented.

If you consider the problems too serious, then stay away from the car.


M

+1

Enthusiast websites will tell you what problems are most common, and which ones are really a cause for concern and they can often tell you why they fail. (Abuse, weather, time, etcetera)

-

Coil-packs... funny... our cars bust them all the time, but CR lists them as "Recommended"...

 

[YSSMAN]

Then we looked at JD power reliability on the A3...

I'm surprised that you're so surprised. VW guys like Phill and I love our cars, and we fully understand how poorly they perform in most reliability rankings, but its more about the experience that the car offers than what some random table tells you about what could go wrong. Simply put, owning a VW product is something entirely different compared to your "other" options out there. Yeah, your window motors will break. Yeah, your 2.0T will guzzle oil like a Guido and Gray Goose. But all of that doesn't matter, because you love your car, and it loves you back (most of the time).

Given that the A3 is a bit older, most of the wiggles that are left should be cleared up by now if you're buying new. That being said, it is a whole generation behind the Golf here in the US. I'm not sure when Audi is planning on issuing us a MKVI-based A3.

Anyway, that's the game you play with VW products. They hurt so good, you just can't stop. Unless you're in my position, where you just couldn't afford it anymore. Doesn't mean I won't go back...



RE: The FX35

Not a bad choice. Try to sample both suspension options though.

 

[ExigeEvan]

I'm surprised that you're so surprised. VW guys like Phill and I love our cars, and we fully understand how poorly they perform in most reliability rankings, but its more about the experience that the car offers than what some random table tells you about what could go wrong. Simply put, owning an Alfa Romeo product is something entirely different compared to your "other" options out there. Yeah, your window motors will break. Yeah, your 2.0T will guzzle oil like a Guido and Gray Goose. But all of that doesn't matter, because you love your car, and it loves you back (most of the time).

That was all I could think reading that paragraph.

 

[Omnis]

I wish CR and JD and all these vehicle dependability people would start recording notes, especially when a car is "below average" in a category.

I think they do, but you have to pay for it.

 

[niky]

I think they do, but you have to pay for it.

Which is how JDPowers makes all its money off of the car companies...

 

[Famine]

I've just hunted out the 2009 JDPower stats for the UK.

Manufacturers
1st - Lexus - 83.3%
11th - Audi - 79.9%
Industry Average - 78.0%

Models
Audi A3 - 79.5% - 38th/101 (-18 2008)
"Audi owners still found plenty to praise, with enthusiasm for the way the A3 drives, the cabin and the looks. The dealers also earned a vote of thanks for their courteous staff and quality of service.

In terms of reliability, however, the A3 sits in the middle of the pack, dragged down by complaints about the stereo. Drivers said that running costs were no better than average, and insurance and servicing bills were dear."

Nothing more detailed than that. However, only 24% of JD Power UK is Quality/Reliability, with 22% Ownership Costs, 17% Service Satisfaction and 37% Vehicle Appeal. We can probably surmise from the text that the A3 got 12/13 marks for reliability, 11/12 marks for ownership and 8/9 marks for service satisfaction, giving about 35 marks (from 37) from vehicle appeal. Given that the S3 was lumped in with it, this you're looking at that probably being the case.

So, appealing car, but average to own and run. The model and the marque are both above industry average, but since most of their cars are effective status symbols they're probably no better than average.

Amazing what the stats hide. Odd that the stereo is such a big bugbear though.

 

[Danoff]

I shouldn't have gone looking on the A3 forums to see what problems people are having. Maybe I'm just not used to reading about peoples' cars breaking down. One guy says his radiator sprung a leak at 3k miles and then his AC died due to what the dealership called a "common problem" at 7k miles. Another says his passenger seat is coming apart at 40k miles and that Audi refuses to replace it under warranty but that the service guy at the dealership had the same exact thing happen on his car. 5 people got together and complained about how sometimes the car wouldn't start (wouldn't even try) for no apparent reason. Dealership refused to fix under warranty saying they couldn't figure it out. One of the posters postulated that it had to do with how long the key was in the ignition prior to twisting it.

If this were a car that was just supposed to go back and forth to work - I might even try to brave all of that and deal with arguing with Audi about what was covered under warranty. But this is the car that's supposed to get us through the snow to the ski lodge, and then it's supposed to get us back OUT of the snow to get home. An untimely breakdown could be very painful, and that's more likely if it's happening often.

