motorgeek.com :: Socially inappropriate motoring information.
Search this topic:
motorgeek.com :: Board index :: The Tech Lounge :: General
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Audi Myth busting thread

Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 7:55 am 
Offline
Redline?

Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:59 am
Posts: 106
Location: central Ohio
About the above,
it "happened" on Automatics, no quattro were auto back then,
yes on the pedal offset compared to 'merican iron that people just got out of,
According to reports at the time Chevy and maybe others had more incidents, but due to number of cars concerned the percentage were much lower

_________________
central Ohio


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 8:36 am 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 2869
Location: TEX-ASS USA
The RS2 transmission is no stronger than any other wide first gear 01E.

The B5 S4 third gear (EDU code trans) is 1.23 not 1.32.

All 01E's made from 1992 to 2005 have the SAME first (3.50) and second gear (1.89) ratio except for the allroad and European diesels made from 2002 and up.

USA 01E's had either a 4.11 or 4.35 final drive ratio. The 3.89 was European only (2002-2004).

No updated 1-2 collars and syncro rings were installed in production 01E transmissions.

The RS6 uses a 5HP24 which is the same transmission internally as the A8/A6 4.2. The difference is the torque converter size is borrowed from the A8 D2 W12 trans (which also was a 5HP24).

There were a handful of RS2 sedans made for the German market.

Unintended acceleration was found to be caused by idiot drivers pressing on the gas instead of the brakes.

60 minutes modified a transmission in an Audi to give the appearance of going into gear by itself and accelerating, using a compressed air solenoid on the transmission throttle lever. (60 minutes also blew up side saddle fuel tanks on a early chevy truck using model rocket engines to ignite the fuel, after repeated side crash test failed to explode).

There is no such thing as "Cryo-Plating" or "Cryo-Dipping) with respect to strengthening of transmission internals.

_________________
The Scottmeister

"With great power comes horrible fuel economy"
www.advancedautomotion.com


Last edited by scottmandu on Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:24 pm 
Offline
I post, therefore I am
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 3:46 pm
Posts: 4322
Location: 03743

Link to video
60 min special Part 1


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:05 pm 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:04 am
Posts: 2556
LOL. Great video. I was laughing through it. I wonder how many takes they had to do before Unser could say all that without busting up laughing. Shift Interlock is a great idea though on many cars. I was at a body shop the other day and some guys 20's Model T was in there. He had a hot rod motor in there and one day he leaned in, turned the ignition to on for some reason as he prepared to roll it forward, and the engine fired, turned over briefly, started, and the car ran through his Garage and took out a 4x4 support. OOPS!

My MYTH Contribution. Hmmm.

Urq Axles ARE swappable diagonally.
84' 4kq Rear Axles ARE the same as Urq rears (or Fronts)
84' 4kq 016's are a closer ratio.
Early Audi wiring DOES Suck.
Mmmm

_________________
Todd
91' CQ Daily Driver (FOR SALE)
2000' A4 Avant ATQ
83' ur-quattro. "Jadis" Cage, Coilovers, No Engine Yet.
"Coupes are better than Sedans. Less Door Handles to replace!!!"

PARTING:
90 90q20v
86 4000quattro


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:55 am 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 2869
Location: TEX-ASS USA
zarati wrote:
Urq Axles ARE swappable diagonally.
84' 4kq Rear Axles ARE the same as Urq rears (or Fronts)
84' 4kq 016's are a closer ratio.
Early Audi wiring DOES Suck.
Mmmm


I would add 84 and early 85 rear axles are the same as the urq
According to Derracuda the 84 trans differs from any other 4kq trans by a shorter 5th gear.

_________________
The Scottmeister

"With great power comes horrible fuel economy"
www.advancedautomotion.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:17 pm 
Offline
Redline?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:12 am
Posts: 117
Location: Estonia, Tallinn
scottmandu wrote:
The RS6 uses a 5HP24 which is the same transmission internally as the A8/A6 4.2. The difference is the torque converter size is borrowed from the A8 D2 W12 trans (which also was a 5HP24).



Is this true? So the internals (clutch packs, the number of clutch disks in one pack, diameter of them, all the shafts and so on, are the same in any other 5hp24?) So basically only the bellhousing + torque converter puts this tranny into "stronger then other 5hp24" league?
My a8 3.3tdi has allso 5hp24 with big bellhousing and big diameter TC, as the rs6 and w12 but I tought it was beefed up internaly as well...

