RS246.com Forum :: The World's #1 Audi R, S and RS Enthusiast Community

So is it just me, or does everyone think that Audi build quality peaked, mid-late 90's?

Based on the Audi's I have owned, the three my dad has owned and the two my brother currently owns I feel that after 99 they have just gone down hill??

Appologies if this starts any arguments.

Not just Audi mate. I have owned BMW E30 3 series and E34 5 series along with mercedes W126 and W140 Sclass.

Newer models are not built to last like the older ones. we live in a throwaway society now. I am old enough to recall the electrical repair shops that used to repair tv's and vacuum cleaners, washing machines etc..

Yeah good point, i recall a guy I know dad's used to do that. I am not sure if they are just not puting the R&D work in or if they are being built deliberately with a limited shelf life. I suspect the later is the case.

Yes, I'm sure the manufacturers don't expect modern cars to last more than 20 years or so.

Just the way of the world. Keep hold of the old classics if you have them. I'm sure they will appreciate in value.

I think you will find that Audi no longer carve the cars from a solid lump of granite like my wife's old A3 TDI.
The B5 RS4 was pretty tough for a quick vehicle too.

Weight and cost pressures means it's no longer possible

If you think Audi has dropped take a look at what Mercedes are passing off as luxury

Yes agreed and I sell them every day.

However like DK says the weight and required CO2 targets means they've had to change tack on the materials used which does affect how they feel to touch / tap / squeeze. Compared to the competition I say they're still top, particularly the Merc offering which is not on the same page.

I think build quality and materials used are as good as you'll get at this price range, and instead of the older cars experiencing mainly (occasional) mechanical issues I think the modern ones have mainly (occasional) electrical or software glitches.

Cost/weight pressures definitely,
I worked for years at Honda, and they are fastidious about quality, but it's reflected in the high price of their cars, which as sales results show, just aren't competitive in the market they're playing in against things like the ford focus or VW golf.
As much as I hate to say it, Audi quality is pretty poor nowadays in comparison to how they were 10-15 years ago, but that's the same with most cars
Honda, for example, will spend £300k making sure the graining on the glove box matches the graining on the dash perfectly, but Audi don't - My car cost nearly £70k and the graining and texturing of the interior is a terrible mish-mash. The general punter doesn't care less, but this is consistent throughout the car. Every little bit of a modern car is scrutinised from a cost perspective, and if it's not considered something that adds customers perceived value to the car, then it's removed. A customer can see and understands consistency in panel shut lines, so it's near perfect. However, the general customer can't see many components that are under the skin, so the quality is reduced to save costs. It's these bits that fail, or rattle, or don't last, that give people the idea that quality isn't what it should be and hence why we have cars that fall apart or cost a fortune to keep going once out their warranty period. If I use my last B8 RS4 as a case study, then of the parts which you'd consider to be A4 standard rather than RS Specific, the pano roof rattled, the door seals squeaked, the windscreen wipers gave in one day. All things that had to be replaced under warranty, and these are things that would cost a small fortune had it been out of my pocket.
I'm perhaps a little Anal when it comes to quality, but things like the seals around the windows and the consistency of button resistance are utter crap in comparison to a Honda, or even another Japanese brand like Subaru.
Audi are very good at ID'ing niche markets and dominating them (think 4WD sports estates, and how the R8 made the reliable/everyday super car segment have a rethink)
I would say, however, that I'm continually shocked that Audi push on with the same basic DRC architecture & technology given that it's been a known problem on all cars it's been fitted on, and still is on Rs6/RS4 models produced in 2015.
This problem must've been fed back into the R&D team, yet they continue with it although BMW and Mercedes have both proven there's other [Arguably just as good] systems available that are developed by the likes of Denso, Continental or Sachs. Has the new RS3 got another iteration of DRC ? I suspect it has...

RS 3 has mag ride

as does TT and R8

maybe Mag ride not suitable for heavier units

HYFR wrote:RS 3 has mag ride

as does TT and R8

maybe Mag ride not suitable for heavier units

I understand Mag ride to be pretty decent too, and reliable ?

yeah pretty solid on the R8's ... few failures, but nothing like DRC !

Audi have the best quality interiors in the business. I'm yet to sit in a competitor that comes close. Mercedes interiors are awful. Try a new A3 compared to a previous gen A3, or a new TT compared to a MK2 TT - they've only got better, sitting in an older TT/A3 now feels cheap compared to the new ones I'm used to. The interiors are the best thing about Audi.

I test drove a B5 with 190,000 on the clock and the interior and dashboard were in amazing condition! Certainly stood the test of time

Loved the dash of my B6 S4 - simple and elegant and hard to believe it was designed in 2000

What mobile phones were we all using back then? Nokia 3210?!

B5, B6, B7 were great. The D2 A8/S8, particularly 2000 year onwards are in another league, Audi really had to prove themselves against the S/7 so went all out IMO.