Anyway, that's the game you play with VW products. They hurt so good, you just can't stop.

Trust me, I get it. One test drive and I was hooked. Painfully hooked. I'm trying hard to come up with a reason why I should take the plunge anyway (so is the wife btw), but every single indication is that this car will be a pain in the ass to own. I have yet to read a single story (on an A3 enthusiast forum btw) about someone who has an A3 (for an appreciable length of time) and never had anything go wrong. Instead, I'm keeping a quickly lengthening list of "common" defects. It's not a good sign to me either that even the people who love their Audi agree that fixing them is a pain. Everything except the test drive is screaming "don't do it".

 

[YSSMAN]

I always tell people who are looking at VW products to consider two main things; Insurance rates and parts pricing. Both were pretty steep on the VWs I've owned, and I imagine it doesn't get any better with the four rings. Run some numbers, see how it looks. Generally speaking, I wouldn't expect the FX35 to be substantially better than the A3, but I don't keep up on Nissans all that well.

 

[///M-Spec]

I looked around and found this thread over at audiworld.

According to this poster, key issues appear to be:

The diverter valve will fail. Get a Forge replacement.

The PCV system will fail. Even before it completely fails it will allow excess oil into the intake tract and thereby cause carbon buildup on the valves. You will need to replace 3 pieces of the PCV/breather system, plus add in a EuroJet check valve.

If the coilpacks are earlier than revision C, replace them so you don't get stranded by a failure.

Have the axle boots inspected for failures.

Make sure the intake runner flap control TSB is complied with, and your ECU software is up to the latest version.

If you have a Zexel a/c compressor, it will fail. The Denso compressors have been more reliable.

Many of the respondents in the thread report no problems. But the sample size is pretty minuscule.

All of these issues are addressable via factory new car or CPO warranty. There is already a recall on the coilpacks, so that's a no brainer. The weak A/C compressor sounds like an issue and is potentially expensive out of warranty. The other items sound like a minor headache, but definately addressable and wouldn't be a "deal breaker" for me.


Have you looked into the FX35's reliability?


M

 

[Danoff]

Not as much as the A3. The FX35 scores right up there with the RDX on JD power - that's about as far as I've gotten. Just got a call a few minutes ago from the Audi dealership saying that they can give me a bargain (isn't that always the case) on a 2010 A3 quattro. I have to admit that I'm sorely tempted to do this and just have them tack on some additional warranty. It seems like a headache, but as long as it wasn't costing us money regularly it might be worth it.

 

[homeforsummer]

Given that the A3 is a bit older, most of the wiggles that are left should be cleared up by now if you're buying new. That being said, it is a whole generation behind the Golf here in the US. I'm not sure when Audi is planning on issuing us a MKVI-based A3.

You realise that the Mk6 is based on the same platform as the Mk5, right? It's not even slightly a new car. The current A3 is on the same platform, as are a dozen and a half other cars.

So, appealing car, but average to own and run. The model and the marque are both above industry average, but since most of their cars are effective status symbols they're probably no better than average.

There's also the possibility that Audi drivers expect more from their cars - a car with identical reliability could figure higher simply because, being a satisfaction survey, it's results are influenced by how the customer experiences the car compared to their expectations of what the car should provide. If you buy a French car and it only has five electrical problems a year, you might still be more satisfied than if you had an Audi that had one electrical problem in the same amount of time, because you expect the Audi not to give you problems.

I shouldn't have gone looking on the A3 forums to see what problems people are having. Maybe I'm just not used to reading about peoples' cars breaking down. One guy says his radiator sprung a leak at 3k miles and then his AC died due to what the dealership called a "common problem" at 7k miles. Another says his passenger seat is coming apart at 40k miles and that Audi refuses to replace it under warranty but that the service guy at the dealership had the same exact thing happen on his car. 5 people got together and complained about how sometimes the car wouldn't start (wouldn't even try) for no apparent reason. Dealership refused to fix under warranty saying they couldn't figure it out. One of the posters postulated that it had to do with how long the key was in the ignition prior to twisting it.