_________________
Mercedes S320CDI as daily driver
S8 2000 for parts
Audi S6 C5 6speed manual 340hp as project car


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:28 am 
Offline
I post, therefore I am
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:05 pm
Posts: 4377
Location: Sobbing in the corner.....
scottmandu wrote:

There is no such thing as "Cryo-Plating" or "Cryo-Dipping) with respect to strengthening of transmission internals.


uhhh yes there is.

http://www.nwcryo.com/motorsports_gears.html

and there is a scientific explaination why.

Residual stresses and retained austenite.

After having installed a RS/RA analyser at a big name transmission manufacturer I was surprised to find that their quality gear components are coming out of heat treat and ready for production with a Retained Austentite measure of 20-30%. If these were aircraft components well.. the shit would be hitting the fan.

The science.. Austenite is a crystal form that Iron takes while cooling from liquid iron to solid. Typically Austenite is only stable above 900ish Celcius, meaning below that it wants to convert into martensite. Of the Crystal forms, martensite generally takes 90% of the Iron which is a cubic body centered crystal (5 atoms 4 perimiter one center) when iron is cool. However when cooling and heat treating austenite crystals which are face centered cubic (4 atoms no center atom) can be retained below 900C.
Since this austenite is unstable below 900C and it is retained in the part we can see that something is up... that something is a change in VOLUME of the crystal forms. since martensite is BCC and composed of 5 atoms and austenite is FCC and composed of only 4... IF austenite were to be unstable and be convinced to convert to martensite there would be a volume change of the crystal, and thus big changes in stresses inside the part.

This is why airplane parts which are designed to operate from 200F to -100F must have very very very low retained austenite. If a temperature swing and load stresses causes the austenite form to convert to martensite, stresses in the part change and can allow structural failure. Parts such as heat treated items like bearings, gears, shafts, ect would all be very succeptable to this.

So now we know the how... now to know the why.

If we can bring our steel parts to a controlled temperature swing and make the austenite crystals change into martensite crystals in a controlled environment then we can allow our parts to reduce the austenite form as much as possible then we can reduce the likelyhood of uncontrolled volume changes.

This does nothing to point out the fact that the physical differences in strength, brittleness, elasticity, ect is different between martensite and austenite too.

this however does not work for austenitic metals such as our famed stainless steels and nickel based alloys.

_________________
Nate's Law:
The greater the number of people in the group, the lower the total collective, and individual intelligence of said group becomes.


Audi, imprisoning me, all that i see, absolute horror. I cannot live, i cannot die, trapped in my audi, my audi my holding cell..

1988 Audi 5ktq - 10vt Ms&s Extra <- sold then someone killed it.
1993 Audi 90q - 12vt


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Sat May 28, 2011 8:51 pm 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 2869
Location: TEX-ASS USA
the_natrix wrote:
scottmandu wrote:

There is no such thing as "Cryo-Plating" or "Cryo-Dipping) with respect to strengthening of transmission internals.


uhhh yes there is.

http://www.nwcryo.com/motorsports_gears.html

and there is a scientific explaination why.


Your correct and totally glazed over my point. It's not called "Cryo plating", or "Cryo dipped" as nothing is plated or nothing is dipped. It is called Cryo Tempering, or cryogenically treating.

_________________
The Scottmeister

"With great power comes horrible fuel economy"
www.advancedautomotion.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:18 am 
Offline
I sprinkle rubber on my Cherios

Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 200
- Unattended Acceleration: There was never any proof to show that this actually happened other than a few instances (but not one resulting in an accident). The truth of the matter is the brakes on the older 5000's were much better than acceleration so if you held the brakes and the gas both to the floor the car would go nowhere. Originally the 4000/5000 used a standard transmission brake pedal on the automatics which was very small compared to the American cars at the time so the first recall was to make this larger. After this didn't work they put the shift lock in all cars and still had problems after this. All cases brought against Audi were lost in court as the car had no issues and it was the drivers fault in each case. We did see one locally where the car was having work done on the cruise and upon start-up the car started revving to about 5,000 rpm. The car was left as-is and the local VW rep was called and they sent the crew to find that the wrong clip was installed causing binding. Audi made no changes to the car other than the brake pedal and shift lock-out yet the problem went away. Lesson learned, never believe what anyone tells you especially if they heard it on TV. This is fiction.

