You know I'm asking for trouble by saying how wonderfull it is, something has to break now.
To be honest I bought mine because it is unmolested, tight and pink (sounds a bit wrong that?) nothing to do with the year.
Cheers
T

What the ^&*(?sfrs4 wrote:all this bumkin about weaker gearbox and better engines, get a life. if and only if you rag the sh!t out your car will this effect you and then only if your unlucky. i used to have a skyline gtr and these had "a notorious problem with the gearbox", the syncro's go on third and fourth, i got my gtr and procced'd to drive it very hard for three years and the gear box never let me down once, issues with cars like this are often due to missuse and abuse and nothing more. to assume that you should not own a car like the rs4 because you want a low tax bracket one is just eliteism at it's worse, take you head out the clouds and join the real world. i'd rather own a car thats exactly the same as one six months older but pay £200 a year less on tax, that that idiot goverment of ours will spend on some trivial sh!t and not the road infrastructure. if you have money and want to throw away i'll gladly set up a bank account for you people and i'll put it to some good use.
That's my choice to make. I would find it really hard to spend an extra £200 tax on a car that only does 2k miles a year.lengster1 wrote:Simons4mtm why on earth would you pay the same or more for a 2000 model with the weaker gearbox that is more prone to developing the crunching selection problem at a cost of thousands to save yourself 100 quid a year in tax????????????????????? Sorry mate it doesnt stack up
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 88 guests