People are more likely to speak about things that break than things that don't break. Reading owners' complaints, though often useful, is a slightly unfair reflection of what a car may be like, because the human race loves a good moan about something. Those whose cars have been perfect are less likely to keep going on about it.

 

[///M-Spec]

With Audi you get a standard 4/50k warranty. They will sell you an extended warranty that goes to 6/100k. Don't know the price, but I would guess around $1500. The extended warranty is a "named item" warranty and not quite as good as the bumper to bumper new car warranty, but will cover all the expensive bits.

One nice thing about Audi (and all the other premium brands) is the dealers will give you an Audi loaner car when yours is in for service/repairs. If you get the A3 you might want to get used to the idea of tooling around in an A4 loaner a few times a year

You realise that the Mk6 is based on the same platform as the Mk5, right? It's not even slightly a new car. The current A3 is on the same platform, as are a dozen and a half other cars.

Nonsense! The restyled headlamps alone puts the Golf in a whole 'nother league compared to the A3! And that's NOT EVEN getting into the quantum leap forward represented by the reshaped wheel arches...


M

 

[Danoff]

Well, there's almost no way we'd keep this thing past 100k miles or 6 years. So provided that Audi didn't try to claim that stuff wasn't covered under warranty, and the car wasn't breaking down or refusing to start - leaving us stranded, we'd be in pretty good shape. I haven't heard or read about that sort of thing happening really. Even the refusal to start issue was something that was fixed by simply trying it again a few times.

Presumably too the 2010 models are more reliable than the 2006/2007 years. Although it's hard to guarantee that, such a thing stands to reason. So for the cost of the additional warranty, we get the car that does everything instead of the car that does most things.... and have to buy two sets of tires and change them out.

Not an easy decision actually - but as surprising as it seems (after much discussion with the wife), I think we're both starting to lean 2010 2.0T A3 Quattro with the Sport Package and extended warranty. Although, the dealer told me that the sport package was just a wheel upgrade and reduced ride height and that it's cheaper just to buy the wheels.

 

[Duke]

The "reduced ride height" probably comes with stiffer springs and better damper valving, and possibly thicker swaybars. At least based on my limited experience, I'd hold out for the whole package.

 

[///M-Spec]

Ugh. The salescritter at your dealer told you wrong.

Click

I think he is trying to sell you a car off the lot instead of ordering one for you. I notice a lot of dealers do this --if they order one, it comes out of next month's car allocation. But if they sell one off the lot, they save themselves flooring cost on that car. So they are more motivated to sell you a car they already have.

But if you are happy with the standard suspension (and all season rubber) and they make you a good deal on a car they have, you should go for it.

And the summer tires that come with the sports package will be a serious problem on your ski trips. But you already know that.


M

 

[Philly]

Presumably too the 2010 models are more reliable than the 2006/2007 years. Although it's hard to guarantee that, such a thing stands to reason. So for the cost of the additional warranty, we get the car that does everything instead of the car that does most things.... and have to buy two sets of tires and change them out.

This one. Part of the reason you see me having issues with my 2006.5 GTI is because the engine was only two years old when they put it into production. There have been a lot of parts revisions that should help out with the little stuff like oil consumption and maybe not starting on the first try. The new parts are also less likely to fail outright and cause more significant damage.

I'm sure if you had a newer car and drove it fairly easily, you wouldn't experience that many problems. Maybe one thing a year or something at worst. And that's if you don't really take care of it. So then as long as you can put up with switches deciding they're not going to work for a month then start working again, you're alright.

My GTI is always having buttons and switches temporarily stop working. It really isn't that much of an inconvenience.

 

[Danoff]

Just got back from the Audi dealership. Here was the deal I walked out on:

2010 A3 Quattro 2.OT Premium: $30,400
6 yr/100,000 Warranty: $2800
Trade-in (2003 RSX-S with 73kmi): -$6800

We agreed on the A3, but I was asking $7000 for my car (which is still a ripoff), and $1500 for the warranty (which can be done, for that price, via third party). So we were off by $1500 and they let me go.

 

[///M-Spec]

$6800 is not a flattering offer for your RSX, but by dealer standards, not terrible. I don't have access to auction prices like Manheim, but I would guess based on the dealer retail it's probably around $6,000.

Any options on the A3? What was the total sticker?


M

 

[Danoff]

No options on the A3. The total price for the car with the warranty and taxes and everything was ~$37k.