- Audi 5000 Turbo catching fire on hills: This is one of those odd problems that only happened in a few places in the world. If you fill your Audi 5000 Turbo in Hope, B.C and then drive up the Coquihalla Highway there is a good chance that the car will catch on fire and burn. We had this problem when I worked for Audi and a customer would fill the tank full to the brim at a sea level and then get on it going up a mountain. As they were gaining altitude the fuel would start to expand then run back through the vent system and piss out on the turbo would cause a fire to start. The people knew there was a problem and stopped on the side of the road where the fire would keep burning and destroy the car. Audi had a hard time figuring this one out as it only happened in a few places in the world and only if you filled the tank until it is was literally pissing fuel out the filler. Audi did a few recalls to modify the evap system which corrected the problem. This one is fact.

_________________
- 2000 Audi A4 1.8T
- 1994 VR6 Corrado
- 1991 G60 Jetta Coupe Syncro


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 2:24 pm 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 9:36 am
Posts: 1440
Location: Devon, England
scottmandu wrote:
The RS6 uses a 5HP24 which is the same transmission internally as the A8/A6 4.2. The difference is the torque converter size is borrowed from the A8 D2 W12 trans (which also was a 5HP24).


The D2 A8 and C5 A6 4.2 use the 5HP19, not the 5HP24. Are you saying the torque converter is what makes the difference between a 19 and a 24 and the internals are the same? :?

_________________
Racecar: noun - a hole in the road in to which money is poured


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 10:05 pm 
Offline
kickin' tires'n lightin fires
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:30 pm
Posts: 606
Location: NOVA (But not the Scotia kind)
MikkiJayne wrote:
The D2 A8 and C5 A6 4.2 use the 5HP19, not the 5HP24. Are you saying the torque converter is what makes the difference between a 19 and a 24 and the internals are the same? :?


Uh, what? I don' tknow about the C5 chassis, but the D2 most certainly did come with the 5HP24. In fact, this is the very 5HP24 I just pulled out of my motor donor/parts pre-facelift D2 A8:

Image
Image

_________________
2005 Audi A4 Ultrasport - K04'd, AEB head, GIAC tuned, still pokey
2001 Audi TT 225 quattro Roadster - Stage 2+, looking for that elusive B&M shifter
2001 Audi S4 - Tial 770R'd 3.1 stroker in the works
1988 Audi 80 quattro - 4.2 powered FrankenAudi comprised of 13 cars and counting...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:53 pm 
Offline
kickin' tires'n lightin fires
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Posts: 696
Location: North Idaho
I heard a new one this weekend. I was driving my fiancees dad around in the 93 s4 and stuck my foot in it to pass a car and after he wanted to tell me that it is "very bad to rev the engine that high. The motor can be damaged by revving it that high." Mind you all that I revved it to about 5500.

_________________
"If the automobile had followed the same development cycle as the computer, a Rolls Royce would today cost $100, get a million miles per gallon, and would explode once a year killing everyone inside."
-Robert X. Cringely


1990 coupe quattro
1969 SS camaro
2003 Aprilia RSV Haga


Last edited by Apriliapilot on Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:27 am 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 9:36 am
Posts: 1440
Location: Devon, England
ur20v wrote:
Uh, what? I don' tknow about the C5 chassis, but the D2 most certainly did come with the 5HP24. In fact, this is the very 5HP24 I just pulled out of my motor donor/parts pre-facelift D2 A8:


Yes my mistake :P The FWD D2 (with 2.8 V6 and 3.7 V8) had the 5HP19. Obviously the V8 Quattro D2s did have the 5HP24 :thumbsup:
Dunno about the V6 Quattro D2s, but I don't really care either cos they're a bit rubbish.

I know non-V8 C5s had the 19 too, but will defer to others on the 4.2.

:cheers:

_________________
Racecar: noun - a hole in the road in to which money is poured


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:50 am 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 1:17 pm
Posts: 2296
Location: Farmington Hills, MI
C5 A6 4.2 has the 5HP24. The v6 cars got the 5HP19.