It turns out that the price I got them to was a good price. $30,400 + $2800 6yr warranty is as low as it goes.

I'm extremely frustrated by Audi right now. The A3 being unreliable (and it legitimately seems to be after listening to owners) means I have to fork over $3k more for it up front. The A3 being unreliable also means I have to change the spark plugs and flush the transmission every 35k mi. The aggressive Audi maintenance can only be described as a way for them to solve their engineering shortcomings by pushing the onus onto their customers. Factoring in another 1-2k in maintenance over the time we own the car (that's above the regular maintenance on other cars), and I'm sitting at a $5k premium for the A3 when compared to the competition.

I'm realizing that I've been sheltered by Honda for quite some time, and looking outside of Honda, especially at Audi, has been a rude awakening.

We test drove an FX35 again last weekend. This time we got it into some canyon twisties. Getting to check out the cornering on the car was a big plus. It's no sports car, not by any stretch of the imagination. But for how big the car is, it handles quite well. It's quick on its feet, agile even. But it hunts a bit when you try to point it (even with the sport suspension), and doesn't really have the confidence-inspiring squat that I enjoy so much. Even our honda accord with 130,000 miles feels better in the turns than the FX, but it was still damned impressive, especially for an SUV. I think it's still beating the A3 after getting a better look at the price on the Audi.

$6800 is not a flattering offer for your RSX, but by dealer standards, not terrible.

Yea, carmax offered me $7k. I'm starting to think I'm going to sell it privately.

 

[ANFD]

Just a small point here ..... a friend of mine who owned an A4 was quick to sell it before it hit the 60K mile mark. He said that the Audi service manual recommends that the timing chain be replaced at 60K and it is a very expensive service.

 

[Duke]

Yea, carmax offered me $7k. I'm starting to think I'm going to sell it privately.

If you have something even remotely desirable (and you do), and you are not absolutely desperate for cash in hand (and I doubt you are), this is always the best way to go. Spend a Saturday (or a hundred bucks) getting it thoroughly cleaned up and waxed, then list it yourself with lots of pictures. You shouldn't have any trouble.

On a side note, I must have missed the part where you are getting rid of the RSX, not your wife's car.

 

[ANFD]

After scanning all the posts in this thread (whew), I don't seem to see any references to the new Honda Crosstour. Decent styling, Honda dependability and sensibility coupled with the 4 wheel drive option at less than $30K. I looked at one last month and was very impressed. We wound up buying an 2010 Accord EX though because we got a great deal on it ($22K) and didn't need the 4 wheel drive

For what it's worth, we absolutely LOVE the new Accord

 

[Danoff]

On a side note, I must have missed the part where you are getting rid of the RSX, not your wife's car.

Yea, that requires some explanation.

The simple answer is that the Accord is not worth much while the RSX is still valuable. The RSX is getting to the point where even another 5,000 miles really costs us in terms of resale value. I think people care about the difference between 74k mi and 80k. Once I get to 90k, it's getting late to recoup value. By contrast, another 5k miles on the 130k mi Accord is essentially free.

I would replace my car immediately with a 2-seater, but I like the Accord quite a bit, am not in a rush, and have notions of getting a proper dual-clutch paddle-shifted automatic 370Z.

 

[///M-Spec]

I'm showing the dealer invoice on a 2010 A3 2.0T quattro S-tronic is $28,690. MSRP is $30,850.

Unless I'm missing something (like a bunch of options), I think you can get a MUCH better deal than that. An average deal would be $1k over invoice, while a good deal would be $500 over.

Have you tried shopping around? Call 4-5 dealers within reasonable driving distance and ask them to quote you over the phone? The A3 you want isn't an unusual spec and unless you're stuck on a particular color, you should have plenty of choices. Let them know you already know the invoice price and start your haggling from there.


Even if you go with the Infitini, you're still going to get lowballed on your Acura.

Selling your RSX on your own would be the best way to go. But you'll have to deal with the waiting, the phone calls, the "I'll come by and see it" followed by the inevitable no shows and the tire kickers, not to mention the insultingly lowball offers (I've give you $4,500 for your $8,000 car) and the odd scammer. I'm not trying to discourage you --I don't know if you've ever tried to sell a car private party before-- it can be a real hassle.