_________________
John Anderson
91 200 20V - not stock
01 S8 - stock
97 GMC Sonoma - 436rwhp
97 Grand Prix GTP
84 928S - 270rwhp
73 MGB


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:08 am 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:21 pm
Posts: 1032
Apriliapilot wrote:
I heard a new one this weekend. I was driving my fiancees dad around in the 93 s4 and stuck my foot in it to pass a car and after he wanted to tell me that it is "very bad to rev the engine that high. The motor can be damaged by revving it that high. Mind you all that I revved it to about 5500.


It's not an old American V8. Mine loves to spin and it sounds so good.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2012 6:52 pm 
Offline
mach 2 with my hair on fire

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:11 am
Posts: 2256
Location: Orange County CA
higher rpms increase internal engine stess exponentionally. Did I spell that right? obviously cars with a high rev limiter are engineered to deal with those stresses but if you ran one engine at lower rpms for it's life and one at higher obviously the one with higher rev's would have more of a tendency to have the possibility of damage.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:10 am 
Offline
I post, therefore I am
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:05 pm
Posts: 4377
Location: Sobbing in the corner.....
Apriliapilot wrote:
I heard a new one this weekend. I was driving my fiancees dad around in the 93 s4 and stuck my foot in it to pass a car and after he wanted to tell me that it is "very bad to rev the engine that high. The motor can be damaged by revving it that high." Mind you all that I revved it to about 5500.



My response would have been.....

If you live your life by being Mr. cautious you are certainly in for a boring uneventful life. The manufacturer put the red checks and electronic limiter to prevent engine damage and I'll stay below that, but I am certainly not going to stop my engine from singing out and having fun. Rev limit is 6700, and I plan to bounce off that once a week.

And a piece of testimony is my audi's have always done so once a week, and have had a long and fruitful joyous life.
Hell even my ford does it occasionally LOL

_________________
Nate's Law:
The greater the number of people in the group, the lower the total collective, and individual intelligence of said group becomes.


Audi, imprisoning me, all that i see, absolute horror. I cannot live, i cannot die, trapped in my audi, my audi my holding cell..

1988 Audi 5ktq - 10vt Ms&s Extra <- sold then someone killed it.
1993 Audi 90q - 12vt


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:17 am 
Offline
kickin' tires'n lightin fires
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Posts: 696
Location: North Idaho
the_natrix wrote:
Apriliapilot wrote:
I heard a new one this weekend. I was driving my fiancees dad around in the 93 s4 and stuck my foot in it to pass a car and after he wanted to tell me that it is "very bad to rev the engine that high. The motor can be damaged by revving it that high." Mind you all that I revved it to about 5500.



My response would have been.....

If you live your life by being Mr. cautious you are certainly in for a boring uneventful life. The manufacturer put the red checks and electronic limiter to prevent engine damage and I'll stay below that, but I am certainly not going to stop my engine from singing out and having fun. Rev limit is 6700, and I plan to bounce off that once a week.

And a piece of testimony is my audi's have always done so once a week, and have had a long and fruitful joyous life.
Hell even my ford does it occasionally LOL


Thats more or less what I said, but in a slightly more diplomatic way. I did also use some of the weirdos on who think its acceptable to double (or triple) the original hp these engines had after driving the crap out of them for more than 150k miles here as examples (i neglected to mention the number or broken rods/blocks though). I do have to be somewhat understanding, as he is from Brazil his experience with cars/engines are with 1liter to 1.6liter engines made out of sugarcane.

_________________
"If the automobile had followed the same development cycle as the computer, a Rolls Royce would today cost $100, get a million miles per gallon, and would explode once a year killing everyone inside."
-Robert X. Cringely


1990 coupe quattro
1969 SS camaro
2003 Aprilia RSV Haga


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 10:58 am 
Offline
kickin' tires'n lightin fires

Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:27 pm
Posts: 513
CorradoGuy wrote:
- Audi 5000 Turbo catching fire on hills: This is one of those odd problems that only happened in a few places in the world. If you fill your Audi 5000 Turbo in Hope, B.C and then drive up the Coquihalla Highway there is a good chance that the car will catch on fire and burn. We had this problem when I worked for Audi and a customer would fill the tank full to the brim at a sea level and then get on it going up a mountain. As they were gaining altitude the fuel would start to expand then run back through the vent system and piss out on the turbo would cause a fire to start. The people knew there was a problem and stopped on the side of the road where the fire would keep burning and destroy the car. Audi had a hard time figuring this one out as it only happened in a few places in the world and only if you filled the tank until it is was literally pissing fuel out the filler. Audi did a few recalls to modify the evap system which corrected the problem. This one is fact.