M

 

[YSSMAN]

Unless I'm missing something (like a bunch of options), I think you can get a MUCH better deal than that. An average deal would be $1k over invoice, while a good deal would be $500 over.

I was thinking the same thing. Although, as I sit here fiddling with the numbers, Audi seems to have placed the MSRP just right to minimize the usual wiggle room (say, 4-8% over invoice) as much as possible. All of that is up to your dealer, of course. If you don't have a whole lot of Audi dealers around there (like we do), it would seem likely that they would care less about cutting you a solid deal, since, you'd just have to put up with them anyway for service and the like in the near-future.


As for reselling the RSX, I'd go private. With the weather dramatically improving very soon I imagine there will be people on the hunt for a new sports car. Price it competitively, make it look pretty, cover your bases and you could have it out the door pretty quickly. Craigslist can be your friend if you do it right...

 

[Danoff]

I'm showing the dealer invoice on a 2010 A3 2.0T quattro S-tronic is $28,690. MSRP is $30,850.

Yup, invoice is $28,690 + $443 for a well-worth-it color upgrade + $825 as a "destination charge" brings (according to edmunds) the total invoice to $29,958. $500 over invoice is $30,500. We agreed on $30,400. Too bad we couldn't agree on the warranty.

Have you tried shopping around? Call 4-5 dealers within reasonable driving distance and ask them to quote you over the phone?

Yea, I offered $32,000 for an A3 quattro with 6 yr warranty to 4 local dealerships who either laughed at me or didn't call back.

The A3 you want isn't an unusual spec and unless you're stuck on a particular color, you should have plenty of choices.

Quattro is apparently extremely unpopular around here on the A3. I have absolutely no clue why - there are mountains right next door.

I'm not trying to discourage you --I don't know if you've ever tried to sell a car private party before-- it can be a real hassle.

I have, and it's why I tried to do a trade-in. But if I put my car on the market at $500 over trade-in ($7500), I expect it would be gone in 5 seconds. I won't though, I'll probably list it around $9000 non-negotiable. Whatever edmunds says basically.

 

[ANFD]

I don't know about the state that you live in but if you sell your car privately, you can get more than a dealer trade in. However, if you do that, you will pay sales tax on the full amount of the new car. Trading in the car to the selling dealer allows you to subtract the trade in amount from the new car amount and then only paying the sales tax on the remainder. Saved me $1000 in sales tax and I didn't have to deal with the potential problems of selling it myself.

 

[Azuremen]

It is California, I am sure he can easily find a younger buyer for the RSX without much issue (hell, I likely would have paid $8000 for one a year or two ago when I had the money and interest).

I've read back a bit here and have to say this thread has changed course a bit over time... Anyhow, I must laugh and pity your odd situation of changes being required for a bit of ice/snow that accumulates on roads up to ski areas. Any ski area access here will always be snow covered and chains are virtually never required. I was laughing in Tahoe at the "Chains Required" lights for maybe an inch of snow... of course, AWD is fine but hardly suitable with Summer tires on... my MR-S with studless snow tires was easier to manage in a few inches than an Outback Turbo with All Seasons (the biggest misnomer of a name ever).

Anyhow, I strongly advise against an Audi for the very maintenance reasons you have mentioned... anything turbo'd by VAG is just woefully unreliable; everyone I know that has owned has had major work done in under 60k miles.

The FX models I've always liked the look of and a tad curious about, but they are Nissans and well, yeah.

I know wagons were banned from your suggestions, but I still must put out the suggestion for either a 3 or 5 series AWD wagon (since M-Spec has apparently lost his way completely to the 4 rings of Doom)... given that the A3 is more of a hatch-wagon thing than a Crossover.

As for why AWD would be less popular in California, I'd imagine it is the increased cost, reduced fuel economy, and increased maintenance, combined with very little need for it.

 

[Danoff]

I don't know about the state that you live in but if you sell your car privately, you can get more than a dealer trade in. However, if you do that, you will pay sales tax on the full amount of the new car. Trading in the car to the selling dealer allows you to subtract the trade in amount from the new car amount and then only paying the sales tax on the remainder. Saved me $1000 in sales tax and I didn't have to deal with the potential problems of selling it myself.

*runs to check*

Not in Taxifornia.