Wellll, actually that would be a myth as well... That was happening here in CO as well. Word is there were ~30 cars that burned here, all of which were kept VERY quiet by Audi. These were all 5000T/Q, 200T/Q with CIS right around the time of the unintended acceleration hysteria, except this was a REAL problem. It got to the point that there was a TV crew outside the dealership that most of these cars (by coincidence) came from about to report on these fires. Audi went to great lengths to stop that. It took many (useless) recalls, like the big rubber shield around the injector lines. The symptoms were always the same. After long uphill runs (like on I70 from Denver to the Eisenhower Tunnel), the car would develop a miss, loss of power, smell of fuel and then fire. This usually happened with cars with about 30k miles. Audi sent engineers who loaded the trunks with bags of concrete and drove I70 repeatedly trying to recreate the problem to no avail. Finally this happened with the service manager of the dealership driving a customer car. It ended up burning to the ground. Audi quietly replaced the customer's car, and flew the burned car back to Germany before the insurance company or anyone else could get at it to dissect the car to find out what happened.

Along with the next (and last) recall parts kits for these cars were taped 5 Viton injector seals, seemingly added as an afterthought. These were the true fix for the problem. This was shared with those attending the Urq25 celebration here in CO by someone who was involved the whole time along with some other great stories from back in the day, like people hot rodding Michele Mouton's '85 Pikes Peak winning car around Denver after the event.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:35 am 
Offline
kickin' tires'n lightin fires
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 2:54 pm
Posts: 634
i just sold my NA quattro. 1988. only year they made em.

_________________
burnin that gasoline
1999 Mercedes Benz 230 SLKompressor
'79 Alfa Romeo Alfetta Sport-Sedan 2000
'79 Alfa Romeo Sprint Veloce
1992 Subaru SVX 3.3
a domestic GMC "pickup"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:49 pm 
Offline
Chirping second
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 62
Location: CT
Myth "you can't run a bov to atmosphere on a cis car".

Truth. I have been running a hks ssqv since I bougt my car 2 years ago. ( sorry I know most of you hate the tuner noise but they work great and hold varied levels of boost with out any adjustments)

Myth "stock head gasket on 10vt 5cyl will not survive more then 10 psi."

Truth. I have been running 14-21 psi on 200000mi plus head gasket for 2 years
( it will probably blow up this week now that I said something)

Myth "multiplying your horsepower output is bad for your car"

Truth It is really bad for stuff! my drive shaft center bearing has been completely destroyed
In under a year.

_________________
1989 200 avant 10vt
1989 Mustang lx
2012 civic (hate it, but 36 mpg)
99 v-max and tl1000


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:16 am 
Offline
Redline?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 5:13 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Canada
bov is a bad idea. When you dump that air to atmosphere, the car is dumping a matching amount of fuel in the engine.

Which is both cheesy and a waste of fuel, if nothing else. The extra fuel can cause problems, though.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:53 am 
Offline
Chirping second
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 62
Location: CT
No problems and it has been 2 years. Fuel economy is the same. No stumbling or stalling at any point. I don't even kill spark plugs. Bov has one major advantage, no double pass through the turbo. Heating charge air twice is not on my list of things to do. Also blowing the cis door in reverse with 20psi seems like a bad idea. So I'm still going with myth.

On the flip side cis won't run with a bov that is open under idle conditions. That is important and I forgot to put that.

_________________
1989 200 avant 10vt
1989 Mustang lx
2012 civic (hate it, but 36 mpg)
99 v-max and tl1000


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Audi Myth busting thread
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:17 pm 
Offline
Stuck in first
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:19 pm
Posts: 24
Location: 042
FACT: Even to this day audi will bend over backwards if you claim unintended acceleration on a new car. Had a customer with a 3.0 CVT who didn't know how to drive it back his new car into a couple of other cars. Audi payed for all the damage to his and all other cars without question. He just murmered those magic words.

Also I have had remote start on my 80 (auto) for about six years and the car still has not managed to drive away on its own yet .
'


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Search this topic:
motorgeek.com :: Board index :: The Tech Lounge :: General

Jump to:  



Information

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests



You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
  |  It is currently Wed Sep 17, 2014 2:31 am
Share |